Ready for take-off: Best practices for creating and launching remote user research studies

At Optimal Workshop, we've always prided ourselves on being pioneers in the field of UX research tools. Since our inception, we've been the go-to platform for UX researchers and designers looking to conduct card sorting, tree testing, and other critical user research activities. Our tools have helped shape the digital experiences of some of the world's leading companies.

‍

The digital landscape is ever-changing, and with it, the needs of the professionals who create and optimize digital experiences. As we've grown and evolved alongside the industry, we've recognized the need to expand our reach and refine our value proposition to better serve not just UX researchers, but all professionals involved in delivering exceptional digital experiences.

‍

That's why we're excited to announce a significant brand refresh and value pivot for Optimal Workshop. This evolution isn't just about a new coat of paint – it's a fundamental shift in how we position ourselves and the value we provide to our users and the broader digital experience community.

‍

‍

Why fix it if it ain’t broke? 💔🔨

‍

‍

Expanding Our User Base

‍

While we've built a strong reputation among UX researchers, we've recognized that there's a broader audience of professionals who benefit from our tools and expertise. Product managers, marketers, customer experience specialists, and others involved in shaping digital experiences often lack access to professional-grade user research tools or the knowledge to effectively implement them.

‍

Our brand refresh aims to make Optimal Workshop more accessible and relevant to this wider circle of professionals, without losing the deep respect we've earned from UX experts.

‍

‍

Adapting to market changes

‍

The UX research landscape has evolved significantly since we first entered the market. With the proliferation of prototyping tools and the increasing speed of digital product development, there's been a shift away from extensive upfront research. However, we firmly believe that incorporating the voice of the customer throughout the development process is more critical than ever.

‍

Our pivot allows us to emphasize the importance of integrating user research and insights at various stages of the digital experience lifecycle, not just during initial design phases.

‍

‍

Leveraging our expertise

‍

As pioneers in the field, we have accumulated a wealth of knowledge about best practices in UX research and digital experience optimization. Our brand refresh positions us not just as a tool provider, but as a trusted partner and thought leader in the industry. We're doubling down on our commitment to sharing knowledge, standardizing best practices, and elevating the work of exceptional practitioners in the field.

‍

‍

Meeting evolving business needs through effective UX

‍

The UX industry is evolving rapidly, with increasing investment and a diverse range of roles getting involved. From junior designers leveraging AI to seasoned researchers with deep expertise, the landscape is rich with talent and tools. However, the true value lies in how effectively these resources translate into business outcomes.

‍

Optimal Workshop recognizes that exceptional digital experiences are no longer just nice-to-have – they're critical for engagement, conversion, and overall business success. Our tools bridge the gap between UX insights and tangible ROI by:

‍

• Democratizing research: Enabling teams across experience levels to gather valuable user data quickly and efficiently.
• Accelerating decision-making: Providing fast, actionable insights that reduce design iterations and time-to-market.
• Enhancing team effectiveness: Facilitating collaboration and knowledge sharing between junior and senior team members.
• Driving business value: Directly linking UX improvements to key performance indicators and bottom-line results.

‍

In a landscape where basic UX practices are becoming table stakes, Optimal Workshop empowers organizations to go beyond the basics. We help teams leverage the full spectrum of UX expertise – from AI-assisted analysis to seasoned human insight – to create digital experiences that truly set businesses apart and deliver measurable returns on UX investment.

‍

‍

What's changing at Optimal Workshop 🐛🦋

‍

1. Best-in-class research & insights platform

While our core tools remain a critical part of our offering, we're broadening our focus to position Optimal Workshop as a best-in-class research & insights platform for digital experience professionals. This means developing new tools, workflows, and integrations that cater to a wider range of use cases and user types.

‍

2. Accessibility without compromise

We're committed to making our professional-grade tools more accessible to a broader audience without sacrificing the depth and rigor that our expert users expect. This means developing new onboarding experiences, creating more intuitive interfaces, and providing educational resources to help users at all levels get the most out of our platform.

‍

3. Championing best practices

As part of our evolution, we're placing a greater emphasis on identifying, sharing, and standardizing best practices in digital experience research and optimization. Through case studies, partnerships with industry leaders, and our own thought leadership content, we aim to elevate the entire field of digital experience design.

‍

4. Fostering a community of excellence

We're doubling down on our commitment to building and nurturing a community of digital experience professionals. This includes expanding our educational offerings, hosting more events and webinars, and creating opportunities for our users to connect and learn from each other. 

