Out of the FOG: A Non-traditional Research Approach to Alignment
Summary
Product teams, including those I work with, struggle to overcome the grinding momentum of product delivery timelines to make room for adequate discovery, learning, and application through research. The game of product development becomes fiercer when it's not the first time, but the fourth team assembled to tackle a complex product space. In well-trod territory, strong opinions may abound, and talking past each other and rehashing approaches is rampant. Challenges that face researchers as partners in product development include establishing a sense of shared team vision, separating facts from fiction, and moving the team past hang-ups to establish a research strategy and product direction. This case introduces the idea of "grinding momentum" and outlines a stakeholder engagement process known as a FOG session that helps all team members across functional expertise areas claim voice, hear others, and share in collective aha moments that define next steps. Using a mixed-methods approach, a process is outlined to frameshift the value of existing knowledge spanning many departments within an organization, bring together distinct expertise vocabularies and analyses, and propel product partners to identify true knowledge gaps.
Key Insights
-
•
Research is often perceived as slow but actually enables faster product velocity by clarifying decisions.
-
•
Daniel Kahneman’s System 1 (intuitive) and System 2 (analytical) thinking both complement each other in decision-making.
-
•
Expert intuition requires regularity, practice, and immediate feedback to be reliable, conditions rarely met in novel product contexts.
-
•
Organizations mature in information processing by adding departments: starting with intuition (product teams), then data, and finally research teams for deeper analysis.
-
•
Product teams often over-rely on intuitive thinking, leading to overconfidence and misalignment.
-
•
Grinding momentum is a shared team pressure to move fast without adequate foundational knowledge, risking poor decisions.
-
•
The FOG method (Facts, Opinions, Guesses) helps teams slow down, separate evidence from assumptions, and surface knowledge gaps.
-
•
Facilitated FOG sessions enable democratic participation, uncover tensions, and establish shared mental models for product direction.
-
•
Research should be positioned as a partner in knowledge creation rather than an arbiter of absolute truth, shifting power dynamics.
-
•
Dealing with bad data or assumed facts requires active researcher intervention to analyze artifacts and reframe discussions constructively.
Notable Quotes
"Slowing down with research can help us move faster overall."
"Intuition is knowing without knowing how you know, I just know it."
"Expert intuition can be right or wrong because it relies on cues and heuristics in uncertain contexts."
"Research is the most analytical form of information processing because it involves active knowledge generation."
"Most product decisions look intuitive, but intuition alone leads to coherent stories that can be wrong."
"Research is sometimes perceived as intuitive and therefore dismissed as insufficient for decision-making."
"Grinding momentum is a shared mental model that pushes teams to decide quickly without shared foundational knowledge."
"The FOG method helps teams separate facts from fiction and move past hangups toward alignment."
"The goal is to turn research into a partner in shared discovery, not just an arbiter of truth."
"If a stakeholder claims something is a fact without evidence, it is our responsibility as researchers to challenge and unpack that."
Or choose a question:
More Videos
"Being human, authentic, humble, and showing vulnerability can take you a long way as a research leader."
Anna Avrekh Dr. John Pagonis Klara Pelcl Sina SchreiberExpert Panel: Leading in and with Research
March 10, 2022
"Sometimes we have to do a bait and switch—meet organizational demands but turn that into opportunities to learn."
Taylor KlassmanShaping the Next Era of UX Research: Collaborative Forum
March 11, 2025
"The pandemic is a message from the universe to pause and rethink who we hire and how we train."
Dr. Jamika D. Burge Steve Portigal Alba Villamil Sam LadnerThe Future of Research: Bridging the Gaps
July 29, 2021
"No surprises. Tell participants everything they’ll be experiencing from who will be in the room to if the session will be recorded."
Marisa BernsteinIt Takes GRIT: Lessons from the Small, but Mighty World of Civic Usability Testing
December 9, 2021
"A lot of people think about design systems as a project, but they’re really about how an organization gets work done."
Dan Mall“Ask Me Anything” with Dan Mall, Author of Upcoming Rosenfeld Title, Design that Scales
October 2, 2023
"What am I personally doing to contribute to the dynamics that stand in the way of better futures?"
Chris GeisonTheme 1 Intro
March 9, 2022
"Weave in great user stories that exemplify your key points to maximize engagement."
Bruce GillespieLearning from journalism: Balancing impactful communication with compassionate storytelling
March 13, 2025
"We all want to design for scale, but empathy alone is sometimes a shortcoming when thinking about scale."
Nancy DouyonWe'll Figure That Out in the Next Launch: Enterprise Tech's Nobility Complex
June 15, 2018
"There’s never really conflicting futures—everyone wants to take care of the most vulnerable children; you just have to find the bridge between visions."
Liz EbengoThe Burden on Children: The Cost of Insufficient Post-Conflict Services and Pathways Forward
December 4, 2024
Latest Books All books
Dig deeper with the Rosenbot
What strategies help speed up the procurement and legal review of UX research platforms in organizations like LinkedIn?
What are the main categories of survey tools and how do they differ in use cases?
What cultural or institutional factors hinder innovation and adaptation in design education programs?