> Spending $100,000 and making two minor changes that triple your revenue is an absolute bargain.
The hard part is knowing what "minor" changes needs to be made.
Unless you have evidence of what the problem is, you're just stabbing the dark. $100k is probably best spent on a session capture tool that allows you to see how/when/why users are dropping off, hire a UX designer who can think up solutions for the highlighted problems, then use the capture tool to gauge effectiveness and sneak up on a solution.
I won't deny that there are great UX people out there with a natural intuition for this stuff. But there's still the problem of figuring out which ones are great.
Old school UX used to involve video taping users interacting with software.
The hard part is knowing what "minor" changes needs to be made.
Unless you have evidence of what the problem is, you're just stabbing the dark. $100k is probably best spent on a session capture tool that allows you to see how/when/why users are dropping off, hire a UX designer who can think up solutions for the highlighted problems, then use the capture tool to gauge effectiveness and sneak up on a solution.
I won't deny that there are great UX people out there with a natural intuition for this stuff. But there's still the problem of figuring out which ones are great.
Old school UX used to involve video taping users interacting with software.