Vienna in June. A train, a few hundred kilometers of track, and the feeling of being around people again who are wrestling with the same questions I am.
The UX Summit at Technikum Wien was my first major conference in a while and it was worth it. Not because of big surprises, but because so many things I'd already been thinking suddenly got said out loud. By others. In a room. Which makes a difference. Here are my key takeaways.
This was the topic that stayed with me the most and probably moved most people in the room.
Julia Zadoorian-Klammer said it directly: more AI in the research process doesn't automatically mean more insight. Structuring qualitative data with AI in particular remains difficult. And honestly, it was a relief to hear that this is the case for everyone. Not just me.
What really made me think: efficiency ≠ working faster. This equation sounds obvious, but it's constantly forgotten including by me. When I use AI to get to a result more quickly, I have to ask: faster toward what? Toward genuine insight? Or toward an output that merely looks like one?
And then there was an idea that grabbed me immediately: sharing insights as a podcast for stakeholders. Audio as a UX research format. Why not? Not everyone wants to read through decks. Some people prefer listening. I sometimes still lack the confidence to offer research findings in formats people will actually use.
Another topic that doesn't get enough space at conferences or in everyday work.
Neurodivergent design came up at the summit, and it reminded me again: accessibility isn't a checkbox at the end of a project. It's a mindset. We design products that work for a specific type of person and then wonder why others struggle with them.
A few concrete things I've committed to:
Admittedly: standards don't sound like the most exciting conference content. But ISO 27500 surprised me.
It deals with human-centered organizations and specifically, how companies should be structured so that user-centered thinking is embedded structurally, not just dependent on the goodwill of individuals.
That's essentially what I'm constantly working toward in my own job: not just delivering good research findings, but making sure they actually land. Using ISO as a reference framework for that hadn't been on my radar. That changes now.
Beyond the content themes, I came home with a few concrete tool recommendations:
That was on a slide, an Austrian dialect phrase from Vienna that roughly means "be great for once" (or more warmly: "just be wonderful"). It made me smile, and somehow it captured what I took away from the summit.
That it's worth asking them out loud. And that it's good, sometimes, to close the laptop and get on a train.And then there was the side impulse that came up during the train ride: how to better capture disabilities and neurodivergence in surveys. How do you ask about that without labeling people or creating new barriers? A question I haven't answered yet.
Until next time, Vienna.