Skip to content

Product and research

User interviews that test a belief instead of confirming itand says so before you write it up.

A user interview goes wrong quietly. You ask the user to agree with you, they oblige, and you leave with a validated belief you walked in holding.

Apple Silicon  ·  free forever for individuals  ·  no account  ·  v0.1.9

Why this is awkward here

Research participants are told who will hear the recording. Every cloud tool in the chain is another name on that consent form and another retention policy to explain.

Where it earns its place

The calls it changes

Set what the call is supposed to achieve before it starts, and the cues are about your call rather than about calls in general.

Discovery interviews

Did you dig into the workflow behind the request, or take the feature ask at face value?

Concept tests

Did you ask what happened, or ask the user to agree with you?

Churn conversations

The workaround described in passing and never priced.

Stakeholder alignment

Scope that arrived without being named as scope.

One conversation at a time. It does not synthesise across a study or build a repository.

The part that makes it usable as evidence

Every score carriesthe sentence that earned it

A score you cannot check is an opinion. Click any dimension and it opens the reason and the exact line from the transcript that produced it.

Every score carries its evidence
Clicking a rubric score opens the reason for it and the exact line from the transcript that earned it

Free, and it takes two minutes

No account, no card, no bot in your next call. Download it and run one meeting through it.

Apple Silicon  ·  free forever for individuals  ·  no account  ·  v0.1.9