Complete firstConcrete subject
Bound one concrete work activity in context; plan consent, privacy, and relevant case variation.
Without a boundary the run becomes generic and untestable.
Method guideUX Research
Contextual Inquiry
A practical method guide: clarify prerequisites and materials, understand the complete process, and look up outputs, pitfalls, and stop criteria.
ComplexityMedium
Time1-3 Wochen
Participants4-12 Beobachtungen
FormatWorkshop + async
MaturityCanonical
01
Prerequisite
What needs to be finished first
Complete firstAccess and participation
Research lead · participants · recorder or analyst · domain decision owner
Missing perspectives or access are made visible before starting.
02
Preparation
What needs to be ready before start
Materials
Consent, research protocol, secure raw-data store, and analysis surface
People / roles
Research lead · participants · recorder or analyst · domain decision owner
Pre-read
Bound one concrete work activity in context; plan consent, privacy, and relevant case variation. Prepare real cases, sources, and boundaries.
Time needed
Several field sessions over one to three weeks.
Setup
Create a workspace with Research scope · Participants · Field record · Clarified actions · Findings; keep example values separate from live data.
03
Core question
The one question this method answers
How do people perform real work in context, and which interruptions or adaptations become visible?
04
Flow
Phases with goal, actions, output and pitfall
Contextual inquiry follows work in its real situation and connects visible behaviour, artefacts, and context. Details become meaningful where they occur in the activity.
Contextual Inquiry · working structure
Fictional example
Fictional values are assigned to explicit method fields.
| Event | Time | Context | Observation | Quote | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spare-part searchObserve one work event; separate observation, quote, and interpretation. | 10:14 | Customer basement, weak network | Technician opens chat, scrolls for 47 seconds, and calls the warehouse. | “The system shows yesterday's inventory.” | Delay relates to currency, not a missing search function. |
| Alternative foundObserve one work event; separate observation, quote, and interpretation. | 10:18 | Warehouse phone call | Warehouse names a compatible part; technician photographs the label. | “I will remember that next time.” | Personal memory substitutes for an accessible compatibility list. |
1. Time
- Spare-part search
- 10:14
- Alternative found
- 10:18
2. Context
- Spare-part search
- Customer basement, weak network
- Alternative found
- Warehouse phone call
3. Observation
- Spare-part search
- Technician opens chat, scrolls for 47 seconds, and calls the warehouse.
- Alternative found
- Warehouse names a compatible part; technician photographs the label.
4. Quote
- Spare-part search
- “The system shows yesterday's inventory.”
- Alternative found
- “I will remember that next time.”
5. Interpretation
- Spare-part search
- Delay relates to currency, not a missing search function.
- Alternative found
- Personal memory substitutes for an accessible compatibility list.
All details are fictional.
- 1
Focus
Research scope
Goal
Research scope: Clarify research question, work situation, observation boundary, and consent.
Inputs for this step
- Bound one concrete work activity in context; plan consent, privacy, and relevant case variation.
- Consent, research protocol, secure raw-data store, and analysis surface
Actions
- Clarify research question, work situation, observation boundary, and consent.
Output
Research scope
Clarify research question, work situation, observation boundary, and consent
Quality check
Are question, context boundary, and privacy explicit?
Pitfall
When the research question and observation boundary stay vague, the team cannot later tell which observations belong to the question. Define the question, work situation, and boundary concretely, and secure consent before the visit.
Timing: Use the time needed within the overall frame; close the step only after its check passes.
- 2
Sample
Participants
Goal
Participants: Recruit participants with relevant experience and prepare a session in the real work context.
Inputs for this step
- Research scope
Actions
- Recruit participants with relevant experience and prepare a session in the real work context.
Output
Participants
Recruit participants with relevant experience and prepare a session in the real work context
Quality check
Does selection cover relevant variation rather than easy availability?
Pitfall
When only easily available people are selected, the sample misses relevant variation in the work. Select participants deliberately for relevant experience and schedule the visit at the real place of work.
Timing: Use the time needed within the overall frame; close the step only after its check passes.
- 3
Observe
Field record
Goal
Field record: Minimise interruption while observing actions, artifacts, and context.
Inputs for this step
- Participants
Actions
- Minimise interruption while observing actions, artifacts, and context.
Output
Field record
Minimise interruption while observing actions, artifacts, and context
Quality check
Does the record separate observation, quote, and interpretation?
Pitfall
When observation, quote, and personal interpretation land in the same sentence, the record can no longer be told apart afterward. Record observation, verbatim quote, and interpretation separately and interrupt the work as little as possible.
Timing: Use the time needed within the overall frame; close the step only after its check passes.
- 4
Probe
Clarified actions
Goal
Clarified actions: Use the master-apprentice stance to ask about intent, exceptions, and meaning at concrete moments.
Inputs for this step
- Field record
Actions
- Use the master-apprentice stance to ask about intent, exceptions, and meaning at concrete moments.
Output
Clarified actions
Use the master-apprentice stance to ask about intent, exceptions, and meaning at concrete moments
Quality check
Do follow-up questions address the concrete action rather than general opinion?
Pitfall
When follow-up questions target general opinions instead of the action just observed, the intent behind it stays unclear. Using the master-apprentice mode, ask about intent, exception, and meaning right at the observed moment.
Timing: Use the time needed within the overall frame; close the step only after its check passes.
- 5
Patterns
Findings
Goal
Findings: Synthesize observations into patterns, variations, and open questions linked to evidence.
Inputs for this step
- Clarified actions
Actions
- Synthesize observations into patterns, variations, and open questions linked to evidence.
Output
Findings
Synthesize observations into patterns, variations, and open questions linked to evidence
Quality check
Are patterns supported by cases with counterexamples visible?
