Optimal vs Dovetail: Why Smart Product Teams Choose Unified Research Workflows

‍

Product teams face an important decision when selecting the right user research platform: do they prioritize speed and simplicity, or invest in a more comprehensive platform that offers real research depth and insights? This choice becomes even more critical as user research scales and those insights directly influence major product decisions.

‍

Maze has gained popularity in recent years among design and product teams for its focus on rapid prototype testing and design workflow integration. However, as teams scale their research programs and require more sophisticated insights, many discover that Maze's limitations outweigh its simplicity. Platform stability issues, restricted tools and functionality, and a lack of enterprise features creates friction that end up compromising insight speed, quality and overall business impact.

‍

Why Choose Optimal instead of Maze?

‍

‍Platform Depth

‍

Test Design Limitations

‍

• Maze has Rigid Question Types: Maze's focus on speed comes with design inflexibility, including rigid question structures and limited customization options that reduce overall test effectiveness.
• Optimal Offers Comprehensive Test Flexibility: Optimal has a Figma integration, image import capabilities, and fully customizable test flows designed for agile product teams.

‍

Prototype Testing Capabilities

‍

• Maze has Limited Prototype Support: Users report difficulties with Maze's prototype testing capabilities, particularly with complex interactions and advanced design systems that modern products require.
• Optimal has Advanced Prototype Testing: Optimal supports sophisticated prototype testing with full Figma integration, comprehensive interaction capture, and flexible testing methods that accommodate modern product design and development workflows.

‍

Analysis and Reporting Quality

‍

• Maze Only Offers Surface-Level Reporting: Maze provides basic metrics and surface-level analysis without the depth required for strategic decision-making or comprehensive user insight.
• Optimal has Rich, Actionable Insights: Optimal delivers AI-powered analysis with layered insights, export-ready reports, and sophisticated visualizations that transform data into actionable business intelligence.

‍

Enterprise Features

‍

• Maze has a Reactive Support Model: Maze provides responsive support primarily for critical issues but lacks the proactive, dedicated support enterprise product teams require.
• Optimal Provides Dedicated Enterprise Support: Optimal offers fast, personalized support with dedicated account teams and comprehensive training resources built by user experience experts that ensure your team is set up for success.

‍

Enterprise Readiness

‍

• Maze is Buit for Individuals: Maze was built primarily for individual designers and small teams, lacking the enterprise features, compliance capabilities, and scalability that large organizations need.
• Optimal is an Enterprise-Built Platform: Optimal was designed for enterprise use with comprehensive security protocols, compliance certifications, and scalability features that support large research programs across multiple teams and business units. Optimal is currently trusted by some of the world’s biggest brands including Netflix, Lego and Nike. 

‍

Enterprises Need Reliable, Scalable User Insights

‍

While Maze's focus on speed appeals to design teams seeking rapid iteration, enterprise product teams need the stability and reliability that only mature platforms provide. Optimal delivers both speed and dependability, enabling teams to iterate quickly without compromising research quality or business impact.Platform reliability isn't just about uptime, it's about helping product teams make high quality strategic decisions and to build organizational confidence in user insights. Mature product, design and UX teams need to choose platforms that enhance rather than undermine their research credibility.

‍

Don't let platform limitations compromise your research potential.

‍

Ready to see how leading brands including Lego, Netflix and Nike achieve better research outcomes? Experience how Optimal's platform delivers user insights that adapt to your team's growing needs.

‍

‍

Many smaller product teams find newer research tools like Ballpark attractive due to their promises of being able to provide simple and quick user feedback tools. However, larger teams conducting UX research that drives product strategy need platforms capable of delivering actionable insights rather than just surface-level metrics. While Ballpark provides basic testing functionality that works for simple validation, Optimal offers the research depth, comprehensive analysis capabilities, and strategic intelligence that teams require when making critical product decisions.

‍

Why Choose Optimal over Ballpark?

