If you grew up on 90s wrestling, you’ll know Mick Foley. The Hardcore Legend. The man of a thousand scars. The man who wrote about losing his ear in Germany - to write that in an autobiography, for me to read aloud in English class when I was 12 which lead to some very stern conversations with the teacher. The bloke who somehow convinced us he had was three different personas in one flannel shirt: Cactus Jack (the violent, unhinged brawler), Dude Love (the groovy, tie-dye dreamer), and Mankind (the deranged, mask-wearing outcast).
Three very different characters. One very battered body.
So what’s this got to do with user research? More than you’d think. The Three Faces of Foley are a perfect analogy for how we approach, interpret, and present our work. It’s about knowing which persona to lean into for the task at hand. Let’s step into the ring (nicely through the ropes, not through a cage…)
Cactus Jack = Raw, Unfiltered Research
Cactus Jack was chaos personified. Barbed wire, thumbtacks, flaming tables—he took punishment and made you feel it. That’s what raw research data is like. Messy. Uncomfortable. Sometimes painful to watch. Users get stuck. They misclick. They sigh. They tell you things that make your stakeholders wince.
And that’s the point. This is where the truth lives. If you sanitise it too early, you lose the edge. As researchers, we’ve got to sit with the struggle and let the pain points hit hard. Sometimes you need to roll around in the thumbtacks (or post its, please don’t literally roll around in thumbtacks.). That’s the real hardcore research.
Dude Love = Storytelling & Selling the Insights
Dude Love was all peace signs, tie-dye, and disco struts. Did it look a bit odd? A bit desperate like a man of a certain age dyeing their hair jet black and buying a ridiculous car? Sure. But he got the crowd’s attention. That’s the job when we present insights. No one’s going to sit through 60 pages of transcripts. We have to bring a little Dude Love—add rhythm, visuals, and just enough charisma to make the story land.
It’s not about sugar-coating the pain. It’s about packaging it so people listen, remember, and act on it. Research isn’t useful if it sits in a dusty folder.
Mankind = Empathy for the Outsider
Mankind was the underdog. Broken teeth, leather mask, boiler-room promos. He wasn’t slick, but people connected with him. That’s empathy in research. Products are often built for the “happy path” users, the main eventers. But many real users are outsiders—people battling friction, barriers, or being flat-out excluded.
Channelling Mankind means surfacing those voices, making them heard, and reminding teams that the outsiders matter. That’s how we build inclusive products. Just remember - although they may not be in the room - they’re there, watching, loitering in the shadows.
Bonus Round: The Royal Rumble of Research
Sometimes, you need all three. Just like the 1998 Royal Rumble, when Foley entered three times as three different characters. Research works the same way: the raw reality (Cactus Jack), the polished story (Dude Love), and the empathy for the overlooked (Mankind), all showing up depending on what the moment demands.
Conclusion
Mick Foley’s genius was switching personas without losing authenticity.
User research is the same. Sometimes you’re Cactus Jack, knee-deep in messy transcripts. Sometimes you’re Dude Love, selling the story with style. And sometimes you’re Mankind, amplifying the voices no one else hears.
The trick is knowing which face to put forward. Because if wrestling - and research, teaches us anything, it’s that a one-dimensional approach is boring.