‍

5. Emphasizing outcomes and ROI

We're aligning our messaging and product development with the real-world impact our users are seeking. That’s why the new names for our tools emphasize what each tool helps you achieve, rather than the technical methodology behind it. This outcome-focused approach helps users quickly identify which tool is right for their specific needs.

‍

‍

How our evolution benefits you 🚀

‍

For our long-time users, rest assured that the tools and features you know and love aren't going anywhere, but their names are changing to plain English terms to be more approachable for professionals who may not have a background in UX research. In fact, our UXR platform is only going to get better as we invest in improvements and new capabilities. You'll also benefit from an expanded community of practitioners and a wealth of new resources to help you continue to grow and excel in your field.

‍

For professionals who may be new to Optimal Workshop or to formalized user research in general, our refresh means it's easier than ever to get started with professional-grade tools and methodologies. We're here to support you at every step, from your first card sort to building a comprehensive, data-driven approach to optimizing digital experiences.

‍

‍

Join us in shaping tomorrow's digital experiences 🌟

‍

This brand refresh and value pivot mark an exciting new chapter for Optimal Workshop. We're committed to continuing our tradition of excellence while expanding our reach and impact in the world of digital experiences.

‍

As we move forward, we'll be rolling out new features, resources, and initiatives that align with our refreshed brand and value proposition. We're excited to partner with our users – both new and long-standing – to push the boundaries of what's possible in creating truly exceptional digital experiences.

‍

Thank you for being part of the Optimal Workshop community. Whether you're a UX research veteran or just starting your journey in optimizing digital experiences, we're here to support you with the best tools, knowledge, and community in the industry. Together, we can shape the future of digital experiences and make the online world more intuitive, efficient, and enjoyable for everyone.

‍

Onwards and upwards,

‍

Alex Burke, CEO Optimal Workshop

‍

When it comes to designing and testing in the world of information architecture, it’s hard to beat card sorting. As a usability testing method, card sorting is easy to set up, simple to recruit for and can supply you with a range of useful insights. But there’s a long-standing debate in the world of card sorting, and that’s whether it’s better to run card sorts in person (moderated) or remotely over the internet (unmoderated).

‍

This article should give you some insight into the world of online card sorting. We've included an analysis of the benefits (and the downsides) as well as why people use this approach. Let's take a look!

‍

How an online card sort works

‍

Running a card sort remotely has quickly become a popular option just because of how time-intensive in-person card sorting is. Instead of needing to bring your participants in for dedicated card sorting sessions, you can simply set up your card sort using an online tool (like our very own OptimalSort) and then wait for the results to roll in.

‍

So what’s involved in a typical online card sort? At a very high level, here’s what’s required. We’re going to assume you’re already set up with an online card sorting tool at this point.

‍

1. Define the cards: Depending on what you’re testing, add the items (cards) to your study. If you were testing the navigation menu of a hotel website, your cards might be things like “Home”, “Book a room”, “Our facilities” and “Contact us”.
2. Work out whether to run a closed or open sort: Determine whether you’ll set the groups for participants to sort cards into (closed) or leave it up to them (open). You may also opt for a mix, where you create some categories but leave the option open for participants to create their own.
3. Recruit your participants: Whether using a participant recruitment service or by recruiting through your own channels, send out invites to your online card sort.
4. Wait for the data: Once you’ve sent out your invites, all that’s left to do is wait for the data to come in and then analyze the results.

‍

That’s online card sorting in a nutshell – not entirely different from running a card sort in person. If you’re interested in learning about how to interpret your card sorting results, we’ve put together this article on open and hybrid card sorts and this one on closed card sorts.

‍

Why is online card sorting so popular?

‍

Online card sorting has a few distinct advantages over in-person card sorting that help to make it a popular option among information architects and user researchers. There are downsides too (as there are with any remote usability testing option), but we’ll get to those in a moment.

‍

Where remote (unmoderated) card sorting excels:

‍

• Time savings: Online card sorting is essentially ‘set and forget’, meaning you can set up the study, send out invites to your participants and then sit back and wait for the results to come in. In-person card sorting requires you to moderate each session and collate the data at the end.
• Easier for participants: It’s not often that researchers are on the other side of the table, but it’s important to consider the participant’s viewpoint. It’s much easier for someone to spend 15 minutes completing your online card sort in their own time instead of trekking across town to your office for an exercise that could take well over an hour.
• Cheaper: In a similar vein, online card sorting is much cheaper than in-person testing. While it’s true that you may still need to recruit participants, you won’t need to reimburse people for travel expenses.
• Analytics: Last but certainly not least, online card sorting tools (like OptimalSort) can take much of the analytical burden off you by transforming your data into actionable insights. Other tools will differ, but OptimalSort can generate a similarity matrix, dendrograms and a participant-centric analysis using your study data.

