UserZoom

UserZoom is really useful for getting qualitative feedback on prototype designs. It can also be used to run quantitative surveys. They have their own recruitment, so sourcing participants is automatic and easy. It is one of the better platforms for obtaining feedback quickly. However, I have found them to be significantly more expensive than other providers of both qual[itative] and quant[itative] research.

I think UserZoom is great because it's a good platform coupled with a panel. This is what makes solutions like this shine because building a test is only half the battle, you do have to field the test with some people. Compared with its competitor UserTesting, it's debatable which one fills faster. We have the ability to launch higher sample tests with UserZoom, which may explain why it's taken longer to fill studies. We also have quant tools, like click tests, tree tests, card sorts, and surveys that we really didn't have on UserTesting.

I love UserZoom's virtual observation room, where stakeholders can see sessions themselves in real time without having to make themselves visible to participants. This is a big reason why we switched from UserTesting, which uses Zoom, so all meeting participants are visible to the research participant. The downside of UserZoom is that their video platform is web-based, so it often buffers or lags when people don't have the strongest connection. With big prototypes, like Figma prototypes, it takes a looong time to load.

I also love their method of sending users to prototypes. It makes a huge difference when doing cognitive walkthroughs, where I can reset the prototype myself or bring them to a particular screen on my own, without having to walk them through the path to get there.

Lastly, just have to mention that their screening tool on UserZoom, not GO, is clunky. It's not as easy to screen participants as other solutions.

Well, I think that fact that you can interreact face to face is great! When my manager asks a yes or no question I can react with a yes or no vs having everyone all take at once. It's very useful and dependable and I enjoy using it. There are also backgrounds that can be downloaded and used if you are somewhere where people are visible in the background you can cancel them out with a background.

UserZoom is well suited for usability testing, I found specifically around test websites and marketing materials. I was able to invite others to participate and watch as well as screen share so that it was an interactive session. Other tools I have used have been a little better with the video output and transcripts of each session so that we could capture notes quickly, but overall it was a good tool to use to test.

I wasn't in the position that I had to use support for this tool, so I can't really answer this question. We were able to test and not [have to] reach out to support so that's a good thing!

UserZoom is very capable of creating a space for a UI team to ask important questions about the usability of a product. The wide number of test options is definitely a strength of the platform as a whole. Teams can create forms, click-tasks, surveys, browser sharing experiences (and more) in order to search for their desired customer insights. While the number of testing styles is robust, I would recommend the platform continue to update its own UI in order to stay up to date with other testing platforms on the market. Overall, I would highly recommend the platform as a tool to help better understand how applications are perceived by user-audiences first hand.

From my experience, the UserZoom team has really done a great job answering the limited questions we have given them thus far. I think the platform is popular enough that many of my questions have been answered by their help pages - or other online content with helpful tips and tricks. I think the community has done a nice job of providing end-user tutorials for those who are new to the platform.

Whatever you have a customer or colleague in another place, Zoom is the best way to make a call with them.

A classic example was when a major retailer in a fiercely competitive sector (fashion) asked us to test their new site (before launch). We agreed to shop for three very specific items and match the items for style amongst "suggested goes with" items in very specific sizes. The experience was a 9 out of 10. What we were able to find was the final step (actual purchase) was far too complex. UserZoom was a great tool that captured the issue and turned the launch into a great success.

Not a lot of services out there offer the remote, UN-moderated task-driven testability. The application works well for this, but the UI could use some improvement.

It is a great tool for usability testing. I would recommend to anyone who wants to make use of the tool for conducting usability tests. It is more appropriate while conducting unmoderated testing. But it can be used for moderated as well.

It really depends on the scenario. If you need behavioral data capture, there aren't many tools on the market that can do it as easily and reliably as UserZoom. Things like Loop11 have behavioral data capture, but their feature set is far behind UserZoom's in many ways. However, if you're just doing a simple survey you might be better off with something cheaper like SurveyMonkey. UserZoom's pricing fluctuates a lot and is difficult to predict without working with them directly.

It is expensive. It is warrented if your organization has a high volume of studies and is mature enough to do more than qualitative usability testing. On the other hand, if you find yourself doing many surveys (large or small), usability tests, etc. there is cost savings due to the recruiting cost being the only thing you pay for... by the way, you will have to figure out how the coordinate the recruiting, but UserZoom is so helpful with this process and I think recently they have made efforts to bring those solutions in house.