Benchmarks / SurveyBench / Why Tallyroom trials don't convert / GLM 5.3 FlashX Legal
GLM 5.3 FlashX Legal: Why Tallyroom trials don't convert
The decision: where to put next quarter's product and sales effort to lift trial-to-paid conversion: a new accounting integration, assisted setup, a cheaper plan, or a shorter trial. The brief and the data →
- Verdict
- ✗ Not sound
- Research score
- 93 of 100
- Analysis rating
- 997
- Head to head, this task
- won 15 of 15
Why it is not sound
The survey
- A double-barrelled question: Q5
Scorecard
Numbers 11 of 11 right
| Question | Its answer | True | |
|---|---|---|---|
| What percentage of respondents said they would need a Sage integration before paying? | ✓ | 23.7% | 23.7% |
| Weighted to the company-size mix of all lapsed trials, what percentage would need a Sage integration? | ✓ | 18.1% | 18.2% |
| Among businesses with 1-9 employees, what percentage gave 'didn't have time to set it up' as the main reason? | ✓ | 27.4% | 27.4% |
| How many of the open-text answers mention not having time to set Tallyroom up, or setup taking too long? | ✓ | 24 | 24 |
| What is the 95% margin of error, in percentage points, on the unweighted share of respondents needing a Sage integration? | ✓ | 3.9 points | 3.89 points |
| Is the difference in the share giving 'too expensive' as their main reason between businesses with 1-9 employees and those with 50-249 statistically significant at the 95% level? (1 for yes, 0 for no) | ✓ | No | No |
| Weighted to the company-size mix of all 1,640 lapsed trials, about how many teams' main reason was not having time to set it up? | ✓ | 355 | 355 |
| How many of the open-text answers from businesses with 1-9 employees mention not having time to set Tallyroom up, or setup taking too long? | ✓ | 14 | 14 |
| Weighted to the company-size mix of all lapsed trials, what percentage would give 'no integration with our accounting software' as their main reason? | ✓ | 16.3% | 16.3% |
| What percentage of the trial admins invited completed the survey? | ✓ | 28% | 28% |
| Among respondents whose main reason was no integration with their accounting software, what percentage said they would be likely (fairly or very) to pay if Tallyroom connected to it? | ✓ | 61.3% | 61.3% |
Traps in the data 7 of 7 handled
- ✓Teams on 'Other' accounting software (base 17) mostly cite missing integration.
- ✓Teams of 50-249 people are 22% of respondents but 10% of lapsed trials. They cite missing integration and use Sage far more, so unweighted figures overstate integration and Sage demand and understate setup time: unweighted, missing integration is the top reason; weighted, setup time is.
- ✓Q2 is multi-select: percentages are of respondents and add up to more than 100%.
- ✓Likelihood to pay is a hypothetical stated intention.
- ✓The head of sales believes the trial is too long and teams forget about it.
- ✓460 of 1,640 invited admins completed (about 28%), with a £10 voucher; those who respond may differ from those who do not.
- ✓Only teams that did not pay were surveyed, so the survey cannot show what distinguishes them from teams that did; paying teams may also have struggled with setup.
The analysis
Put next quarter's effort into assisted setup and a Sage integration. Do not cut the trial to 14 days. Do not lead with a cheaper plan. Head of sales: the 30-day trial is not too long (0.2% said too long, 1.5% too short, 3.7% forgot). Open text shows trials expiring mid-setup; a 14-day cap would tighten the constraint that already makes 27.4% of 1-9 employee firms and ~24% of Xero/QuickBooks users fail to finish. Keep 30 days and sell done-for-you setup, not a ticking clock. Head of product: Sage demand is real and concentrated - 23.7% unweighted, 18.1% weighted to the lapsed-trial mix; 85.5% of Sage users need it and 58.1% of them named missing integration as the main reason they did not pay. Build Sage first; FreeAgent (7.2% of base) and Other (3.7%) are not next-quarter bets. Finance director: among the 93 teams whose blocker was integration, 61.3% said they would be fairly or very likely to pay at £6 per user per month once connected. Bank that as an upper bound on that segment, not as a forecast of trial-to-paid; overall net likely is 37.6%. Cheaper plan: 'too expensive' is 15.9% and does not differ significantly by size (19.0% vs 15.5%). The pricing issue is structure - per-user bills for low-usage teams (20.4% want per-company pricing) - more than the headline rate. Test per-company pricing; do not slash £6. Assisted setup is the fastest, cheapest experiment and hits the largest single reason among micro firms and a top-two reason among already-integrated users.
In-trial funnel telemetry (did they connect software, scan a receipt, invite an approver, finish setup) would confirm or kill the assisted-setup bet: if most trials already finish setup and still do not pay, white-glove onboarding will not move conversion. Depth interviews with lapsed Sage users that show they would not actually pay £6 once Sage works would cut the Sage business case, as would a scoping estimate showing Sage 50/200/Business Cloud is a multi-quarter build. A pricing test showing high elasticity at £4 or strong take-up of per-company would promote packaging to the primary lever. If a randomised 14 vs 30 day trial nevertheless showed higher paid conversion at 14 days, we would reverse the trial decision, but the current evidence runs the other way. A 1-9 employee top-up survey could raise weighted Sage need above 18% or reveal that non-respondents differ from the 460 who answered.
