Six ways to pressure-test a B2B campaign. WhyUser is one of them.
We do not win every row. Here is what each method is best at, where WhyUser is the wrong tool, and the order that costs least if you can run more than one. No gate, no form.
The one-screen version
Each method answers a different question. The costly mistake is picking a tool for a question it was never built to answer, then deciding the method does not work.
| Method | The question it answers | Time | Fails when |
|---|---|---|---|
| General AI assistant | Is this copy any good? | Instant | You need the same answer twice, or a committee |
| Internal review | Is this on-brand, legal and typo-free? | ~2 weeks | Everyone in the room already believes in the product |
| Buyer panel | Does this land, in these words, with this person? | 12 to 48 hours | You need committee handoffs, or eight iterations |
| Build it yourself | Can we own this internally? | A weekend, then forever | Month two: determinism, calibration, and no track record |
| A/B test | What actually happened on live traffic? | 4 to 6 weeks | You lack the volume, or the budget is already spent |
| WhyUser | Which role vetoes, which handoff breaks, and what proof is missing? | ~30 min | You need copy written, human quotes, or legal sign-off |
What WhyUser adds that the others cannot
Two layers, not one.
Per persona. Up to 10 personas, about 30 runs each, across three behavioural states weighted to your channel. You get an abandon rate and a reason code per role, not one opinion. Rare dealbreakers surface even when the average looks fine.
Per committee. The roles are then computed as a graph rather than averaged. One blocking role sinks the verdict. Seven handoff chains are scored healthy, at risk or broken, which catches the failure every other method misses: every role approves the page and the deal still cannot move, because the champion holds nothing that answers the economic buyer.
The full comparison, one method at a time
Each page takes a single alternative and works through where it beats WhyUser, where it does not, and what it costs to run both. No gate, no form.
Where WhyUser is the wrong choice
- You want copy written, or twenty variants. Use ChatGPT or Claude.
- Simulation is your product, or you have a research function. Build it.
- You need legal sign-off, or a claim checked against your roadmap. That is internal review, always.
- You need a quote from a real human to settle an internal argument. Use a panel.
- You have the traffic and the time and only need to know which variant wins. Run the A/B test.
- You sell B2C or e-commerce. Committees are shallow there. Our evidence carries little weight.
Check us rather than trust us
One landing page, judged two ways is interactive and needs no login. Our accuracy page publishes 473 graded claims, each sealed before the outcome existed, with the misses left in.