Design research is one of those terms we hear often, but rarely stop to unpack. It shows up in conversations across firms, manufacturers, and academia. We see it in dedicated research teams, new roles, and growing investments. But what does it really mean for our design industry, and what role should it play moving forward?
This question has been on my mind since my recent IDEC conference panel, “All Designers Do Research,” where we explored design research as a lens for how we practice, educate, and evolve as a profession. To continue that exploration, I reached out to voices across the industry, from practice to manufacturing, from academic researchers to emerging designers, and asked a simple question: “What does design research mean to our design industry?”
What came back was not a single definition, but a clear direction. The responses were thoughtful, nuanced, and remarkably aligned.
Understanding What We Mean by Design Research
At its core, design research is about understanding and using that understanding to make better decisions. It is about understanding people, their behaviors, needs, and the environments they inhabit, but also about what is changing around them. Our communities, businesses, and expectations continue to evolve, and design research gives us a way to respond with intention.
Mark Bryan, chief research and strategy officer at IIDA, describes it clearly: “I think of design research as something that helps us understand what people, organizations, communities, markets, and environments are becoming and using that understanding to shape better choices in our designs and processes.”
This idea of understanding is intentional and deeply human. It requires empathy, engagement, and a willingness to question what we think we already know. Ryan Anderson, vice president of global research and planning at MillerKnoll, explains this approach: “Design research is best understood as a way to help the people designing solutions to better understand and empathize with the people who use them. There are many ways to do this, but what matters most is engaging in a discovery process that challenges outdated assumptions about how spaces should be planned and tests them against the diverse needs of today’s users. At MillerKnoll, we prefer a participative process and have embraced the mantra ‘design with, not just for’ the people who use our products and the environments they help create.”
There was also strong agreement on what happens when research is missing. Without it, design relies on designer’s intuition, personal preference, or outdated assumptions. With research, those assumptions are tested and clarified. Cindy Coleman, former editorial lead of the Gensler Research Institute and director of strategy at Gensler, puts it simply: “Design research is the foundation upon which informed, intentional, and resonant design is built. For our industry, it means rigorously understanding the conditions of a given problem, deeply engaging with the needs of the people we serve, and cultivating the aesthetic and cultural knowledge that allows design to transcend function and carry genuine meaning. Without it, we are just guessing.”
Design research also connects creativity to impact. Amanda Schneider, founder and president of ThinkLab, connects research directly to business value: “In both product and interior design, research connects creativity to the business decisions that actually fund the work. It clarifies the real needs and pain points and ensures design is solving the right problem. Without it, design risks being seen as subjective when it is actually one of the most powerful drivers of real business impact.” ThinkLab reinforces this idea from an industry-wide perspective: “Why Research? We think the better question is, why not? Change is happening fast, and the interiors industry is evolving rapidly. If you want to replace assumptions with facts and make decisions with more confidence, research is key to avoiding investment pitfalls.”
Taken together, these perspectives point to a shared belief. Design research is not an optional add-on, but it is essential to how we understand, decide, create, and bring value.
Two Modes of Design Research
As I reflected on these insights, it became clear that design research operates across a spectrum, rather than a single definition. From my vantage point as an academic as well as a design practitioner, it can be understood in two broad and overlapping modes.
The first mode is academic and knowledge-driven. This includes research conducted in universities, non-profit research organizations, or by independent researchers, focusing on topics such as environmental psychology, neuroscience, human behavior, etc. Academic research usually aims to be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. These efforts build rigor, provide evidence, and expand our understanding of how environments impact people.
Environmental psychologist Sally Augustin, principal of Design with Science, highlights its ability to quantify the value of design, reinforcing its credibility and influence: “Design research means that the design industry can definitively establish the value of the work that it does–and the effects of its efforts can indeed be quantified.”
Ana Pinto-Alexander, president of CADRE (Center for Advanced Design Research and Evaluation), adds critical context: “Design research is important in the interior design industry because meaningful research helps designers understand social drivers, emerging needs, and the deeper context shaping how people live and interact with spaces. It also reveals how humans behave within the built environment, allowing designers to create spaces that genuinely support comfort, well-being, and functionality.”
Research Directors at HKS, Deborah Wingler and Mike O’Neil, describe how research operates at a large research-focused practice: “Research at HKS operates at two scales; generating original insights that connect the designed environment to human outcomes, and embedding inquiry directly into the design process to deeply understand user needs. Together, these practices reduce assumptions, inform markets, and ensure that what we design meaningfully impacts people in the ways that matter most.”
The second mode is human-centered and practice-driven. This user-centered research is usually embedded in the design process itself, through observation, ethnographic research, user interviews, persona building, and participatory co-design workshops. This human-centered research method is popularized by design innovation firm IDEO, but the focus on empathy and engagement to uncover deeper insights is applicable to the built environment industry as well.
Kristin Reddick, lead research specialist at Haworth, reminds us that designers are already doing this work: “What designers don’t often realize is that by seeking to understand users and design the best possible outcome, they are conducting research. Research is the ‘systematic investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts.’ At its core, the programming phase is research. Understanding the local culture where the organization resides so you can connect the space to local community is research. Asking questions and observing users in situ in order to solve design problems and increase access to space is research!”
