Usability testing (user testing)

Usability testing is a project: we frame tasks for your scenarios, recruit participants from a relevant audience, run moderated or unmoderated sessions (on the site or a prototype), note where people stumble, misunderstand, abandon, and gather a prioritized list of problems with solution hypotheses. Honestly about the nature of the method, this is key: it is QUALITATIVE research on a small sample — in practice 5–8 participants reveal most typical usability problems, but this is NOT statistics and NOT a representative estimate of 'how much conversion will grow'; we find WHAT hinders and frame hypotheses, while the size of the effect is checked quantitatively (A/B). Honestly about recruiting: conclusions depend on who was tested — irrelevant participants give irrelevant problems; we try to pick a close audience, but perfect representativeness on a small sample does not exist. Honestly about the essence: this is finding problems and hypotheses, NOT fixing them and NOT growth — fixing the interface and validating hypotheses is separate work; the testing itself does not raise conversion. Honestly about task design: poorly framed tasks distort the result — so methodology matters. The platform for unmoderated tests/recruiting (if paid) is separate. An important boundary: this is usability testing, not quantitative analytics (funnels/numbers — separate), not A/B (effect validation — separate) and not redesign. If you specifically need to measure the effect on conversion, you need A/B, not a usability test — we say so honestly. Picture this: instead of 'it seems clear to us' you see how real people cannot find a button or do not understand a step. The base price starts from 25,000 ₽ per project; it depends on the number of participants and format.

• The team finds it 'all clear', but users get confused and leave.
• You do not know exactly where people stumble in the interface.
• You find usability problems after the fact, via lost customers.
• You make UX decisions without observing real people.

• Framing tasks for your scenarios
• Recruiting participants from a relevant audience
• Moderated or unmoderated sessions (site/prototype)
• Observing and recording problems, misunderstandings, drop-offs
• A prioritized list of problems with hypotheses
• Flagging limitations (sample, representativeness)
• A report (with recording clips for moderated)
• Reviewing results with you

• You see where real people stumble and why they get confused
• A prioritized list of interface problems
• Hypotheses for fixes and tests (fix/growth — separately)
• UX decisions based on observation, not guesses

• We clarify scenarios, audience, format; prepare tasks and recruiting
• We run sessions, record problems and behavior
• We compile a prioritized report with hypotheses, review with you

• Will usability testing raise conversion?

  No by itself. It finds interface problems and gives hypotheses, but fixing UX and validating the effect (A/B) is separate work. The testing itself does not raise conversion; it helps you not lose customers on obvious problems.

• 5–8 people — isn't that too few?

  For finding typical usability problems a small sample is usually enough (practice shows a few participants reveal most problems). But it is a qualitative signal, not statistics or a measure of 'how much conversion will grow' — that is checked with A/B.

• How is it different from funnel analysis?

  Funnel analysis (quantitative) shows WHERE you lose people in the numbers; a usability test shows WHY — by observing real people. They are often used together: the funnel points to the problem spot, the test explains the cause.