Reframing UX Job Interviews: Lessons From 2 Major Fails

A Cautionary Tale for Experienced UX Researchers

Dec 06, 2024

Summary: In this post, I share how I completely botched two final-round case study presentations. I also discuss the lessons I learned and how they helped me improve. If you've ever struggled to connect with your audience during an interview, these stories might help you avoid making the same mistakes I did.

I, like many UXers, was laid off earlier this year. As profit margins shrank across the tech sector, a lot of us suddenly found ourselves competing for fewer and fewer job openings. When I was laid off, I wasn't worried at first. I'd been through it before and had always landed on my feet, finding another great job pretty quickly. But this time was different. Opportunities were scarce, and that scarcity made every interview feel like a high-stakes game.

In the past, I hadn't struggled with interviews at all. Early in my career, I worked at just 3 companies over a 12-year period, and every single job came from being poached by the next company. It was a privileged experience, and I recognize how lucky I was. It's much easier to get through an interview process when the company is pursuing you.

Over the last six years, though, I've been actively seeking roles in different types of organizations, everything from pre-profit startups to large government agencies. And when I was laid off this time, in this tough economic climate, I realized how unprepared I was for the kind of interview grind that lay ahead.

Big mistakes often lead to big insights.

In this post, I want to share the story of how I completely botched two UX research case study presentations. In both cases, I was highly qualified, had nailed multiple rounds of interviews, and was in the final stretch. And in both cases, I blew it. I hope that by sharing this story, I can help others avoid making the same mistakes.

My First Disaster

I was in the final round for a Lead Quantitative UX Researcher position at a mid-sized SaaS company. The hiring manager asked me to prepare a 45-minute case study presentation. I reached out to clarify what they were looking for, and their reply was vague: "Oh, just show me any project that highlights quantitative research."

So that's what I did. I put together a 30-slide deck showcasing one of the most complex, methodologically advanced series of quantitative studies I'd ever done. I rehearsed it over and over until I felt completely confident.

Five minutes into my presentation, I realized I'd made a huge mistake. I had done exactly what the hiring manager asked, but I had completely misjudged my audience.

I assumed that a Director of User Experience would have at least a basic understanding of advanced quantitative methods. Spoiler alert, they didn't.

I could see the hiring manager's face in the Zoom window go blank. I was losing them, but instead of adjusting on the fly, I powered through, sticking to my script. By the end of it, I had left the impression that I couldn't communicate UX research effectively in the real world.

Once I saw that look, I knew I had messed up big time.

Two Times a Fool

A few weeks later, I made it to the final round for another role, this time to lead UX research for an entire business line at a communications company. The process seemed promising, and I was optimistic that I'd learned from my last blunder. This time, the panel asked me to prepare a 45-minute presentation with two case studies: one showcasing quantitative work and the other focusing on qualitative work.

I thought I'd struck the right balance. I condensed my previous quantitative presentation, cutting it down to the essentials, and paired it with a second case study highlighting some of my most impactful qualitative research. Both case studies featured real-world, multi-method projects, and I felt confident they demonstrated my range and expertise. I practiced extensively, determined not to repeat the mistakes of my last botched attempt, and refined each case study into a concise 10-minute narrative.

But things started to go sideways before I even began presenting. The panel started 10 minutes late as we waited for a few stragglers to join the Zoom call. Once everyone was finally there, the Director of UX (the person running the meeting and someone I hadn't spoken with before) asked me to kick things off by introducing myself. I've been doing UX for almost 20 years, so even my shortest introduction takes about four minutes. I gave my condensed spiel, hoping it would set the right tone.

Then, the panel members each took turns introducing themselves. This was a group of six people, ranging from UX designers to a graphic designer, and their introductions took another 15 minutes. By the time we were ready to get into the actual presentation, we had already burned through 30 minutes of our scheduled time. That left me with just 15 minutes for what was supposed to be a 45-minute presentation.

Sensing the time crunch, I tried to adapt. I asked the panel, "Since we're short on time, would you prefer I focus on the quantitative or qualitative case study?" The Director of UX immediately responded, "Show us the quantitative one."

I launched into the presentation, but it quickly became clear I had made the same mistake as before.

I was presenting advanced quantitative methods, like conjoint analysis in RStudio, to an audience of designers, not researchers.

Some cameras were off, other's faces (the few I could see) were blank, and no one seemed engaged. I paused several times to invite questions, but all I got was silence. It was obvious I'd lost them.

Then came the curveball. When I finished, the Director of UX asked, "Could you explain how you injected user empathy into the project?" It was one of those buzzword-filled questions that feels more like a test than a genuine inquiry. I scrambled to answer, explaining how the initial qualitative research (18 in-depth interviews) had shaped our approach and how personas helped us select survey participants. But it was clear they were expecting me to talk about empathy in a more performative, surface-level way, the kind of pseudo-scientific jargon that's popular in UI and aesthetic-driven UX social media content today.

Once again, I had completely misjudged my audience. Despite all my preparation, I had fallen into the same trap: thinking that demonstrating my expertise would be enough to resonate. It wasn't.

⚠️ Disclaimer: While I do wish our industry had more UXR literacy, I'm not casting judgment here. I'm simply making an observation about the current state of the world. Acknowledging this truth was an important part of my journey to these conclusions.

Building a New Mental Model

Taking a step back, let's do a quick informal root-cause analysis of the issue here. Based on my past experience (where I was often pursued by UX research leaders) I assumed interviews would go best if I showcased my most complex and impactful work. I've since learned this was a mistake. The modern audience for an advanced UX Researcher role rarely includes other UX researchers.

Just because people on a Zoom call have "UX" in their job titles doesn't mean they're knowledgeable about or even value UX Research as a separate discipline.

