Dovetail, headquartered in Sydney, aims to enable the world to create better products and services through deep customer understanding. Dovetail states they empower 45,000+ people, from agencies to universities to Fortune 100 companies, to make sense of their customer research in one collaborative research platform.
$0
per month
Maze
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Maze is a rapid user testing platform from Maze.design in Paris, designed to give users actionable user insights, in a matter of hours. The vendor states that with it, users can test remotely, autonomously, and collaboratively.
$75
per month
Pricing
Dovetail
Maze
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
Professional
$15
per month
Enterprise
Contact Sales
per year
Professional
$75
per month 3+ seats
Organization
custom pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Dovetail
Maze
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
Discount available for annual billing on the Professional plan.
Dovetail outperforms in qualitative research analysis by offering advanced tagging transcription and centralized insights. I think notion is good for large or complex documentation but Dovetail is nice for qualitative documentation. Maze is better for usabilty testing , …
I did not select Dovetail but chose to keep it, hoping it would end up connected to more things over time. I probably would have gone with Great Question or Maze if I had to start from scratch for cost purposes. Glad I stuck with Dovetail, but hoping for more automated …
Dovetail is 10X better. So much easier and truly meant for having one centralized workspace. Everything from the highlights and tags and videos and column customization when editing makes it easy to call them the winner in this field. I wouldn't want to go back to my other …
Dovetail is the most stakeholder-friendly research tool we've used.
Its visual insights, highlight reels, and intuitive interface make it easy for non-researchers to understand and act on customer feedback. Stakeholders can engage directly without needing deep training, making …
Maze User Testing is brilliant to test with a large volume of people and if you’re not after particular qualitative insights, like UserTesting would offer. The card sorting feature is basic and not as mature as Optimal Workshop would offer but it does the job and can be used in …
Well suited for: A product team with one FT person dedicated to research and operations to ensure the DT stays up to date, since its automated connectors are not that robust for lower plans. Eg., Salesforce doesn't work great without an enterprise plan, and you have to use outside automated workflows to feed in data from other sources of user feedback (e.g., Google Docs, Sheets). An enterprise team with more engineering time to dedicate to customizing their user research workflows.
Maze User Testing is great if you're interested in doing user research from the comfort of your own desk. You can easily setup usability tests, surveys, card sorting and tree tests among other things to get a better understanding of how customers use your product. The only limitation at the moment with Maze that I can identify is only being able to do unmoderated tests, so if you'd like to be able to ask follow up questions in the moment, Maze is not the tool for you.
I really like the User Interface, how easy it is to have all your research data in one project and how visual it is to understand where are things. It does have a good User Experience.
I like how nice and easy it is to create categories or use the ones auto generated as a starting point. It is very easy to create a color coded set of categories that help make sense of the data.
I like how easy it is to see the video snippet of a specific highlight.
Because we are really happy with the tool and it’s capabilities at the moment. The price increase is the main issue we can have but the features are getting better and better. It really saves a lot of time for our team and allow us to collaborate more efficiently with certain stakeholders that often did not réalise how much research we conduct. Now they can just have a look to it by themself!
it is relatively intuitive but it does take some practice to get used to the platform and understand the capabilities and limitations. There are also times that we have run into issues where the people we are sharing reports with either cannot view them or access is not provided. Additionally, the ability to export any of the video clips or snippets has created some frustration since we want to include the great findings that Dovetail helps put together, but need to bounce between screens or share after-the-fact rather than embedding it directly into a readout deck.
Maze is easy to use most of the times. It is easy to integrate with Figma, It is easy to find testers worldwide with required filters. Maze gives recorded videos which are helpful in debugging and understanding the problem with flows. A/B testing is easy to add and test. Overall Maze is very easy to use
Regarding performance, I would say it’s satisfactory. Adding data and transcriptions is really fast and efficient, and can be done in the background, so I’m never hindered by these aspects. However, all the new AI-generated features are still somewhat slow to run. It’s nothing major, but it should improve in the future.
Support was good, especially when it comes to the capability of your support agents and engineers. But as i am located in Europe, the difference in the time zone made it hard to communicate with your offices and kept my work way back
The training went very well, and we co-built it to really address our needs. I also think it was beneficial to have feedback coming from someone other than myself (since I manage the tool), as it helped reinforce the points I wanted to highlight. The team’s feedback on the training was very positive.
We looked at a few other options, Marvin and Reforge Insight. They were both pretty cool platforms that operate largely or entirely on AI, but neither quite fit our needs. Reforge Insight was cool, but it did not have all the features we needed from Dovetail, and switching to Marvin felt like a massive undertaking. We have so much data in Dovetail that the "cost" of leaving feels monumental. Besides, Dovetail fits our needs right now.
A Lookback is an alternative option if you think Maze User Testing is quite expensive for you, but look back has a different approach to Maze User Testing. Lookback focuses on qualitative usability testing instead of quantitative UserTesting. And also, Maze User Testing has a free option but Lookback doesn't have it, but Lookback has a cheaper option at $19/month than Maze.
Management is quite straightforward; it’s easy to change access if certain stakeholders need to use it. The repository features are accessible to all teams, making it a good entry point into the tool. The more people use it, the more powerful the tool becomes, so it seems truly scalable to me. The limits are more financial, in terms of accessing additional features.
Having a centralized research space is a game changer. Makes it so much easier to hand over research if working with new people and have system in place (using the templates). Saves so much time. We don't have hard numbers on the hours saved but we are much more efficient using Dovetail than without.
The tagging system in general is amazing and allows for consistency in topic marking. This was non-existent for our team before Dovetail and now we can do much more granule reports with exact # of times something was said with accuracy.
