Private equity

Diligence-grade research on a deal timeline.

Customer, competitor and pricing evidence for every stage of the deal. Your researcher scopes it to the thesis, and AI-moderated interviews reach the buyers who decide. Diligence-ready in two weeks.

Talk to our team

dashboards.usercue.com/b2b-platform-voc/story/overview

B2B platform VoC
Customer VoC · N=233

Story

1Overview

2The experience gap

3Price headroom

4Why they leave

5Explore by segment

Cross-tab Studio

Deeper Analysis

Methodology

Study files

Executive reportPDF

AppendixPDF

Data tablesXLSX

B2B platform VoC · Customer readout

Rated above the market, with churn among larger accounts.

A study of N=233 leaders who choose or run their organization’s platform, across North America and Europe.

Experience · current customers

+43

net score on the 0-to-10 scale, with 5% detractors

Satisfaction

85%

very or extremely satisfied, against 72% of other users

Price tolerance

34%

would accept a rise above 25%, against 13% of other users

Story · 02 · Signature view

The experience gap

Every respondent rated each platform they knew on the same 0-to-10 scale, scored the way an NPS is scored. Current customers put this platform at +43 with 5% detractors; no competing platform scores above +19.

Net scoreDistributionBy groupPromoters (9 to 10) minus detractors (0 to 6)
Each platform rated by the respondents who knew it

Net experience score against every rival ● HIGH

0-to-10 overall experience · N=233

This platformCurrent customers

+43No rival above +19

n = 62

This platformAll who rated it

+33

n = 76

Highest-scoring rivalEach rated by its own users

≤ +19

ceiling

0+15+30+45+60

Current customersScore distribution

7 to 8 · 47%9 to 10 · 48%

0 to 6
5%

Detractors 5%PassivesPromoters

Current customers · n = 62

+435% detractors

Promoters 48% · passives 47%

Story · 03 · Pricing

Price headroom

79% of current customers call the platform fairly priced, and 34% would accept a rise above 25% before seriously considering a switch, more than twice the share of other-platform users.

Would accept a price rise above 25% before a switch ● HIGH

Each group on its own primary platform · % of respondents

0%15%30%45%

34%

21%

13%

Current customersFormer customersdirectionalOther-platform users

Against the market

+21 pts vs other-platform users

Call it fairly priced

Current

79%

Other users

66%

The limit

61%of current customers set their threshold at 25% or below

Analyst readPrice is watched: 82% of current customers name price increases as a typical reason organizations switch, the highest of any group.

Current customers

34%+21 pts

would accept a rise above 25%; other users 13%

Story · 05 · Explore by segment

Explore by segment

Pick a group and every measure re-cuts against users of other platforms. Usage and budget rows describe each respondent’s primary platform today.

Every measure, by relationship to the platform ● HIGH● DIRECTIONAL · SMALL BASE

Re-cut byRelationship to the platform Current customersFormer customersOther-platform users

Measure│ Other-platform users baseline%Δ vs base

Integration problems as a switching driver

48% +21 pts+52 pts

Scalability limits as a switching driver

34% +13 pts+27 pts

Price increases as a switching driver

82% +12 pts−18 pts

Use integrations with other business systems

47% −12 pts+13 pts

Use dashboards and reporting

61% −7 pts+18 pts

Organizations of 5,000+ employees

18% −34 pts+7 pts

Multi-select rows · former-customer cell is small, read as directional · N=233

Source: N=233 completed interviews · each group rates its own primary platform · former-customer cell directional

Client HTML Data Studio, available with any study

Research at the pace of your decisions

Sixty deep dives a year.
Same team.

Traditional CDD: 12 customer deep dives a year. With UserCue: 60 customer deep dives a year.

How it works

Human expertise, at AI scale.

One study for a deal team, and one buyer traced from screen to readout. Two weeks.

01 · Kickoff
The deal team names the decision.
Hana: Frames the question
Research OS structures the brief
Kickoff call
02 · Design
One concept, a clear switching question.
Hana: Writes the guide
Research OS programs the agents
A new store near you.
Equally convenient locations, the same service levels and account terms as your current store, at a lower price at checkout.
Would you consider switching to this store?
Would consider switching
Unsure
One buyer’s answer
03 · Fielding
238 buyers, professional and consumer.
Research OS asks why
Hana: Reads every interview
Live transcript · professional buyer · $80K to $300K a year
“Look, if the price is lower and they actually have what I need on the shelf, I’d give them a shot. My crew can’t stand around waiting on parts, so whoever has it in stock gets the order.”
✓ Coded · Would consider switching
Same buyer, in their words
04 · Analysis
Openness peaks in the middle market.
Research OS computes the cuts
Hana: Checks the story
Switch consideration by annual professional spend
$80K to $300K79%
$15K to $80K72%
Under $15K58%
Over $300K43%
Professional buyers · n = 23–33 per tier · directional
Where this buyer counts
05 · Readout
64% would consider the challenger.
Hana: Presents it live
Research OS renders the report
This buyer, in three findings

Selected research

Research for every stage of the investment lifecycle.

SourcingDental lab manufacturing outlook

160 dental labs and 80 contract manufacturers.

What it found

62% of labs plan to send out more metal frameworks within 10 years.

Read the case study

Other research we run

Your researcher shapes each study around where the deal stands.

Market landscape and TAM
Market attractiveness
Unmet needs assessment
Adjacent market opportunity
Buyer persona development
Growth forecasting

Rapid customer VoC
Competitive positioning
Win-loss analysis
Expert network sentiment
Emerging competitor threats
Pricing power and elasticity

Deep customer VoC
Churn and retention risk
Share of wallet
Switching cost assessment
Cost and margin benchmarking
Needs-based segmentation

Adjacent market validation
Message testing
Concept testing
Brand equity tracking
Wave studies
NPS key driver analysis

If your team needs it, we run it.

Talk to our team

How it compares

Primary research was missing an expert-led, AI-native option.

Deal-ready customer insight, without the CDD timeline.

Senior researchers lead

Strategy consultancies and agencies

Senior expertise. More manual workflow. Longer timelines.

Senior researchers lead, traditional workflow.

Senior expertise. AI-native workflow. Two weeks.

Senior researchers lead, AI-native workflow.

Your team leads

Expert networks and panel providers

Respondent access. Your team leads the research and the synthesis.

Your team leads, traditional workflow.

Self-serve AI platforms

Your team leads the research, with the platform’s panel or synthetic respondents.

Your team leads, AI-native workflow.

What clients say

“Insightful, actionable, and exactly what we were looking for. The research gave us learnings we couldn’t have gotten any other way, and it was on our desk before the IC.”Operations Lead · Global PE firm · Industrial diligence

Ready to move at deal speed?

30 minutes. We’ll walk you through our research process, show you a sample deliverable for your sector, and map out exactly how we’d approach your next deal.

Talk to our team View case studies

Diligence-grade research on a deal timeline.

Sixty deep dives a year.Same team.

Human expertise, at AI scale.

The deal team names the decision.

One concept, a clear switching question.

238 buyers, professional and consumer.

Openness peaks in the middle market.

64% would consider the challenger.