Case study · Client confidential · 2026

Innovating for the bathroom

Led a 3-week discovery sprint that translated an open-ended brief into behavioral grounding that drove a full product concepting phase — ending with three prioritized device concepts.

---

Context

The client's emerging devices team was exploring whether smart home products could meaningfully expand into the bathroom. The brief was ambitious — customer research, concept territories, and device concepts — compressed into roughly six weeks.

The core gap was behavioral: the team had hypotheses (smart mirrors, health tracking as a growth area) but nothing from real users. My job was to generate that grounding quickly, and help the team understand which problems were actually worth solving.

Two early scope decisions defined the project: reframing an overly ambitious research plan around clear learning questions linked to product outcomes, and consolidating health tracking as a topic within the bathroom study rather than running it as a parallel project.

---

Approach

The behavioral question had two parts: how do people actually use bathrooms, and what does friction look like in real routines and spaces? That framing drove method selection.

• Diary study 18 participants via dscout. Four structured activities covering smart device tours, bathroom tours, and morning/evening routine logging. Captured the texture of real spaces without observer effect.
• In-depth interviews 12 participants. Part 1: routine deep-dive. Part 2: concept feedback on real CES 2026 products for an initial read on innovative bathroom technologies.
• Secondary research Competitive landscape, CES 2026 bathroom tech, and syndicated behavioral data from the client's internal research team.

---

Key findings

• Two distinct modes Users toggle between efficiency-focused (morning, functional) and self-care ritualism (evening, restorative). Devices that served one mode often created friction in the other.
• Static space, dynamic needs Bathrooms are fixed environments but user needs shift by day, calendar, sleep quality, and household composition. People had developed fragile workarounds — propped phones, extension cords — to compensate.
• Health as aspiration Users were motivated to self-improve but overwhelmed by data without guidance. They wanted an active partner in their wellness goals, not more numbers to interpret.
• Physical constraints, not privacy Power outlets and counter space were the primary barriers to device adoption — not privacy concerns, which were less significant than initially hypothesized.

---

Impact

Research directly seeded three concept territories, refined into a final slate with form factors, job-to-be-done, and tiering rationale. The initial scope — a 600-person survey plus ethnography and focus groups — was reframed into a leaner diary + IDI approach that delivered within timeline.

---

Reflections

Scoping hard at intake — negotiating health off the brief and right-sizing the research plan — was the decisive call that made delivery possible. The diary + IDI combination surfaced the efficiency/ritualism insight within the first days of fielding, giving synthesis a clear organizing frame.

What I'd do differently: the insights board went through a major rewrite two weeks before final delivery because the initial framing prioritized narrative over the statistical evidence the client needed for internal selling. Earlier alignment on what "a good research board" looked like for this context would have saved significant rework.

The engagement also involved navigating subterranean misalignment between two client-side stakeholders on narrative direction — consulting craft that doesn't show up in deliverables but was essential to keeping the project moving.

Supporting materials available upon request. Client name, internal concept names, and participant quotes abstracted per NDA.