In hindsight, this should have been obvious. If we break down the types of companies most likely to be hiring right now, it's typically mid-sized UX organizations with enough budget and headcount to justify a full-time researcher or two. Small companies and startups rarely have the need or resources for a UX researcher, while larger companies and full enterprise organizations aren't expanding their teams right now. In fact, they are the ones shedding experienced researchers into the job market.

If you were to graph the state of advanced UX Researcher roles, it might look something like this:

*A visual of the new mental model I developed to predict the types of audiences I'd encounter during the interview process.*

As you can see in the chart, the most likely organizations hiring are also the least likely to have other UX researchers present for interviews. Had I realized this earlier, I would have approached my presentations in an entirely different way.

My New Approach

By the time my next interview came around, I was determined not to make the same mistakes. This was my chance to truly shift my thinking and, in doing so, I learned something crucial: a job interview, especially one for an experienced UX researcher role, isn't about showcasing every aspect of your expertise. It's about demonstrating that you can communicate your value efficiently, speak their language, and adapt to their needs. So, I threw out the formal slide deck entirely and instead walked through the high-level case studies directly from my portfolio website.

Here's how I made it work:

Treat the Presentation as a Conversation, Not a Lecture
This was the biggest change in my approach. I stopped seeing the interview as a one-way street where I had to deliver a perfectly rehearsed monologue. Instead, I framed it as a dialogue from the start. I kicked off by giving a brief overview of what I was about to cover, keeping it casual and engaging, and I immediately invited the panel to ask questions throughout. This wasn't about delivering a perfect narrative; it was about starting a conversation where the panel could engage with the material as we went. And trust me, it made a huge difference. Instead of feeling like I was just talking at them, I felt like I was collaborating, adapting my presentation in real-time based on the cues they gave me.
Show, Don't Tell
For years, I thought the key to a successful case study presentation was narrating every single detail, explaining every research method, every finding, every step of the process. But that approach doesn't work when you're presenting to a mixed audience. So, I simplified. I let my portfolio and visuals do the talking. I didn't get bogged down in technical jargon or dive deep into methodologies unless they asked for it. By focusing on key outcomes and real-world impact, I gave them a clear picture without overwhelming them with too much detail. The result? I communicated my work in a way that made sense to a non-researcher audience, and it left them wanting to know more.
Anticipate the Audience's Priorities
With a room full of designers, product managers, and business leaders, the last thing they wanted to hear was a deep dive into complex statistical analyses. I didn't assume they needed to understand every method or tool I used. Instead, I focused on concise, high-level examples that directly demonstrated how my research solved real-world problems. I zeroed in on the parts of the projects that aligned with their goals: how my research informed design decisions, improved user experiences, or helped meet business objectives. By anticipating their priorities, I made my case studies relevant and compelling to their specific needs.
Leave Out the Unnecessary Details
This was the game-changer for me. In the past, I would have filled every gap with background information or methodological details. But this time, I held back. I gave the panel just enough to understand the key insights and outcomes without going off on tangents. This created room for them to ask questions about what interested them most, allowing me to steer the conversation toward areas where I could truly demonstrate my expertise. In one instance, they wanted to hear more about a complex statistical calculation I did. It was the one random, super-researchy thing they actually cared about! It was a great opportunity to flex my advanced researcher skills, and it was perfectly timed and contextual, which undoubtedly helped me stand out. It was something I could never have anticipated. Leaving out the unnecessary details made my presentation feel more fluid and dynamic, allowing me to address what the panel cared about in the moment rather than what I assumed they wanted to hear.

The Result

This approach worked! I landed the role right after the interview. The key takeaway here is that most hiring managers and executives don't want a detailed, cradle-to-grave research narrative. What they're really looking for is your ability to explain your process and outcomes succinctly and in a way that makes sense to them, whether they're designers, product managers, or other non-researchers. They want to know what the problem was, how you approached solving it, and the results you achieved, all in a concise and clear way.

If there's one thing I want you to take away from this, it's this: adapt your communication to your audience.

Tailor your presentations to the people you're talking to, and make sure you're not just showcasing your research knowledge but also your ability to collaborate, engage, and communicate clearly. With this approach, you'll not only avoid the missteps I made but also set yourself up for success in any interview. And maybe, just maybe, you'll land the role on the spot too.

Conclusion

Sharing this story isn't just about revisiting my missteps, it's about helping others in similar situations avoid making the same mistakes. As experienced UX researchers, we've honed our craft, mastered methodologies, and delivered meaningful results. But when it comes to interviews, especially in today's hiring climate, even seasoned professionals can fall into the trap of overestimating what their audience knows or values.

I hope that by walking you through my mistakes, I can offer some clarity on how to approach these high-stakes presentations. Interviews aren't the time to showcase everything you know or deliver a research masterclass. They're an opportunity to connect with your audience on their level, highlight what matters to them, and demonstrate that you can communicate and collaborate effectively.

If you're navigating the job market right now, I encourage you to reflect on how you present your work. Are you tailoring it to your audience? Are you leaving room for engagement and curiosity? These shifts in how I prepared and delivered my presentations made all the difference for me, and I hope they can do the same for you.

We've all been there, sitting in front of a blank-faced Zoom panel, wondering if we're saying the right things. But by learning from each other's experiences, we can approach these situations with a clearer perspective and, hopefully, better results. If my mistakes and lessons resonate with you, I hope they save you from a few headaches and help you land the role where you can thrive. That's what this blog is all about, helping each other succeed.

Have you ever learned something the hard way, like I did? I encourage you to share your story, you never know who might benefit from hearing it. If you have any tips or tricks for interview case study presentations that I missed, feel free to drop them in the comments or send me a DM. Let's keep the conversation going. Thanks, all!