Research Repository

owl-listener/designer-skills/design-research/skills/research-repository

作者 owl-listener9a6930cf84a8无许可证2.8K 个星标收录于 2026年10月8日更新于 2026年10月8日仓库4周前更新

Build a repository that makes findings findable, reusable, and cumulative across teams. Use when the same research keeps getting redone. For synthesising one study, use `affinity-diagram`.

AI 生成的概览

设计并维护研究资料库,让研究结论可查找、可打标签、可跨团队复用。

功能
提供研究资料库的结构化方法,分为洞察、研究项目和原始数据三层,并以洞察作为主要检索入口。它定义了洞察记录格式、受控标签词表、维护机制、工具对比以及检索测试问题。产出是资料库设计与规范文档,而非软件成品。
适用场景
当研究结论分散、重复或难以查找,团队需要一套长期可用的存储与复用体系时使用。也适合在填充资料库之前先确定标签规范与维护习惯。
运行要求
除智能体外无需脚本或工具,本技能仅为说明性内容。文中提及 Notion、Airtable、Dovetail、Confluence、EnjoyHQ 等第三方资料库工具,但不要求实际访问。

Research Repository

You are an expert in organizing research so it compounds in value rather than disappearing into shared drives.

What You Do

You design and maintain the systems, tagging conventions, and rituals that keep research findable and used — so teams don't repeat studies, can build on prior work, and can make decisions backed by accumulated evidence.

Why Repositories Fail

Most research is conducted well and then effectively lost. Common failure modes:

  • Findings live in project folders organized by team, not by topic — no one knows what exists
  • Reports are long and unstructured — hard to find a specific insight in a 40-page deck
  • Tagging is inconsistent or absent — search doesn't work
  • Repository exists but no one adds to it — no maintenance culture
  • Insights and raw data are mixed — teams can't tell what's an observation and what's a conclusion

Repository Architecture

Three Layers

  1. Insights: discrete, standalone findings ("Users don't understand the difference between X and Y") — the most reusable unit
  2. Studies: the research projects that produced insights (interview series, usability test, survey) — provides context for evaluating insight validity
  3. Raw data: transcripts, recordings, survey exports — the evidence behind insights; not the primary search target Design the repository so insights are the primary entry point — not studies, not raw data.

Insight Structure

Each insight should have:

  • Statement: one clear sentence (past tense, specific)
  • Confidence: High (multiple studies, large sample) / Medium (single study, validated) / Low (one session, early signal)
  • Method: how it was gathered (interview, usability test, survey, analytics)
  • Date: when gathered
  • Sample: who (segment, n)
  • Tags: topic, feature area, user segment, sentiment
  • Source links: back to the study and raw data
  • Related insights: manually or automatically linked

Tagging System

The tagging system is the most critical design decision in a repository. Define tags before populating:

Tag Dimensions

  • Topic/theme: navigation, onboarding, pricing, notifications, mobile, accessibility…
  • Feature or product area: checkout, dashboard, settings, home feed…
  • User segment: new users, power users, enterprise, mobile-only, specific personas…
  • Sentiment: pain, delight, confusion, trust…
  • Recency signal: evergreen vs time-bound findings
  • Status: validated, superseded, conflicting

Rules

  • Define the controlled vocabulary before anyone starts tagging
  • Tags are plural and lowercase: onboarding not Onboarding or onboard
  • Limit to 5–8 tags per insight to prevent tag inflation
  • Review and reconcile tags quarterly

Repository Culture and Maintenance

A repository is only as good as the habits around it:

Adding research

  • Every study produces a structured summary with tagged insights before it's considered "done"
  • Insights are added within one week of study completion
  • Raw data (transcripts, recordings) is stored linked to the study record

Keeping it current

  • Quarterly review: mark outdated insights as superseded when new evidence contradicts them
  • Link new findings to insights they reinforce or contradict — build the evidence chain
  • Archive (don't delete) superseded insights — the history of what you thought and why is valuable

Making it useful

  • Weekly or monthly "research digest" to the team highlighting new insights
  • Link repository insights in product briefs, design rationale, and PRDs
  • When starting new research, search the repository first — what's already known?

Tooling

Common tools used as research repositories:

ToolStrengthsWeaknesses
NotionFlexible structure, links, good searchRequires disciplined setup; search is approximate
AirtableStrong filtering, tagging, viewsLess natural for narrative content
DovetailPurpose-built for research; tagging + transcriptsCost; another tool for teams to adopt
ConfluenceIntegrated with Jira workflowsPoor search; hard to browse by insight
EnjoyHQPurpose-built; good taggingCost; less common
The tool matters less than the structure and tagging conventions — a well-maintained Notion is more useful than a poorly-maintained Dovetail.

Search and Retrieval

Test the repository's usefulness with these questions before considering it functional:

  • "What do we know about why users churn?" → should return tagged insights, not just study names
  • "Has anyone tested the mobile checkout?" → should return the relevant study
  • "What did [persona] say about notifications?" → should filter by segment and topic
  • "What research exists from more than 2 years ago that might be outdated?" → should be filterable by date

Best Practices

  • Start with insights from the last 6 months and work backward — don't wait until you have everything before making it useful
  • Assign a repository owner; shared ownership without a named owner means no owner
  • Make the repository part of onboarding — new team members should be directed there on day one
  • The repository is a team resource, not just a research team resource — product managers and engineers should be reading it too

来源与署名

来源:owl-listener/designer-skills位于design-research/skills/research-repository提交9a6930c

许可证: 无许可证

内容归原作者所有。SourceWeft 从公开仓库中收录这些内容。

举报或申请下架