To say that my wife and I share the same interest in the software business would be a bit of a stretch. It would also be a bit of a stretch to believe that I'm alone in this camp. While the curiosity and passion to achieve the optimal balance between utility, value, and user satisfaction is not shared between Jaimee and me, I must admit that she and a few of the other Smartsheet spouses have been invaluable in recent weeks. They have something that we at the business can't emulate - a less biased perspective. Our extended Smartsheet team (the spouses) have proven to be an asset as we gauge reaction to 'Haymaker' designs (codename for our major release slated for Q2 '08)

Similar to parents who are convinced (and not afraid to share) that their child is the most capable and engaging member of their elementary class, it's just as easy for a software developer to slip into a comfortable zone of self-confirmation. To offset some of the risks of inwardly focused design, Smartsheet and other companies engage external participants in feedback sessions and usability studies. In recent months, we have interacted with people in three groups: 1) familiar faces - our existing customers 2) new faces - folks who have never heard of us and 3) passer-bys - those who looked at the service once and never returned.

Among many pieces of feedback, we observe people's reactions to the words we choose for labels, the workflows we aim to be highly valuable yet utterly straightforward, and the cohesiveness of the overall solution. Measuring someone's ability to find a feature and execute a process is one thing - knowing how a person feels about their experience is a bit more subtle and challenging. Measuring confidence, frustration, satisfaction, boredom, or enthusiasm are vital to hitting the design and workflow mark. This kind of feedback is referred to internally as 'gold'.

If finding the 'gold' were easy, there might be a lot more software in the market that is as valuable as it is enjoyable to use. From our experiences, capturing golden feedback isn't as much a function of not being able to observe people in a controlled setting. The difficultly is in ensuring that the 'controlled setting' is as un-biased as possible. Biases (or preferences) permeate how test plans are written, how usability workflows are crafted, and the inflection in our voices as we convey instructions and solicit feedback. I've found that even best intentioned collectors of feedback have a difficult time shielding the participant from their preferences.

This is where the spouses come in. They know us well. They know how we position things. They have an exceptional sense for cutting through the bullshit that sometimes makes sense to us. They know what we do, but they are not close enough to get wrapped up in any one thing. Their ability to call it like it is and not worry about how their feedback lands is powerful.

Special thanks to Andrea (the wife of one of our Sr. Developers) who, after spending an hour reviewing Haymaker, showed great interest in the new design. 'Now this feels inviting! I'd use this!'. That simple yet enthusiastic remark was a great shot in the arm for the entire team. She has a critical eye, knows us very well, and does not gratuitously hand out accolades. Andrea - thanks for serving as the founding member of the fourth feedback group: the spouses who put up with our work schedules and provide a valuable, differentiated perspective.

-Mark