Turn interview detail into a research view you can inspect.

Your interviews are complete, but the insight is scattered across long conversations. You need to compare experiences, understand why respondents differ and build an argument for the study objectives. Start with the guide and the analysis grid you want to work in, then connect each finding back to the relevant source.

A useful grid does more than shorten each interview. It captures the material needed for each objective: experiences, reasons, tradeoffs and unanswered questions. Agree sections and subsections with your researchers so the structure follows the study, including topics that emerge beyond the original guide.

Keep individual summaries and source references available for review. A theme should not erase a respondent who disagrees or combine different experiences into a single invented view. Where speaker attribution is uncertain, particularly in overlapping group discussion, retain that uncertainty instead of assigning a statement confidently.

Compare supplied groups such as frequent and occasional users, regions or journey stages. Report which participants contributed to each contrast and retain within-group differences. These are findings from the study participants; they do not establish how common a view is across the whole market.

Connect the evidence to your objectives, including conflicting accounts and topics the interviews did not resolve. Researchers can challenge whether a synthesis is supported, whether a quotation reflects its context and whether an apparent difference is driven by one participant. Those checks belong in the evaluation, alongside representative audio and discussion formats.