Define the focus
Agree complaint types, channels, audiences and decisions the study should inform.
Complaint & Recovery Experience
Understand what people experience when something goes wrong, from asking for help to reaching a resolution.
Journeys, Decisions & Trust
Complaint & Recovery Experience research that informs clearer decisions.
A complaint is more than a ticket to close. People need to explain the problem, understand what will happen and know whether the outcome addresses their concern. Complaint and recovery experience research examines this journey across channels, teams and stages.
What we look at
Ease of raising a complaint- Clarity of ownership and timelines
- Tone and empathy in channel interactions
- Resolution quality and follow-up
How we study it
- Complaint journey mapping
- Recovery interviews
- Call and chat interaction analysis
- Service recovery redesign recommendations
What we investigate
Questions the research can address
Can people find a suitable way to raise a concern? Do they understand what information is needed? Who owns the next step? Are updates useful, and is the final response understandable? Research explores where people repeat themselves, chase progress or feel the process has ended without addressing the issue.
Potential study areas include product faults, billing queries, delivery problems, returns, refunds and service complaints. We agree relevant scenarios and distinguish the original problem from the experience of seeking help.
Research focus
The whole recovery journey
The journey may begin with self-service information, move into chat or a call and continue through specialist review. We investigate transitions, repeated requests, waiting periods and the clarity of escalation routes. Staff perspectives can add operational context, while remaining distinct from user evidence.
Administrative closure is not necessarily the same as a user feeling their concern is resolved. We explore understanding of the outcome, remaining questions and follow-up needs. Dissatisfaction with an outcome is also distinguished from difficulty with the process used to reach it.
What we investigate
Methods matched to your questions
Interviews explore specific incidents and expectations. Journey mapping brings stages and handoffs together. Usability and content testing can examine complaint forms, support routes and response templates. Analysis of suitably authorised tickets, calls or chats may identify recurring issues in existing interactions.
Records and participant accounts provide different evidence. Repeated messages may refer to one case, so message counts are not automatically counts of affected customers. Reported events are not treated as independently verified unless suitable supporting evidence exists.
From context to opportunity
Our research process
Review context
Examine available evidence, case stages and access or participation constraints.
Plan safe participation
Confirm recruitment, consent, sensitive-case handling and data requirements.
Research the experience
Explore incidents, interactions, communication and outcomes through suitable methods.
Analyse patterns
Distinguish original failures, recovery barriers and operational dependencies.
Discuss improvements
Prioritise candidate changes, owners and follow-up evaluation.
The output
What your team can receive
Depending on scope, outputs can include recovery journey maps, evidence-backed barriers, communication findings and prioritised opportunities. Examples explain where people lost context, needed more help or remained uncertain after a response. Reports state the audience, sources, case coverage and limitations.
A findings discussion helps service, product and operations teams agree next steps. Measures such as repeat contacts, reported effort or resolution clarity may inform follow-up work when appropriate data is available. Implementation, dashboards and ongoing reporting are separately scoped.
Research focus
Participants and case coverage
Recruitment can include people with recently resolved, ongoing, escalated or abandoned cases, where appropriate. Case type, channel, recency and access needs help define coverage. Studying only successful closures may miss important barriers.
We discuss how participants will be contacted without pressure and how research will be separated from case handling. Participation must not be presented as a route to compensation or faster resolution. Sensitive or active cases require an agreed approach before inclusion.
Research focus
Communication, fairness and support
We explore whether acknowledgements, updates and decisions explain what happened and what the person can do next. Tone matters, but an empathetic message cannot substitute for a workable process. Research can identify perceived fairness, unclear explanations and unmet support needs without deciding whether a case outcome is legally or technically correct.
Recommendations may concern ownership, information continuity, response clarity or accessible alternatives. Changes to policy, required notices and case decisions need review by the responsible teams; they are not determined by UX research alone.
Global research
Different users, channels and markets
People may need different channels, language support or help from a representative. We agree relevant audiences and participation arrangements. Cross-market work documents local service processes and expectations alongside common research questions, rather than assuming all complaint journeys are equivalent.
Research focus
Confidentiality and participant wellbeing
Complaint records may contain sensitive personal details. Agree access, transfer, recording and reporting boundaries before sharing material. Remove unnecessary identifiers where possible and avoid identifying individual staff or customers in examples without an appropriate basis.
Participants can pause or stop and should not be pressured to revisit distressing experiences. Agree how researchers will handle an urgent concern raised during a session. Research is not a live complaint-resolution service and must not imply authority to settle a case.
Before we begin
Frequently asked questions
Yes, where access and use are appropriately authorised. A review of record quality and coverage helps determine what can be learned and whether interviews or testing are needed to address gaps.
Counts describe the analysed records or study participants. Complaint data does not represent everyone who encountered a problem, and qualitative interviews do not establish population percentages. Broader estimates require suitable measurement.
Research can guide improvements but cannot guarantee restored trust, retention or lower complaint volumes. Retesting and appropriate operational measures can help assess changes over time.
Journey Experience
Connect experiences across stages, channels and touchpoints.
Explore
Onboarding Experience
Onboarding usability testing, first-use studies, and diary studies for the critical window where users decide.
Explore
Loyalty & Retention Experience
Explore reasons for continuing, switching or stopping use.
Explore
Experience Benchmarking
UX benchmarking, competitor benchmarking, and scorecards that make experience performance comparable and actio.
Explore
Let us help shape the next step
Understand the experience after a problem.
Find better ways to support people.
Next research service Loyalty & Retention Experience Understand the experience after a problem. Find better ways to support people. Contact Us Share the recovery journey you want to understand.