‍

Where in-person (moderated) card sorting excels:

‍

• Qualitative insights: For all intents and purposes, online card sorting is the most effective way to run a card sort. It’s cheaper, faster and easier for you. But, there’s one area where in-person card sorting excels, and that’s qualitative feedback. When you’re sitting directly across the table from your participant you’re far more likely to learn about the why as well as the what. You can ask participants directly why they grouped certain cards together.

‍

Online card sorting: Participant numbers

‍

So that’s online card sorting in a nutshell, as well as some of the reasons why you should actually use this method. But what about participant numbers? Well, there’s no one right answer, but the general rule is that you need more people than you’d typically bring in for a usability test.

‍

This all comes down to the fact that card sorting is what’s known as a generative method, whereas usability testing is an evaluation method. Here’s a little breakdown of what we mean by these terms:

‍

Generative method: There’s no design, and you need to get a sense of how people think about the problem you’re trying to solve. For example, how people would arrange the items that need to go into your website’s navigation. As Nielsen Norman Group explains: “There is great variability in different people's mental models and in the vocabulary they use to describe the same concepts. We must collect data from a fair number of users before we can achieve a stable picture of the users' preferred structure and determine how to accommodate differences among users”.

‍

Evaluation method: There’s already a design, and you basically need to work out whether it’s a good fit for your users. Any major problems are likely to crop up even after testing 5 or so users. For example, you have a wireframe of your website and need to identify any major usability issues.

‍

Basically, because you’ll typically be using card sorting to generate a new design or structure from nothing, you need to sample a larger number of people. If you were testing an existing website structure, you could get by with a smaller group.

‍

Where to from here?

‍

Following on from our discussion of generative versus evaluation methods, you’ve really got a choice of 2 paths from here if you’re in the midst of a project. For those developing new structures, the best course of action is likely to be a card sort. However, if you’ve got an existing structure that you need to test in order to usability problems and possible areas of improvement, you’re likely best to run a tree test. We’ve got some useful information on getting started with a tree test right here on the blog.

"Dear Optimal Worshop

I have two huge content structures I would like to A/B test. Do you think Treejack would be appropriate?"

— Mike

‍

Hi Mike (and excellent question)!

‍

Firstly, yes, Treejack is great for testing more than one content structure. It’s easy to run two separate Treejack studies — even more than two. It’ll help you decide which structure you and your team should run with, and it won’t take you long to set them up.

‍

When you’re creating the two tree tests with your two different content structures, include the same tasks in both tests. Using the same tasks will give an accurate measure of which structure performs best. I’ve done it before and I found that the visual presentation of the results — especially the detailed path analysis pietrees — made it really easy to compare Test A with Test B.

‍

Plus (and this is a big plus), if you need to convince stakeholders or teammates of which structure is the most effective, you can’t go past quantitative data, especially when its presented clearly — it’s hard to argue with hard evidence!

‍

Here’s two example of the kinds of results visualizations you could compare in your A/B test: the pietree, which shows correct and incorrect paths, and where people ended up:

‍

‍

‍

And the overall Task result, which breaks down success and directness scores, and has plenty of information worth comparing between two tests:

‍

‍

Keep in mind that running an A/B tree test will affect how you recruit participants — it may not be the best idea to have the same participants complete both tests in one go. But it’s an easy fix — you could either recruit two different groups from the same demographic, or test one group and have a gap (of at least a day) between the two tests.

‍

I’ve one more quick question: why are your two content structures ‘huge’?

‍

I understand that sometimes these things are unavoidable — you potentially work for a government organization, or a university, and you have to include all of the things. But if not, and if you haven’t already, you could run an open card sort to come up with another structure to test (think of it as an A/B/C test!), and to confirm that the categories you’re proposing work for people.

‍

You could even run a closed card sort to establish which content is more important to people than others (your categories could go from ‘Very important’ to ‘Unimportant’, or ‘Use everyday’ to ‘Never use’, for example). You might be able to make your content structure a bit smaller, and still keep its usefulness. Just a thought... and of course, you could try to get this information from your analytics (if available) but just be cautious of this because of course analytics can only tell you what people did and not what they wanted to do.

‍

All the best Mike!