I think it might be beneficial for you to reconsider what is the biggest value of this service - quality or price?
The first part of your post starts with a list of problems with consultants: costly, unreliable, require "setup".
Your service seems to address the last 2 pain points. Great. You promise the customer higher quality and time-savings, which is really important.
And than suddenly you mention that "our experts are working on many projects at once" what in case of many customers will trigger the "low quality" alarm. And to make it worse, you use it as an explanation for the low price.
If you can offer a high quality and reliable service, why do you want to charge less than alternative solutions?
Hey, great questions, and thanks for the feedback. I agree with you re the 'many projects at once' sentiment. Let me see if I can clarify:
We can charge less because because we have standardised the process with software.
When a user leaves feedback on your website with TalkToUsers, the feedback comprises a screenshot, the textual content of the feedback, and the browser/user information.
We run some analysis on your feedback over a period, let's say a month: where people clicked, certain analytics, sentiment. This includes lots of derived quantitative information (i.e. 10 other people clicked on this div and left feedback). This bunch of data is sent to the UX team when your report is due.
The deliverable to the UX team is standardised, which means they can more quickly consume it. They read the derived data, and go through the screenshots. They use their experience to make qualitative judgment: 'Hey, these users aren't happy because of x, y, z. This came up in the analytics, and now someone is complaining about it'. After digesting this, they make an argument for what should come next. They enter their thoughts into the dashboard, and a report is created with the data, and they move onto the next one.
So, it takes them a lot shorter period of time to digest the data than alternative solutions, because the process has been streamlined: they are a part of what is essentially still a system driven by software, not people. Their input is vital and could not be done by a machine, but the 'operations' side of things has been automated.
For the reliability, it means that if one of our clients reaches out to us, someone in the UX team will be there and can offer some on-demand insights. It's a bit like having lots of smaller Heroku instances, vs. one big AWS one.
Does this answer your question? This is a pretty new service, so I'd love to get any more thoughts.
3 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 20.0 ms ] threadThe first part of your post starts with a list of problems with consultants: costly, unreliable, require "setup".
Your service seems to address the last 2 pain points. Great. You promise the customer higher quality and time-savings, which is really important.
And than suddenly you mention that "our experts are working on many projects at once" what in case of many customers will trigger the "low quality" alarm. And to make it worse, you use it as an explanation for the low price.
If you can offer a high quality and reliable service, why do you want to charge less than alternative solutions?
We can charge less because because we have standardised the process with software.
When a user leaves feedback on your website with TalkToUsers, the feedback comprises a screenshot, the textual content of the feedback, and the browser/user information.
We run some analysis on your feedback over a period, let's say a month: where people clicked, certain analytics, sentiment. This includes lots of derived quantitative information (i.e. 10 other people clicked on this div and left feedback). This bunch of data is sent to the UX team when your report is due.
The deliverable to the UX team is standardised, which means they can more quickly consume it. They read the derived data, and go through the screenshots. They use their experience to make qualitative judgment: 'Hey, these users aren't happy because of x, y, z. This came up in the analytics, and now someone is complaining about it'. After digesting this, they make an argument for what should come next. They enter their thoughts into the dashboard, and a report is created with the data, and they move onto the next one.
So, it takes them a lot shorter period of time to digest the data than alternative solutions, because the process has been streamlined: they are a part of what is essentially still a system driven by software, not people. Their input is vital and could not be done by a machine, but the 'operations' side of things has been automated.
For the reliability, it means that if one of our clients reaches out to us, someone in the UX team will be there and can offer some on-demand insights. It's a bit like having lots of smaller Heroku instances, vs. one big AWS one.
Does this answer your question? This is a pretty new service, so I'd love to get any more thoughts.
Thanks again.