Digital design methodologies emphasize the need for risk reduction through rigorous research, pairing qualitative insights with quantitative data to improve product development. This comprehensive approach aims to validate assumptions and enhance decision-making. However, many experiments reveal that improved user experiences do not necessarily translate into higher conversion rates. The article highlights the reality that despite robust research, nearly half of tested concepts may lack statistical significance, suggesting that success may rely more on the sheer volume of experiments run than the depth of any single study.
If you pick up any 'iconic' digital-design literature or a popular methodology like Design thinking or the Double diamond, their main promise is that in order to create in-demand products, you need to reduce risks through research.
If you have an existing product, more advanced designers will also notice that it's important to combine qualitative research with quantitative data.
In my experience, this happens in more than half of the experiments. I'm not talking about CSAT or NPS, God forbid, but about how people 'vote' with their own money.
A product team turned to consultants from BCG, McKinsey, PwC, Accenture (pick your favourite), and for a sum with many zeros, they pr...
Collection
[
|
...
]