Optimal Workshop, a company in New Zealand, offers their suite of user research tools on a subscription basis, including the Treejack information architecture tool, OptimalSort card sorting test, Chalkmark first-click testing, and other tools.
If I were in charge of the purchase decision, I probably would've gone with Hotjar, as they have additional qualitative data collection abilities other than heat and click maps. However, I inherited the purchase decision. Crazy Egg has been great for our click and heatmap needs.
+ I strongly believe that this tool helps when a firm has good user count (depends on business model) as most of these tools are data friends. More data - more valuable insights+ Best fit if someone who is looking for deeper insights of individual page - Not suggested for very fewer visits of a website. Suggested toimprove better visit count
Optimal Workshop is great for UX testing for those with a budget to do so. This may be a little on the expensive side for smaller businesses, but definitely not anything crazy expensive. The insights that you get out of these tests are invaluable and can be the difference between launching a site and succeeding/failing.
Provides heatmaps that shows you the elements on your site that are and aren't performing well.
Provides scrollmaps so you can see how far down a page users are scrolling and which content never gets seen.
Screenshots show you how your website looks across a variety of different devices.
Provides a type of clickmap called confetti that enables you visualise clicks by segments - device, new/returning visitors, campaigns and other metrics.
Tree Testing - it is a very simple and easy to use system, that provides the data needed from a tree test
Card sorting - provides a system for users to participate in navigation menu layouts. We looked into several options, but this seemed very intuitive for users.
The largest thing we've struggled with is the Optimizely integration. I've contacted customer service a few times to get it properly setup. Customer Service is always friendly and helpful; they provide clear steps to get it setup. Unfortunately despite clear instructions, they are tedious, and if not completed in the correct order, the integration with Optimizely does not work. My success rate with the integration is less than 55%.
The recruitment panelists are not professional, nor do they take the tasks seriously. You are going to get a lot of bad data.
They are HQ'd outside the US and must have a small team because the customer service is the absolute WORST I've experienced in their industry.
They pride themselves on documentation, but when they fail to document something they blame the customer for the mistake.
There are way too many limitations with the tool after you launch, limited integrations, and poor survey questionnaire options. The tool itself is far too basic for most sites, especially B2B.
It's a great tool considering how inexpensive it is. If used correctly and you have a plan for tracking your websites, this tool can make a world of a difference. If you are not going to sit down and take the time to make a plan for how to use this tool, I would say it is not worth your time. Yes, you can look at items on your website that need to be changed, but without a consistent plan, other important items that need changing can be lost in the mix. Make sure you have enough time and energy to invest in this and it will be well worth it
It's not clear what features there are. The navigation icon is not labeled. It's hard to know where to start when you're first logging in as a first-time user. It's hard to know how to set up anything and there aren't many helpful tutorials in-product. I don't want to be kicked out of a help center or read the documentation.
I would rate Optimal Workshop's overall usability 9 out of 10 due to several key factors. Firstly, the platform has a user-friendly interface makes navigation straightforward, even for first-time users. The tools and features are well-organized, ensuring users can quickly find what they need without unnecessary complexity. Secondly, the platform is highly intuitive, meaning users can easily understand how to perform tasks without extensive guidance. This is supported by clear and concise instructions throughout the application, reducing the learning curve significantly.
Additionally, the learnability of Optimal Workshop is exceptional. New users can become proficient in a short amount of time, thanks to its well-thought-out design and helpful onboarding materials. Even more advanced features are presented in a way that feels approachable and manageable. Finally, the platform supports a seamless workflow, allowing users to focus on their research or tasks rather than struggling with the software. These qualities collectively make Optimal Workshop a reliable and efficient tool for many projects, justifying its high usability rating.
It's slow to post data, and slow to get a snapshot to finally be active (i.e. not pending). Not intolerable, but would be nice to see data within a couple hours. Often have to wait to the next day.
I think support is an area where Crazy Egg is lacking. I would love to have a quarterly check-in with a Crazy Egg rep to understand what kinds of changes have been made to the platform and what is on the horizon. I also think a quick consulting sessions with a rep could be extremely beneficial, as I'm sure there are ways to use the tool that we haven't even thought about yet that would be extremely insightful for our team.
We’ve never had to use much of their support services since the platform is very easy to use, we have however needed to transfer ownership between team members due to people leaving or other circumstances. Under those situations, the support offered to us has been been very quick and efficient and we never had to nudge them much to get the job done.
Hotjar is more expensive than Crazy Eggs, and we needed a tool to fit the budget for small comp. With more time, we could have tested it deeply also to have a better opinion, it seems to be great too
For the price as it is very convenient for first-time beginners, its intuitiveness both for the one who is designing the activities and for those who have to interact with them. The fact that it collects and gathers the data into insights of the overall responses collected by all users.
Its reliability (not scaleability, as the question asks for, sorry) is pretty good but through our testing we know that some clicks do not get recorded. It doesn't bother us a lot because we look at the aggregate of thousands of visits, but we do know it misses things. As for scaleability, it's about right. You really don't want zillions of clicks per snapshot - the screen just turns to 100% dots and you lose the ability to differentiate different screen areas. We find that 25,000 clicks for a page gives us a really good view.
