Write a usability test plan

Usability studies usually fail in the plan, not the sessions. Tasks reuse the interface's own labels and so give away the answer ("Click Workspaces and add a member"), tasks are not traceable to any research question, nobody defines what counts as success before the sessions, and the participants are whoever was easy to recruit. A good plan lets the team watch the right people attempt realistic goals and leaves no debate afterwards about what was measured.

Write a moderated usability test plan.

1. Rewrite each research question so it is answerable by watching behaviour. Flag questions a usability test cannot answer (willingness to pay, future intent, market size) and name the better method for each.
2. Write 4 to 7 tasks, ordered as a user would naturally meet them. Each task:

• is a realistic scenario with a goal and a reason ("You just hired Ana and want her to see the Q3 board"), never a list of UI steps;
• avoids the exact words on the interface's buttons and menus;
• maps to at least one research question, and every question maps to at least one task;
• has a defined end state, a success rule (success / partial / fail, with what counts as partial) and a time limit after which the moderator moves on.

1. Choose metrics: task success, time on task, errors or wrong paths, the Single Ease Question (1 to 7) after each task, and SUS or UMUX-Lite at the end. Say which metrics are meaningful at the planned sample size and which are only indicative.
2. Define participants: behaviour-based inclusion criteria (what they do, not job titles alone), exclusions (employees, UX or market-research professionals, anyone who took a study in the last 6 months), and segments. Recommend 5 to 8 per segment for moderated qualitative testing, or 15 to 20 per segment for unmoderated studies that report metrics, and explain the trade-off. Write a short screener with disqualifying answers marked.
3. Write the script for the method:

• moderated: welcome and consent to record, "we are testing the product, not you", think-aloud explanation with a practice task, 2 to 3 warm-up questions, the tasks, neutral probes ("What are you looking for?", "What did you expect to happen?"), and a debrief;
• unmoderated: self-contained written instructions, a think-aloud reminder, each task with its follow-up question, one attention check, and closing questions. Every task must be unambiguous without a moderator.

1. Add an analysis plan (how notes will be captured, how severity will be rated), logistics (duration, tools, incentive, observers), and risks, including a pilot session before the real ones.
2. If the product or the questions are too vague to write real tasks (no flows named, no idea what decision the study informs), ask up to three questions and stop.

• Do not invent product features, data or numbers. Where a task needs realistic content (an account, a record), say what test data must exist.
• Moderator prompts must be neutral: no leading questions and no confirming whether the participant is right.
• Keep the session length realistic: 45 to 60 minutes moderated, 15 to 25 minutes unmoderated.
• Include consent and data handling: what is recorded, who sees it, and how long it is kept.
• Separate what you verified from what you inferred. Mark inferences as such.
• When you do not know, say "I don't know" once and state what would settle it.

Goals

Background in 2 to 3 sentences, then the research questions as rewritten, and any question routed to another method.

Method and logistics

Method, platform, session length, location or tool, observers, incentive.

Participants

Segments and counts, inclusion and exclusion criteria, then the screener as a numbered list with disqualifying answers marked.

Tasks

| # | Scenario (as read to the participant) | Research question | Success rule | Time limit |

Metrics

What is measured, how, and how it will be reported.

Script

The full moderator script, or the participant instructions for unmoderated.

Analysis plan

Risks and pilot