User research is an extremely powerful tool (or set of tools) for understanding customer needs and behaviours. As digital projects grow in size and complexity, the risk of building the wrong thing becomes an increasing danger. So it makes sense to spend a portion of your budget to ensure that you've done the due diligence and are investing wisely.
The argument for "designing in the browser" seems very seductive at first glance. The web is an interactive medium that defies the fixed canvas of traditional layout tools, so why not use the browser as your primary design environment?
Over the years I've heard plenty of designers moan about their clients. I've also witnessed a recent outburst of complaints against authors and speakers on Twitter. However the group that rarely comes under fire in public, but probably should, are the mass of terrible agencies out there.
First off let me apologise for the laboured metaphor I'm about to inflict on you, but I thought it could be entertaining to try and describe the web design industry using a medium I'm sure you're all familiar with; Dungeons & Dragons.
I first came across the term Minimum Viable Product when I dropped into a talk by Eric Reis at the Web 2.0 Expo in New Year a few year's back. As a company that has always worked on variable scope projects, defining a MVP seemed like a great way of managing client expectations.
Have you every been in the situation where the client keeps requesting tweaks to the design or changes in functionality? As you sit moving boxes around the page, the budget is slowly draining away and you're no longer sure whether the project can be completed on target? In these situations what do you do?