When I went to your domain and read the main page, I didn't understand what it did.
The big call to action 'learn more' button took me to a series of points that didn't really clue me into what it was about. I thought I got it, but I wasn't sure - certainly not sure enough by the time I got dumped off at the signup page.
Both the 'about' and the 'features' page told me more, but I had to click around to get to those, and I went to them only after I went through the 'learn more' flow.
Now that I think I get it, it sounds pretty cool - asynchronous text-based meetings. But I had to click around a fair bit more than most people will to understand it.
Wanted to emphasize this point - I did the exact same thing. I read through the "Learn More" bullets and thought "hmm, this sounds interesting and useful...but I still really have no idea what it does".
It wasn't until I read the About and Features that I actually understood the product.
The benefits listed in the "Learn More" are really good...you just need to add a little more concrete information about the product itself.
Anyhow, looks interesting and I'm going to recommend it to my company. We work in three different locations (and two timezones), so it could be useful for us.
I loved the "people hate"..."stairway solves" structure. Great way of putting across the problem and the solution clearly and succinctly. Just my two cents.
We're testing different variations of the pitch. We find it really hard to pitch features and functionality to business/management people, so we have a few variations running that are pitching only benefits or pains, but no exact functionality. For the features tour we decided one must sign-up and try. And only then we take them trough features tour.
Don't pitch, show it. Pitches are for products that don't exist or work properly yet. Yo u have a cool product explanation with screenshots on the Features page, just add in another callout to emphasizie the due date field (in fact, I'd promote that field so it becomes clear that the deadline is of equal importance to the decision).
I HATE a pitch without screenshots. It's a waste of my time and makes me instantly skeptical of the product.
2) You definitely need some screenshots or a video. After browsing the entire site for a few minutes I only have a vague guess of what this application might do.
haha, the whole time I was clicking around, a non-zero part of my brain was sitting there thinking, "ok, but where the hell did that daddy thing come from?"
Thx. That's true. Will do. Do you think that this is important for the minimum viable product? We're just trying to get it out ASAP and we've been pretty sloppy with the text this time. Sorry for that.
Yes, I think it adds (or detracts, in the case of poor copy) from the credibility of the product as a whole. I actually have a use for the product right now, and I must admit the copy errors when I went through the site made me wonder what other errors would come up.
It's a good idea - don't let crappy copy lose you signups.
I guess they figured their utility increases as the meeting grows. It's not like you can segregate people into two meetings and get out of that, either.
Increasing the marginal cost discourages adding users. You punish people for having a lot of users, which creates a pain point, which creates an exploitable opportunity for your competition.
Better to charge a flat rate per user, or follow the 37 Signals example and not charge per user at all.
I will never use this. You know why? Because my work at big big enterprise would be too transparent and everybody would know that I don't add value to meetings. On live meeting I just talk myself out of everything and that's it. We don't want decisions to be made on meetings.
From my standpoint as an introvert, I see meetings done this was like a godsend.
I can’t express my thoughts clearly when there are other louder individuals at an in-person meeting. This way, I can sit down, relax, gather my thoughts and provide a whole lot more valuable input. This way everybody wins - me and my company.
Of course I’d have to say this doesn’t work in all circumstances, like free-for-all brainstorming sessions, but still.
Just a quick couple of thoughts about your UX and landing page:
* There's not enough information on your homepage for me to figure out what you do
* The information I need is between one and three clicks away ("learn more", and then "more" until I've read enough to get it), clicking "more" just gets in the way
* I don't really get the "you will", "we will" dichotomy. Frankly, I don't care what "I will" do, all I want to know is how this product is going to make my life easier.
* Stop using buzzwords ("message-based collaboration", "asynchronously"), and just tell me what you do in plain English
* Some of the English phrases come out awkwardly ("We will guide you to prepare quality agenda before calling the meeting.")
Having said all that, it's a neat idea, and I hope it catches on. We all need fewer meetings.
Very impressive and refreshing. For our team, this would replace google hangouts and non-technical people needing to wade through technical discussions on irc... And more than anything, would replace a lot of unnecessary emails.
I spent about 30 seconds clicking around, I have no idea what your app is.
I think a video, or an example of someone using it would be nice. The philosophy alone is not enough for me to understand the app, or even make me want to use it.
Meetings may be more efficient when strict policies are enforced, but I think some forgiveness could be provided by allowing the user to edit/sort Agenda items after the meeting has been created.
The common use case right now is time-shifted decision making, but this would kick ass if it were real-time.
Good job with the design. Nice legible type, unambiguous form layout. I think the landing page could bring forward some content from the Learn More and Features subpages.
Done. There are. But which ones do resonate with people, that's the big question. This one did mighty good actually, quantitatively speaking. But qualitatively looking at this option I agree with you, the term is pretty edgy.
I hope so, because I was wondering if it was some strange business-speak term that had to do with meetings somehow. "I have to 'daddy' another meeting at 2pm".
The learn more page needs to be a single page in the browser history. After I clicked through 125 of them, I wanted to get back to the home page with my back button but couldn't.
I would have liked to see 4-5 of those "people hates" and then a demo of the product in action.
This is very cool. There's so much that could be done to better organize and run meetings. It's great to see someone taking a stab at it.
I wished there was more of a demo before signup. Even just some screenshots would have helped.
You are correct. You can only decide a meeting when it's due. This is because all the participants are counting on the meeting to be available until that date.
We're currently waiting for the approval in the app store for iPhone. Haven't made anything for Android yet, waiting for a few pokes on the demand side :) like this one.
Like everyone else, I couldn't find what it did, but the tour https://secure.stairwayapp.com/tour albeit brief, it fully explanatory. I think the concept is great and that this has the potential to be actually very useful.
From a product point of view, I think it should integrate with a corporate LDAP otherwise you have the catch-22 problem of any social network like system.
I really like the idea of decision based (rather than talk based) meeting goals. Rather than "let's have a meeting to talk about it" it becomes "let's have a meeting to decide X", then it becomes possible to draw time-lines of the decision making process and those involved, which hopefully leads to accountability and improved engagement.
My only criticism is that companies would want to host this. The security concerns and longevity of the data would be beyond any IT depts stress threshold. I could imagine the privacy policy causing my companies IT dept to start having panic attacks. Then again, everything's going cloud, so maybe other IT departments will be fine with it.
We're thinking to make it closer to smaller teams and individuals in the enterprise and then they'd take it bottom-up from there. Thanks for the awesome feedback.
The big call to action 'learn more' button took me to a series of points that didn't really clue me into what it was about. I thought I got it, but I wasn't sure - certainly not sure enough by the time I got dumped off at the signup page.
Both the 'about' and the 'features' page told me more, but I had to click around to get to those, and I went to them only after I went through the 'learn more' flow.
Now that I think I get it, it sounds pretty cool - asynchronous text-based meetings. But I had to click around a fair bit more than most people will to understand it.