Likelihood to Recommend If you have a fully customized cms and have people working on the site with html and css knowledge this is the best tool ever, all specifics can be checked. Using ab tests and optimization services we identify best practices of the website and everywhere the best practices aren't implemented we find using the custom checkpoints. Aspects that cannot be automated via a quick IT solution is turned into a checkpoint and that's great!
Read full review It's the best for A/B tests or tests where you need a broad audience. If you don't need a real niche audience (that you should recruit then rather yourself), then you can rely on UserTesting. It's good because it's so quick, almost instant, it takes about 10 minutes on average before I can start reviewing and documenting sessions.
Read full review Pros Preconfigured checkpoints to gather a baseline. Reporting at regular intervals to identify pain points. Mapping to WCAGG standard to understand how to resolve errors. Ability to add customized checkpoints to align with messaging changes Aggregating images in a visual repository to scan for relevancy. Read full review Taking notes with video clips. I can take notes while I am watching a session and I can create clips of UX issues or bugs occurring. This really helps when I share them with other teams. Exporting all your notes. I analyze all usability tests by exporting my notes from UserTesting. I wish I could bulk export multiple tests though. Setting up demographics. This helps me reach out to users who are similar to our audience. Setting up screeners. Some studies require specific audiences (using a specific tool etc.), by setting screeners I can make sure I reached the correct audience. Read full review Cons It would be helpful if the Issues page under Website showed the WCAG level for each issue (A, AA, AAA). You currently have to look up the guideline to find the level. There is no indicator that a page is currently being scanned. During a website scan, some of the reports are blank or missing information. Having a notification on the main page showing which websites are being scanned would be helpful. Some ADA compliance items are left off, such as keyboard navigation, tabbing, etc. It doesn't view the websites on mobile devices or if using a screen reader. Some pages or formatting changes depending on resolution. The DQM, from what I have seen, doesn't account for that. Read full review The organization of the work spaces/dashboards could use some work. I don't feel as supported as I used to from a customer success perspective. I used to have dedicated, go-to professionals to reach out to about my account who knew my project context, account history, etc. Recently we've been pushed into general support pools, and it doesn't feel like my account gets any personalized attention anymore. I would like to see a more refined experience for collaborators - the test plans I share with them are plain text/hard to read. Would be nice to be able to conduct focus groups using this tool. Read full review Likelihood to Renew We've seen competitors, they're not doing as well of a job as dqm is. It's a wonderful tool and there a huge opportunities for crownpeak
Read full review I'm very happy with my experience of the product and the level of service and learning resources they provide. If the service becomes more expensive than it currently is then we might not be able to justify additional cost - but this is theoretical. I would recommend UserTesting and would ideally renew our contract.
Read full review Usability I had a small learning curve in order to become fluent with the platform as it doesn't work like the other automated accessibility tools that I've used. However, once I was up to speed, I like it better than any of the other tools and find the data more useful, digestible, and relevant.
Read full review User Testing is very easy to use. You first select the profile of your participants. This is as simple as checking on checkboxes and creating some questions to target the right market and user. You may also just send the tests to your own customers with a simple link. After selecting your audience, you just need to drag and drop the tasks and set them up. You're always guided throughout the process and if you're missing something, the user testing platform will let you know. Really simple stuff.
Read full review Reliability and Availability Haven't had issues accessing the dashboard when needed.
Read full review Never encountered any problems
Read full review Performance No issues with speed and performance
Read full review Perfectly fine. Never had any problems.
Read full review Support Rating DQM support teams are responsive and knowledgeable, and will spend time working directly with client and agency teams to ensure the best outcomes are achieved. I can't fault the level of input and engagement from Crownpeak support teams across the board.
Read full review Taking a long time When we had issues or questions, it often took a long time to receive a response from the support team. This delayed our testing and caused frustration for our team.
Not helpful in our specific questions
When we did receive a response, it often did not fully address our specific questions or issues. This made it difficult to resolve problems or move forward with our testing.
Read full review Online Training Product is straight-forward but the training was helpful and beneficial
Read full review Implementation Rating The initial process is not clear but after the first cookie banner all others are faster to implement.
Read full review From a technical perspective, the implementation was extremely smooth. Most of the change management / implementation hurdles were clearing use of the tool through our various security, legal, and information privacy teams. Once these concerns were addressed (UserTesting.com was very helpful in providing all the needed documentation), the implementation process was very simple and we were able to get going right away.
Read full review Alternatives Considered One of the most similar solutions to Crownpeak is the
Yext tool because it has a good set of functions that can be managed from content to customer experiences, it is fascinating to be able to track all user interactions through users, in the same way as in Crownpeak that allows all users to create digital experiences.
Read full review UserTesting allows for a quicker recruiting process for our studies. Additionally, UserTesting has more unmoderated research features and capabilities. I think that their payment model is also easier than UserInterviews. We typically user UserTesting for reaching our hard to reach segments and recruiting prospective users not already within our product user population.
Read full review Scalability haven't had issues accessing when needed.
Read full review The package we have limits the number of people who can set up tests. This prevents us from scaling the use of the platform.
Read full review Return on Investment When driving Customer Care, it was great to be able to add the Autofix tool to the web estate - a quick-win that really drives the accessibility agenda. Building reports off the back of DQM gives senior stakeholders an understanding of the importance of usability and accessibility. The gamification of league tables highlights to stakeholders the areas that need focus and budget in order to improve. Read full review Cost savings of over $100K as we dont involve our research vendors as much as we used to do in the past Better tested experience get out in the market quickly even when we don't have enough time available with our researchers; our designers who are well-trained on usertesting.com can test out quickly Read full review ScreenShots Crownpeak Digital Accessibility and Quality Screenshots