‍

Surface-Level Feedback vs. Strategic Research Intelligence

‍

• Ballpark's Shallow Analysis: Ballpark focuses on collecting quick feedback through basic surveys and simple preference tests, but lacks the analytical depth needed to understand why users behave as they do or what actions to take based on findings.
• Optimal's Strategic Insights: Optimal transforms user feedback into strategic intelligence through advanced analytics, behavioral analysis, and AI-powered insights that reveal not just what happened, but why it happened and what to do about it.
• Limited Research Methodology: Ballpark's toolset centers on simple feedback collection without comprehensive research methods like advanced card sorting, tree testing, or sophisticated user journey analysis.
• Complete Research Arsenal: Optimal provides the full spectrum of research methodologies needed to understand complex user behaviors, validate design decisions, and guide strategic product development.

‍

Quick Metrics vs. Actionable Intelligence

‍

• Basic Data Collection: Ballpark provides simple metrics and basic reporting that tell you what happened but leave teams to figure out the 'why' and 'what next' on their own.
• Intelligent Analysis: Optimal's AI-powered analysis doesn't just collect data—it identifies patterns, predicts user behavior, and provides specific recommendations that guide product decisions.
• Limited Participant Insights: Ballpark's 3 million participant panel provides basic demographic targeting but lacks the sophisticated segmentation and behavioral profiling needed for nuanced research.
• Deep User Understanding: Optimal's 100+ million verified participants across 150+ countries enable precise targeting and comprehensive user profiling that reveals deep behavioral insights and cultural nuances.

‍

Startup Risk vs. Enterprise Reliability

‍

• Unproven Stability: As a recently founded startup with limited funding transparency, Ballpark presents platform stability risks and uncertain long-term viability for enterprise research investments.
• Proven Enterprise Reliability: Optimal has successfully launched over 100,000 studies with 99.9% uptime guarantee, providing the reliability and stability enterprise organizations require.
• Limited Support Infrastructure: Ballpark's small team and basic support options cannot match the dedicated account management and enterprise support that strategic research programs demand.
• Enterprise Support Excellence: Optimal provides dedicated account managers, 24/7 enterprise support, and comprehensive onboarding that ensures research program success.

‍

When to Choose Optimal

‍

Optimal is the best choice for teams looking for: 

‍

• Actionable Intelligence: When teams need insights that directly inform product strategy and design decisions
• Behavioral Understanding: Projects requiring deep analysis of why users behave as they do
• Complex Research Questions: Studies that demand sophisticated methodologies and advanced analytics
• Strategic Product Decisions: When research insights drive major feature development and business direction
• Comprehensive User Insights: Teams needing complete user understanding beyond basic preference testing
• Competitive Advantage: Organizations using research intelligence to outperform competitors

‍

Ready to move beyond basic feedback to strategic research intelligence? Experience how Optimal's analytical depth and comprehensive insights drive product decisions that create competitive advantage.

‍

Summary: The equipment and tools you use to run your user testing sessions can make your life a lot easier. Here’s a quick guide.

‍

It’s that time again. You’ve done the initial scoping, development and internal testing, and now you need to take the prototype of your new design and get some qualitative data on how it works and what needs to be improved before release. It’s time for the user testing to begin.

‍

But the prospect of user testing raises an important question, and it’s one that many new user researchers often deliberate over: What gear or equipment should I take with me? Well, never fear. We’re going to break down everything you need to consider in terms of equipment, from video recording through to qualitative note-taking.

‍

Recording: Audio, screens and video

‍

The ability to easily record usability tests and user interviews means that even if you miss something important during a session, you can go back later and see what you’ve missed. There are 3 types of recording to keep in mind when it comes to user research: audio, video and screen recording. Below, we’ve put together a list of how you can capture each. You shouldn’t have to buy any expensive gear – free alternatives and software you can run on your phone and laptop should suffice.

