After talking with a bunch of user researchers, we realised that a lot of the research process is stupidly clunky. User researchers often run a survey with open ended questions, manually group responses into themes and then turn that into a normal multiple-choice survey based on what gets said most. Overall it can take a full week of work and is pretty frustrating.<p>How our tool makes this process better:<p>- By analysing user votes we surface the most important topics/opinions, not just the topic with the most submissions.<p>- You get qualitative input alongside quantitative analysis, making product prioritisation way easier.<p>- By letting users submit new opinions you can discover new insights you never considered before.<p>We're in the process of setting up a freemium subscription model. Right now it's free to create your first survey [1] and we've got a sample survey going too if you want to just play around with it from a participant perspective [2] (it asks for your email but feel free to put anything in, it doesn't verify it).<p>[1] <a href="https://app.opinionx.co/sign-up" rel="nofollow">https://app.opinionx.co/sign-up</a><p>[2] <a href="http://app.opinionx.co/5fc62b9f9891c20db5dc2d14" rel="nofollow">http://app.opinionx.co/5fc62b9f9891c20db5dc2d14</a>
This reminds me of pol.is, which is used in various places to develop rough consensus in multi-stakeholder situations.<p><a href="https://pol.is/" rel="nofollow">https://pol.is/</a>
<a href="https://github.com/pol-is/" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/pol-is/</a><p>Taiwan use it for their multi-stakeholder decision making to find points of agreement. Their application of it to the Uber vs Taxis situation was quite interesting.<p><a href="https://debconf18.debconf.org/talks/135-q-a-session-with-minister-tang/" rel="nofollow">https://debconf18.debconf.org/talks/135-q-a-session-with-min...</a>
<a href="https://blog.pol.is/pol-is-in-taiwan-da7570d372b5" rel="nofollow">https://blog.pol.is/pol-is-in-taiwan-da7570d372b5</a>
<a href="https://blog.pol.is/uber-responds-to-vtaiwans-coherent-blended-volition-3e9b75102b9b" rel="nofollow">https://blog.pol.is/uber-responds-to-vtaiwans-coherent-blend...</a>
I would love to know how my survey responses change the recipient behavior.<p>If I say that I love meeting new people, will my gym invest into expanding the lounge area instead of buying a new barbell?
i like the idea of rethinking surveys.<p>1) have you thought about voting schemas besides multiple choice? ex. rank choice, weighted preference, exclusion, multiple round voting.. there's a field of economics called "social choice theory" that you might have come across or would be a good area of research.<p>2) it would be interesting if people could predict survey outcomes, compare predictions with colleagues, and compare predictions against outcomes.<p>3) how are you thinking about anonymity?..which impacts what people are willing to reveal. we use google forms for surveys at work and you have to be logged in with your company email address. when the survey collects email addresses, it says so, but when that is turned off, it doesn't label the survey as anonymous. it would be nice if anonymity/privacy was more clear, or to have anonymity as an option to the responder.