For research teams and project managers planning timelines for qualitative interview-based studies
Calculate total time required across all phases of interview-based research including recruitment, conducting interviews, analysis, and synthesis. Understand resource requirements and project duration for accurate study planning.
Analysis Hours
30.00 hours
Total Hours
90.00 hours
Project Timeline
3.00 weeks
Conducting 20 interviews at 60 minutes each requires 90 total hours across all phases. This includes 10 hours for recruitment, 20 hours conducting interviews, 30 hours for analysis, plus synthesis and buffer time. The complete project spans approximately 3 weeks.
Interview-based research requires comprehensive time planning across multiple phases: recruitment, conducting interviews, transcription/analysis, and synthesis. Each phase compounds the time commitment beyond just the interview duration itself.
Effective project scoping accounts for the 3:1 ratio between interview time and total effort—a one-hour interview typically requires two additional hours for preparation, analysis, and synthesis. Buffer time mitigates scheduling conflicts and unexpected complexity in data analysis.
Analysis Hours
30.00 hours
Total Hours
90.00 hours
Project Timeline
3.00 weeks
Conducting 20 interviews at 60 minutes each requires 90 total hours across all phases. This includes 10 hours for recruitment, 20 hours conducting interviews, 30 hours for analysis, plus synthesis and buffer time. The complete project spans approximately 3 weeks.
Interview-based research requires comprehensive time planning across multiple phases: recruitment, conducting interviews, transcription/analysis, and synthesis. Each phase compounds the time commitment beyond just the interview duration itself.
Effective project scoping accounts for the 3:1 ratio between interview time and total effort—a one-hour interview typically requires two additional hours for preparation, analysis, and synthesis. Buffer time mitigates scheduling conflicts and unexpected complexity in data analysis.
White-label the Interview Based Study Time Calculator and embed it on your site to engage visitors, demonstrate value, and generate qualified leads. Fully brandable with your colors and style.
Book a MeetingInterview-based qualitative research involves substantial time investment beyond interview sessions themselves. Each interview hour typically requires multiple hours for recruitment, analysis, and synthesis. Organizations underestimating time requirements face project delays, budget overruns, or insufficient analysis depth. Accurate time planning enables realistic project timelines, appropriate staffing, and adequate budget allocation. Research teams need comprehensive time estimates when proposing projects to stakeholders or applying for research funding. Understanding full time commitment prevents rushed analysis compromising research quality.
Research phases compound with different time multipliers. Recruitment time varies by participant availability, compensation, and screening requirements. Hard-to-reach populations require substantially more recruitment effort. Interview conduct time includes not just conversation but setup, rapport building, and closure. Analysis involves transcription, coding, thematic analysis, and interpretation. Synthesis increases non-linearly as researchers integrate findings across interviews identifying patterns and connections. Buffer time accounts for participant cancellations, rescheduling, technical issues, or deeper-than-expected analysis needs.
Beyond individual study planning, time estimation supports resource allocation across research portfolios. Organizations conducting multiple studies simultaneously must distribute researcher capacity appropriately. Accurate time estimates enable pipeline planning preventing team overcommitment. However, time requirements vary by research domain, interview complexity, and team experience. Organizations should calibrate estimates based on historical data from similar projects. Regular tracking during execution enables improving future estimates through empirical refinement.
Product team conducting customer discovery interviews
PhD student conducting dissertation research interviews
Market research firm conducting exploratory customer research
Hospital studying patient experiences and care improvements
Analysis time depends on interview complexity, research questions, and analysis depth. Basic content analysis may require 1-2 hours per interview hour. Detailed thematic analysis with coding often needs 2-3 hours per interview hour. Transcription adds time if researchers transcribe recordings. Professional transcription services reduce researcher time but add costs. Analysis includes reviewing transcripts, coding themes, identifying patterns, and documenting insights. Experienced researchers may work more efficiently. Complex topics or dense conversations require more analysis time. Organizations should track actual analysis time improving future estimates.