‍

• Audio – Forget dedicated sound recorders; recording apps for smartphones (iOS and Android) allow you to record user interviews and usability tests with ease and upload the recordings to Google Drive or your computer. Good options include Sony’s recording app for Android and the built-in Apple recording app on iOS.
• Transcription – Once you’ve created a recording, you’ll no doubt want a text copy to work with. For this, you’ll need transcription software to take the audio and turn it into text. There are companies that will make transcriptions for you, but software like Transcribe means you can carry out the process yourself.
• Screen recording – Very useful during remote usability tests, screen recording software can show you exactly how participants react to the tasks you set out for them, even if you’re not in the room. OBS Studio is a good option for both Mac and Windows users. You can also use Quicktime (free) if you’re running the test in person.
• Video – Recording your participants as they make their way through the various tasks in a usability test can provide useful reference material at the end of your testing sessions. You can refer back to specific points in a video to capture any detail you may have missed, and you can share video with stakeholders to demonstrate a point. If you don’t have access to a dedicated camera, consider mounting your smartphone on a tripod and recording that way.

‍

Taking (and making use of) notes

‍

Notetaking and qualitative user testing go hand in hand. For most user researchers, notetaking during a research session means busting out the Post-it notes and Sharpie pens, rushing to take down every observation and insight and then having to arduously transcribe these notes after the session – or spend hours in workshops trying to identify themes and patterns. This approach still has merit, as it’s often one of the best ways to get people who aren’t too familiar with user research involved in the process. With physical notes, you can gather people around a whiteboard and discuss what you’re looking at. What’s more, you can get them to engage with the material directly.

‍

But there are digital alternatives. Qualitative notetaking software (like our very own Reframer) means you can bring a laptop into a user interview and take down observations directly in a secure environment. Even better, you can ask someone else to sit in as your notetaker, freeing you up to focus on running the session. Then, once you’ve run your tests, you can use the software for theme and pattern analysis, instead of having to schedule yet another full day workshop.

‍

Scheduling your user tests

‍

Ah, participant scheduling. Perhaps one of the most time-consuming parts of the user testing process. Thankfully, software can drastically reduce the logistical burden.

Here are some useful pieces of software:

‍

Dedicated scheduling tool Calendly is one of the most popular options for participant scheduling in the UX community. It’s really hands-off, in that you basically let the tool know when you’re available, share the Calendly link with your prospective participants, and then they select a time (from your available slots) that works for them. There are also a host of other useful features that make it a popular option for researchers, like integrations and smart timezones.

‍

If you’re already using the Optimal Workshop platform, you can use our  survey tool Questions as a fairly robust scheduling tool. Simply set up a study and add in prospective time slots. You can then use the multi-choice field option to have people select when they’re available to attend. You can also capture other data and avoid the usual email back and forth.

‍

Storing your findings
‍

One of the biggest challenges for user researchers is effectively storing and cataloging all of the research data that they start to build up. Whether it’s video recordings of usability tests, audio recordings or even transcripts of user interviews, you need to ensure that your data is A) easily accessible after the fact, and B) stored securely to ensure you’re protecting your participants.

‍

Here are some things to ask yourself when you store any piece of customer or user data:

‍

• Who will have access to this data?
• How long do I plan to keep this data?
• Will this data be anonymized?
• If I’m keeping physical data on hand, where will it be stored?

‍

Don’t make the mistake of thinking user data is ‘secure enough’, whether that’s on a company server that anyone can access, or even in an unlocked filing cabinet beneath your desk. Data privacy and security should always be at the top of your list of considerations. We won’t dive into best practices for participant data protection in this article, but instead, just mention that you need to be vigilant. Wherever you end up storing information, make sure you understand who has access.

‍

Wrap up

‍

Hopefully, this guide has given you an overview of some of the tools and software you can use before you start your next user test. We’ve also got a number of other interesting articles that you can read right here on our blog.