What it is
A conversion review examines how people move through a defined digital journey and how reliably the organisation measures the outcome it cares about. The outcome might be a completed enquiry, registration, application or purchase, but it must be agreed before analysis starts.
Analytics can show where behaviour changes; it does not establish why on its own. A useful review combines measurement checks with interface review, user feedback or usability research where appropriate. It produces testable questions, not a promise that a particular design change will increase revenue or conversion.
What you get
- Measurement definition. The primary outcome, supporting events, journey boundary, audience and review period are recorded in plain language.
- Data-quality check. Confirm that key events fire in the intended states, duplicate events are understood and consent or tracking gaps are visible before interpreting a funnel.
- Journey evidence. Review the relevant pages, states, devices and known user feedback without treating a dashboard pattern as proof of a design cause.
- Hypothesis backlog. Each proposed change states the observed evidence, the user problem it may address, the metric to watch and the main uncertainty.
- Proportionate test plan. Recommend an A/B test, usability test, prototype check, technical fix or monitored release according to the question and available evidence.
- Decision record. Capture what changed, the observation window, limitations and whether the result supports keeping, reverting or investigating the change.
Readiness questions
- Can the team name the decision this review needs to inform?
- Is the primary outcome measured consistently enough to create a baseline?
- Are important audience, device, consent and seasonality limitations understood?
- Can the team implement a change and observe it for an appropriate period?
- Is there enough traffic for the proposed quantitative method? Required sample size depends on baseline rate, effect size, allocation and statistical design; it is not a universal visitor threshold.
When another method comes first
- Unreliable instrumentation. Repair and validate measurement before comparing variants or funnel stages.
- Unclear user need. Use user research to understand the audience and task before optimising an assumed journey.
- Specific interaction uncertainty. Use usability testing to observe representative users attempting the task.
- Known accessibility barriers. Evaluate and remediate barriers rather than testing whether exclusion improves a business metric.
- Insufficient quantitative sample. Use qualitative evidence and monitored delivery without presenting before-and-after variation as causal proof.
Engagement shape
The first phase defines the journey, validates measurement and creates a prioritised evidence register. Any experiment phase is scoped separately because duration and method depend on traffic, implementation effort, risk and the minimum effect the organisation needs to detect. Some reviews end with a usability study or technical repair rather than an A/B test.
How CRO interacts with the other services
There is no mandatory sequence. A heuristic audit can identify likely interface problems, usability testing can show how participants attempt a task, and analytics can reveal the scale and location of measured behaviour. The right combination follows the research question and the strength of evidence already available.
No uplift guarantee
A test result is conditional on its design, sample, implementation and observation period. Usability.ie does not promise a percentage uplift, extrapolate a small qualitative study into a population statistic, or describe correlation as causation. Commercial outcomes also depend on offer, pricing, demand, traffic quality and operational factors outside an interface review.
Read next
Ready to scope it?
Use the brief call to define the journey, outcome, available evidence and decision the work needs to support. A written proposal can then state the scope, method, limitations, timing and fee.