Recruitment time varies by population accessibility, screening requirements, scheduling flexibility, and compensation adequacy. General populations recruit faster than specialized professionals or hard-to-reach groups. Medical patients, executives, or niche experts require more recruitment effort. Screening surveys identifying qualified participants add time. Scheduling accommodations for busy participants extend timelines. Adequate compensation improves response rates. Recruitment through existing networks proceeds faster than cold outreach. Organizations should pilot recruitment approaches estimating actual time requirements. Multiple recruitment channels may accelerate participant acquisition.
Parallel approaches conducting interviews while analyzing earlier sessions enable iterative refinement. Researchers can adjust interview guides based on emerging insights. Theoretical saturation becomes evident allowing researchers to stop when no new themes emerge. However, parallel work requires disciplined analysis keeping pace with interviews. Sequential approaches complete all interviews before analysis enabling consistent interview protocols. Sequential work suits fixed interview counts or single-researcher projects. Organizations should balance iterative learning benefits against logistical complexity. Team size and timeline constraints affect approach selection.
Buffer recommendations vary by project certainty and participant predictability. Well-defined projects with reliable participants may need 10-15% buffers. Exploratory research with uncertain scope warrants 20-30% buffers. Hard-to-reach populations requiring extensive recruitment justify higher buffers. Buffer accounts for participant cancellations, rescheduling, technical issues during virtual interviews, or unexpectedly rich data requiring deeper analysis. Organizations with tight deadlines should include adequate buffers preventing deadline pressure compromising quality. Historical project data calibrates appropriate buffer levels. Contingent participants reduce scheduling delays.
Synthesis involves identifying patterns, developing frameworks, and integrating findings across interviews. Synthesis time grows with interview counts as cross-cutting patterns emerge. Complex research questions with multiple dimensions require more synthesis. Interdisciplinary projects synthesizing diverse perspectives increase synthesis needs. Synthesis produces research outputs including reports, presentations, or academic papers. Organizations should allocate 20-30% of total project time for synthesis. Collaborative synthesis with multiple researchers discussing interpretations adds time but improves rigor. Synthesis often reveals needs for additional interviews refining understanding.
Virtual interviews reduce travel time but may increase technical setup and troubleshooting. Recording and transcription work similarly across formats. In-person interviews require travel to participant locations or providing interview spaces. Travel time varies by geographic distribution. In-person rapport building may proceed faster than virtual. Virtual interviews enable geographic reach beyond local areas. Technical issues including connectivity problems or platform unfamiliarity can extend virtual interviews. Organizations should account for format-specific considerations when estimating time. Hybrid approaches may optimize different interview phases.
Multiple interviewers enable parallel interviewing reducing calendar time but requiring coordination ensuring consistent approaches. Single interviewers maintain consistency but extend timelines with sequential interviewing. Team approaches benefit from diverse perspectives during synthesis. However, multiple interviewers require training, calibration, and regular check-ins. Small studies or single-researcher projects like dissertations use individual approaches. Large studies with tight timelines benefit from teams. Organizations should balance timeline needs against coordination complexity. Team synthesis discussions improve rigor through peer examination of interpretations.
Efficiency improvements include professional transcription services, structured coding frameworks, interview guide refinement through pilots, recruitment process optimization, and collaborative analysis. Transcription services free researchers for analysis rather than transcription. Pre-established coding frameworks accelerate analysis versus emergent coding. Pilot interviews refine questions reducing wasted interview time. Efficient recruitment through referrals or existing databases reduces per-participant time. Team analysis sessions parallelize synthesis work. However, efficiency cannot compromise research quality. Organizations should identify high-leverage improvements rather than rushing critical research phases.
Plan and allocate budget across different research activities
Calculate the optimal sample size needed to achieve statistical significance for your research
Evaluate the potential return on investment for your research project with scenario analysis
Calculate total cost of software licenses plus support
Calculate the revenue impact of increased user engagement