Improve your
customer focus with crowdtesting

UX Agencies (Frog, Method, etc.)

UX agencies tend to have more specialized knowledge around usability and user research. They possess expertise in designing digital solutions that align with user needs, with intuitive and engaging interfaces.

However, the scope of UX agencies’ expertise is focused on specific areas of user experience. In contrast, crowdtesting is able to deliver a more holistic testing service that incorporates multiple testing scenarios and a broader group of diverse testers.

Digital Experience Analytics Platforms (Contentsquare, Hotjar, etc.)

Digital experience analytics platforms analyze websites and provide insights into how a user interacts with a site.

However, these platforms can be limiting when considering the overall user experience. While they provide quantitative data on user interactions, they may miss the qualitative aspects that underlie real user preferences and frustrations.

In-House Testing

In-house testing is a well-established and proven method where internal teams carry out QA testing. This approach helps keep your proprietary solutions under cover until release. In-house testing is done by your employees who are often specialized in their field and have very in-depth knowledge of your solutions. But it can be very costly and time-consuming to set up a good internal testing team.

This also means dealing with those ongoing costs, including having to source your own devices and software solutions to do the testing. However, when testing in your lab, you can put more controls in place and create test cases that fit extremely specific scenarios and needs.

Beta Testing

There is one big similarity when it comes to beta testing and crowdtesting: both put products directly in the hands of real users to see how the product works in real-world conditions.

Both enable developers to see how their product is used and to discover actionable insights from a larger group than can be used in-house. There are, however, differences.

Beta testing is very localized in its scope, typically runs for two or more weeks, and places a larger focus on the customer’s experience with the product.

Test Automation

When it comes to speed and accuracy, test automation is years ahead of manual testing. It is a much relied-upon solution that is ideal for quickly dealing with repetitive test case executions and finding bugs and vulnerabilities. It can be substantially less costly than manual testing.

While they require careful planning, they can only cover so much because they’re focused on checking and re-checking code changes. Its benefit is being able to do these tasks without a break and without ‘human’ errors.

But what it does lack is that human element.

Traditional Market Research (Nielsen, GfK, Kantar, etc.)

We all know that data is vital if you want to create a product that people love. From ideation to realization, input from multiple areas can make a huge impact.

Traditional market research (TMR) firms gather data through interviews, surveys, and focus groups. But mostly to gain answers to a specific set of questions, often in large groups, and usually in a one-off situation.

Finding people, setting up locations, etc., can also incur larger costs and take a considerable amount of time. In many ways it is a rigid way of testing that cannot easily change what is tested or who is doing the research.