Learn hub

Creating successful products is tough. Whether you're gathering competitive intelligence before entering a market, discovering user needs for a brand new product, redesigning a website, optimizing a sign-up flow, or improving internal tools, the stakes are high.

‍

Poor user experiences cost businesses up to 35% of potential sales, while organizations that deliver superior experiences drive 5-6x more revenue. Optimal helps you turn user insights into better business decisions so you can deliver products your users love.

‍

From Discovery to Continuous Optimization

‍

Great products don’t just happen. They’re guided by real user feedback at every stage.

‍

Start with discovery.
Use live site testing to watch real users navigate competitor experiences or test early concepts in staging environments. Combine this with surveys and interview insights to understand what users actually need. Validate navigation and information architecture with card sorting and tree testing.

‍

Validate before you build.
With prototype testing, you can connect to Figma or create clickable prototypes in minutes or use live site testing to test a website or web app in a staging environment. Identify pain points early and fix them before development.

‍

Continuously optimize.
Even after launch, the best experiences evolve with their users. Ongoing testing, surveys, and interviews can reveal opportunities to refine and grow, keeping your product relevant and effective.

But nothing beats seeing users interact with your actual site. With Optimal’s newest tool - live site testing - you can see how users engage with your actual websites or web apps or even a competitor's. No guesswork, no assumptions.

‍

Introducing Live Site Testing

‍

‍

We’re excited to announce live site testing has officially joined Optimal’s platform! Here’s what makes it powerful:

‍

• Test any live site. Yes, any.
  ‍Understand exactly how users interact with your website or web app in a production or staging environment or gain valuable insights by testing a competitor’s site.
  ‍
• ‍No code. No friction.
  Unlike many other live site testing tools, with Optimal, setup takes minutes. There's no plugins or technical hurdles for you or your testers. Just paste a URL to set up your test and start testing.
  ‍
• ‍Validate at every stage.
  Catch issues before they cost you conversions. Identify blockers pre-launch on staging sites or improve existing user flows on live sites.
  ‍
• ‍Video recordings with real insights
  Watch exactly where users hesitate, struggle, or abandon their journey. Back every decision with user feedback and evidence and confidently prioritize your next decisions.‍‍
  ‍

Why This Matters

‍

With live site testing, you get real insights from real user interactions beyond quantitative data.

‍

The result?

• Better competitive insights and analysis
• Fewer surprises post-launch
• Improved usability
• Higher conversion or adoption rates
• Increased user or customer satisfaction
• Faster, data-backed decisions
  ‍

Live site testing is now available for all plans, except for our legacy Individual plan. 

‍

Already an Optimal user? Log in now to start testing your websites and web apps. 

Not yet using Optimal? Get started with a free trial to try it for yourself.

Most product teams treat UX research as something that happens to them:  a necessary evil that slows things down or a luxury they can't afford. The best product teams flip this narrative completely. Their research doesn't interrupt their roadmap; it powers it.

‍

"We need insights by Friday."

‍

"Proper research takes at least three weeks."

‍

This conversation happens in product teams everywhere, creating an eternal tension between the need for speed and the demands of rigor. But what if this debate is based on a false choice?

‍

Research that Moves at the Speed of Product

‍

Product development has accelerated dramatically. Two-week sprints are standard. Daily deployment is common. Feature flags allow instant iterations. In this environment, a four-week research study feels like asking a Formula 1 race car to wait for a horse-drawn carriage.

‍

The pressure is real. Product teams make dozens of decisions per sprint, about features, designs, priorities, and trade-offs. Waiting weeks for research on each decision simply isn't viable. So teams face an impossible choice: make decisions without insights or slow down dramatically.

‍

As a result, most teams choose speed. They make educated guesses, rely on assumptions, and hope for the best. Then they wonder why features flop and users churn.

‍

The False Dichotomy

‍

The framing of "speed vs. rigor" assumes these are opposing forces. But the best research teams have learned they're not mutually exclusive, they require different approaches for different situations.

‍

We think about research in three buckets, each serving a different strategic purpose:

‍

Discovery: You're exploring a space, building foundational knowledge, understanding thelandscape before you commit to a direction. This is where you uncover the problems worth solving and identify opportunities that weren't obvious from inside your product bubble.