Pitfall
When a single memorable case is sold as a general pattern, the findings do not hold up. Support every pattern with multiple cases and name counterexamples and open questions explicitly.
Timing: Use the time needed within the overall frame; close the step only after its check passes.
05
Artifact
What comes out at the end
Sketch: what the artifact looks like
Form
Findings with evidence, open points, owner, and review.
Versioning / ownership
Record date, owner, source state, and review date; preserve earlier versions.
Tool alternatives
- Shared workspace
- Consent, research protocol, secure raw-data store, and analysis surface
- Versioned result repository
contextual-inquiry-working-template.md
Plan subject, participation, complete flow, and review.
Contextual Inquiry: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Whole initiative Time: Several field sessions over one to three weeks.
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Consent, research protocol, secure raw-data store, and analysis surface
- Roles: Research lead · participants · recorder or analyst · domain decision owner
- Advance information: Bound one concrete work activity in context; plan consent, privacy, and relevant case variation. Prepare real cases, sources, and boundaries.
- Overall time needed: Several field sessions over one to three weeks.
- Setup: Create a workspace with Research scope · Participants · Field record · Clarified actions · Findings; keep example values separate from live data.
Prepare for the work steps
Focus: Research scope
- Bound one concrete work activity in context; plan consent, privacy, and relevant case variation.
- Consent, research protocol, secure raw-data store, and analysis surface
Sample: Participants
- Research scope
Observe: Field record
- Participants
Probe: Clarified actions
- Field record
Patterns: Findings
- Clarified actions
Contextual Inquiry · working structure
| Event | Time | Context | Observation | Quote | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spare-part search | |||||
| Alternative found |
- Spare-part search: Observe one work event; separate observation, quote, and interpretation.
- Alternative found: Observe one work event; separate observation, quote, and interpretation.
The blank worksheet contains prompts only.
Reference source · original teaching example
Focus: Research scope
Expected artifact: Research scope
Clarify research question, work situation, observation boundary, and consent
Entry:
...
- Are question, context boundary, and privacy explicit?
Sample: Participants
Expected artifact: Participants
Recruit participants with relevant experience and prepare a session in the real work context
Entry:
...
- Does selection cover relevant variation rather than easy availability?
Observe: Field record
Expected artifact: Field record
Minimise interruption while observing actions, artifacts, and context
Entry:
...
- Does the record separate observation, quote, and interpretation?
Probe: Clarified actions
Expected artifact: Clarified actions
Use the master-apprentice stance to ask about intent, exceptions, and meaning at concrete moments
Entry:
...
- Do follow-up questions address the concrete action rather than general opinion?
Patterns: Findings
Expected artifact: Findings
Synthesize observations into patterns, variations, and open questions linked to evidence
Entry:
...
- Are patterns supported by cases with counterexamples visible?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/contextual-inquiry/run-sheet
06
Example output
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional example for orientation. Counts and timings describe this case and are not universal requirements.
contextual-inquiry-beispiel.md
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional teaching example: Contextual Inquiry · working structure
| Event | Time | Context | Observation | Quote | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spare-part search | 10:14 | Customer basement, weak network | Technician opens chat, scrolls for 47 seconds, and calls the warehouse. | “The system shows yesterday's inventory.” | Delay relates to currency, not a missing search function. |
| Alternative found | 10:18 | Warehouse phone call | Warehouse names a compatible part; technician photographs the label. | “I will remember that next time.” | Personal memory substitutes for an accessible compatibility list. |
07
Pitfalls
Recognize symptoms and steer against them
Quick overview, the full text is in the matching phase in the flow
- Research scopeWhen the research question and observation boundary stay vague, the team cannot later tell which observations belong to the question.View in phase
- ParticipantsWhen only easily available people are selected, the sample misses relevant variation in the work.View in phase
- Field recordWhen observation, quote, and personal interpretation land in the same sentence, the record can no longer be told apart afterward.View in phase
- Clarified actionsWhen follow-up questions target general opinions instead of the action just observed, the intent behind it stays unclear.View in phase
- FindingsWhen a single memorable case is sold as a general pattern, the findings do not hold up.View in phase
Trap
Research scope
Symptom
When the research question and observation boundary stay vague, the team cannot later tell which observations belong to the question.
What to do
Define the question, work situation, and boundary concretely, and secure consent before the visit.
Trap
Participants
Symptom
When only easily available people are selected, the sample misses relevant variation in the work.
What to do
Select participants deliberately for relevant experience and schedule the visit at the real place of work.
Trap
Field record
Symptom
When observation, quote, and personal interpretation land in the same sentence, the record can no longer be told apart afterward.
What to do
Record observation, verbatim quote, and interpretation separately and interrupt the work as little as possible.
Trap
Clarified actions
Symptom
When follow-up questions target general opinions instead of the action just observed, the intent behind it stays unclear.
What to do
Using the master-apprentice mode, ask about intent, exception, and meaning right at the observed moment.
Trap
Findings
Symptom
When a single memorable case is sold as a general pattern, the findings do not hold up.
What to do
Support every pattern with multiple cases and name counterexamples and open questions explicitly.
08
Stop criteria
When to pause, resolve prerequisites, or choose another approach
Do not close “Research scope” while this check remains open: Are question, context boundary, and privacy explicit?
Do not close “Participants” while this check remains open: Does selection cover relevant variation rather than easy availability?
Do not close “Field record” while this check remains open: Does the record separate observation, quote, and interpretation?
Do not close “Clarified actions” while this check remains open: Do follow-up questions address the concrete action rather than general opinion?
Do not close “Findings” while this check remains open: Are patterns supported by cases with counterexamples visible?
Finished the method guide?
Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.