From an educator’s perspective, Noor Murteza, visiting assistant professor at Indiana University, expands the role of research: “Design research bridges intuition and evidence, grounding design in real human needs and contexts through collaboration and inquiry. As an educator and a co-designer, I see how it expands students’ sense of what their future can be, opening paths into roles like research strategist, consultant, or user-experience specialist. It reframes the industry as not just creating spaces, but generating knowledge and shaping how people live.”
Both modes are essential, and both are focused on people. But they do not always connect as seamlessly as they should.
The Gap Between Knowledge and Practice
This is where I see the biggest opportunity for our design industry. I believe we don’t have a research problem, but we may have a translation problem. There is more research than ever before. Academic research and science continue to grow, offering deep insights into how the environment impacts human brain, body, behavior, and health. At the same time, practice-based research is expanding through firms, manufacturers, and organizations investing in dedicated research teams. Yet there is still a gap between what we know and how we apply it. Academic research can sometimes feel distant from day-to-day practice influenced by budget, schedule, and client requests. It is often rigorous and valuable, but not always easily incorporated into design decisions. On the other hand, research in practice can sometimes lack depth or consistency, becoming a quick discovery phase or surface level survey to check off the box, rather than a meaningful investigation. The result is a disconnect between knowledge and practice. Insight exists, but it does not always translate into action.
Organizations like CADRE are working to bridge this gap by fostering collaboration across academia, industry, and practice. Increasing awareness and interdisciplinary partnerships with psychologists, neuroscientists, and anthropologists are bringing science to the forefront of human health and wellbeing. Similarly, in-house research teams within firms and manufacturers are helping translate research into measurable goals and actionable strategies.
These efforts are critical and pointing us to the right direction, but there are still a lot more work to do to fill the gap between knowledge and practice.
From Human-Centered Research to Research-Informed Design
At its core, design research is about understanding to inform decision-making. It begins with framing the right question to solve the right problem. Without clarity, design risks becoming decoration rather than solution. Human-centered research methods encourage us to frame the right question, start widely, explore deeply, and engage directly with the people we are designing for to uncover insights. But insight alone is not enough. The real shift our industry needs to make is from human-centered research to research-informed design. In other words, how do we translate what we learn into what we create? Research gives us information, and insight gives us direction. But translating the research in to design decisions are where impact happens.
What stood out across these conversations is that designers are already doing some version of research. But the difference is, how intentionally and rigorously we approach it. Recognizing this reframes research from something external to something embedded within our process. At the same time, research is becoming more measurable and data-informed. From qualitative insights to quantitative metrics and biometric data, the tools are evolving. This brings new opportunities, but also new responsibilities. This is also where emerging tools like AI begins to play a role: not as a replacement for human thinking, but as our thinking partner. In research, AI can help us synthesize information, expand perspectives, and challenge assumptions, but it should not replace human judgment and decision-making. The responsibility to interpret and decide remains with the designer. Equally important is interdisciplinary collaboration, as the most meaningful insights rarely come from a single discipline. They emerge at the intersection of disciplines, when designers work alongside researchers, scientists, and strategists, expanding both the depth and breadth of inquiry.
This evolution is reshaping the role of the designer. We are not only creators of space, but translators of insight, facilitators of collaboration, connectors of knowledge, and investigators of human experience. Roles that blend design, strategy, and research are becoming more visible, opening new paths for the profession.
Looking Forward: Translating Insight into Design Decisions
So where does this leave us? Design research is gaining momentum, but it is not yet fully embedded across the industry. Some have integrated it deeply, while others are still navigating what it means and how to apply it. There is still a gap between intuition-driven design and evidence-informed design. The path forward is not about choosing between intuition and evidence, but about integrating both. Intuition, informed by experience, paired with research grounded in evidence. This is where design becomes both creative and credible.
It also reshapes how we educate future designers. If design research is becoming foundational to practice, it must also become foundational in education. Students need to understand that research is deeply embedded in design process. They need to learn how to ask better questions, engage with users, collaborate across disciplines, translate insight into design decisions, and communicate their discovery through storytelling.
As Odalis Campos Vasquez, interior design student at Purdue University, reminds us: “Design research in our design industry means reflecting our insights and new knowledge within different areas in the industry through storytelling. How do you tell a compelling story and build a narrative that can be accessible to the broader audience? Design is universal and so should the way we translate research.”
That ability to translate insight into design narrative may be one of the most critical skills for the next generation of designers, especially as they step into a profession that is increasingly collaborative, science-informed, and shaped by both human and artificial intelligence.
And perhaps this is where the future of our design industry becomes most compelling. Not in choosing between research and design, or evidence and intuition, but in learning how to bring them together through curiosity, asking better questions, and making better design decisions.
Editor’s Note: Yong In is a professor of interior design at Purdue University and has more than 25 years of experience in the design and architecture industry. She earned her master’s degree from Northwestern University and holds dual Bachelor’s degrees in interior architecture and science. She is a whole-brain designer with a unique background in both creative explorations (design/art/architecture) and analytical processes (science/engineering/strategy).