‍

Fine-Tuning: You have a direction but need to nail the specifics. What exactly should this feature do? How should it work? What's the minimum viable version that still delivers value? This research turns broad opportunities into concrete solutions.

‍

Delivery: You're close to shipping and need to iron out the final details: copy, flows, edge cases. This isn't about validating whether you should build it; it's about making sure you build it right.

‍

Every week, our product, design, research and engineering leads review the roadmap together. We look at what's coming and decide which type of research goes where. The principle is simple: If something's already well-shaped, move fast. If it's risky and hard to reverse, invest in deeper research.

‍

How Fast Can Good Research Be?

‍

The answer is: surprisingly fast, when structured correctly! 

‍

For our teams, how deep we go isn't about how much time we have: it's about how much it would hurt to get it wrong. This is a strategic choice that most teams get backwards.

‍

Go deep when the stakes are high, foundational decisions that affect your entire product architecture, things that would be expensive to reverse, moments where you need multiple stakeholders aligned around a shared understanding of the problem.

‍

Move fast when you can afford to be wrong,  incremental improvements to existing flows, things you can change easily based on user feedback, places where you want to ship-learn-adjust in tight loops.

‍

Think of it as portfolio management for your research investment. Save your "big research bets" for the decisions that could set you back months, not days. Use lightweight validation for everything else.

‍

And while good research can be fast, speed isn't always the answer. There are definitely situations where deep research needs to run and it takes time. Save those moments for high stakes investments like repositioning your entire product, entering new markets, or pivoting your business model. But be cautious of research perfectionism which is a risk with deep research. Perfection is the enemy of progress. Your research team shouldn’t be asking "Is this research perfect?" but instead "Is this insight sufficient for the decision at hand?"

‍

The research goal should always be appropriate confidence, not perfect certainty.

‍

The Real Trade-Off

‍

The choice shouldn’t be  speed vs. rigor, it's between:

‍

• Research that matters (timely, actionable, sufficient confidence)

• Research that doesn't (perfect methodology, late arrival, irrelevant to decisions)

‍

The best research teams have learned to be ruthlessly pragmatic. They match research effort to decision impact. They deliver "good enough" insights quickly for small decisions and comprehensive insights thoughtfully for big ones.

‍

Speed and rigor aren't enemies. They're partners in a portfolio approach where each decision gets the right level of research investment. The teams winning aren't choosing between speed and rigor—they're choosing the appropriate blend for each situation.

‍

The traditional product development process is a linear one. Research discovers insights, passes the baton to design, who creates solutions and hands off to product management, who delivers requirements to engineering. Clean. Orderly. Completely unrealistic in today’s modern product development lifecycle.

‍

Beyond the Linear Workflow

‍

The old workflow assumed each team had distinct phases that happened in sequence. Research happens first (discover users problems), then design (create the solutions), then product (define the specifications), then engineering (build it). Unfortunately this linear approach added weeks to timelines and created information loss at every handoff.

Smart product teams are starting to approach this differently, collapsing these phases into integrated workflows:

‍

• Collaborative Discovery. Instead of researchers conducting studies alone, the product trio (PM, designer, researcher) participates together. When engineers join user interviews, they understand context that no requirement document could capture.

• Live Design Validation. Rather than waiting for research reports, designers test concepts weekly. Quick iterations based on immediate feedback replace month-long design cycles.

• Integrated Tooling. Teams use platforms where research data and insights across the product development lifecycle, from ideation to optimization, all live in the same place, eliminating information silos and making sure information is shared across teams.

‍

What Collaborative Workflows Look Like in Practice 

‍

• Discovery Happens Weekly. Instead of quarterly research projects, teams run continuous user conversations where the whole team participates.

• Design Evolves Daily. There are no waterfall designs handed off to developers, but iterative prototypes tested immediately with users.

• Products Ship Incrementally. Instead of big-bang releases after months of development, product releases small iterations validated every sprint.

• Insights Flow Constantly. Teams don’t wait for learnings at the end of projects, but access real-time feedback loops that give insights immediately.

‍

In leading organizations, these collaborative workflows are already the norm and we’re seeing this more and more across our customer base. The teams managing it the best, are focusing on make these changes intentional, rather than letting them happen chaotically.

As product development accelerates, the teams winning aren't those with the best researchers, designers, or product managers in isolation. They're organizations where these teams work together, where expertise is shared, and where the entire team owns the user experience.

‍