Findings
-
Do not cut the trial to 14 days. Trial length is not why teams lapse, and a shorter window would worsen the real barrier: setup takes longer than the time respondents actually have.
Q2 (n=460): trial too short 1.5%, forgot trial was running 3.7%, trial too long 0.2% (combined 5.4%). Didn't have time to set it up is 18.7% overall and the single largest reason among 1-9 employees (27.4%, n=168). Of 109 open-text answers, 24 describe setup still unfinished when the trial ended.
-
Assisted setup is the highest-leverage, fastest conversion action, especially for micro-businesses and for Xero/QuickBooks users who already have integrations.
Didn't have time to set it up: 27.4% of 1-9 (n=168), 15.9% of 10-49 (n=182), 10.0% of 50-249 (n=110). Among Xero users it is 24.7% (n=182) and QuickBooks 22.5% (n=111). 14 of the 24 setup-themed open texts are from 1-9 employee firms.
-
Sage integration is the highest-value product gap for conversion, but demand is concentrated in Sage users and larger firms, not the whole base.
Q3: 23.7% of all respondents need Sage before paying (n=460); 18.1% when weighted to the 55/35/10 size mix of all 1,640 lapsed trials. Among Sage users, 85.5% need it (n=117) and 58.1% named no integration as their main reason. Need by size: 40.9% of 50-249 (n=110), 28.0% of 10-49 (n=182), 7.7% of 1-9 (n=168). Q4: Sage is 25.4% of the lapsed base.
-
For the finance director: connecting to their software would likely convert around 6 in 10 of the integration-blocked group at £6 per user per month - that is a stated-intent ceiling, not a forecast.
Q5 among the 93 whose main reason was no integration: 61.3% fairly or very likely to pay (35.5% fairly, 25.8% very). All software users: 37.6% net likely (n=460). Intent questions over-turn actual conversion; treat 61.3% as an upper bound on that segment.
-
A cheaper plan is not the primary lever. Price is a secondary, size-independent barrier; the pricing problem is per-user structure for low-usage teams.
Too expensive: 15.9% overall (n=460); 19.0% of 1-9 (n=168) vs 15.5% of 50-249 (n=110). Two-proportion z=0.77, not significant at 95%. Q3: 20.4% want per-company pricing. Open text repeatedly cites per-seat bills for 12-30 staff where only a handful submit expenses.
-
Approval-workflow mismatch is a scale problem that grows with company size and will not be fixed by pricing or trial length.
Approval didn't fit: 21.8% of 50-249 (n=110), 12.1% of 10-49 (n=182), 7.1% of 1-9 (n=168). Q3: 22.0% want custom approval chains (n=460). Open text describes batch monthly sign-off, two directors for claims over £500, email approval, and an external accountant as final approver.
-
About one in ten lapsed trials never needed an expenses tool; that share is concentrated in micro firms and is not addressable by integrations, price, or trial length.
Q2 decided we didn't need it: 10.0% overall (n=460); 13.7% of 1-9 (n=168) and 12.6% of 10-49 (n=182) vs 0.0% of 50-249 (n=110). Open text cites company debit cards, two or three claimants, and expenses going through payroll.
-
Already-integrated users (Xero and QuickBooks, 63.7% of the sample) will not convert on more integrations. Their blockers are setup, price and approvals.
Q2 no integration: 0.0% for Xero (n=182) and QuickBooks (n=111). Q3 none of these: 51.6% Xero, 42.3% QuickBooks. Their top reasons are setup (24.7% / 22.5%), too expensive (18.1% / 21.6%) and approvals (14.3% / 15.3%).
-
Unweighted tables mislead the decision. Micro-firms are under-represented (36.5% in sample vs 55% of all lapsed trials) and 50-249 firms over-represented (23.9% vs 10%), so unweighted totals understate setup and no-need and overstate integration and approvals.
Q6 (n=460) vs product database (N=1,640). Weighted vs unweighted: Sage need 18.1% vs 23.7%; no integration as main reason 16.3% vs 20.2%; no time to set up 21.6% vs 18.7%. Weighted, about 355 of 1,640 lapsed teams had setup time as their main reason.
Caveats
- The sample is unweighted and badly skewed versus the 1,640 lapsed trials: 1-9 employees are 36.5% of respondents vs 55% of the population; 50-249 are 23.9% vs 10%. Unweighted headline percentages understate micro-firm barriers (setup, no need) and overstate larger-firm barriers (integration, approvals).
- Completion was 28.0% (460/1,640) with a £10 voucher. Respondents may be more engaged or more frustrated than the admins who did not reply, so true population shares could sit outside the ±3.9pp margin of error on the Sage figure.
- Q5 is stated intent at a single price (£6 per user per month), not behaviour. The 61.3% among integration-blocked teams is a ceiling; typical intent-to-pay overstates actual conversion.
- Open text is only 109 of 460 completes (24%). Themes are directionally consistent with Q2 but should not be counted as population estimates.
- Q3 asks what respondents would need before paying; ticking Sage does not mean they would buy at £6, and 36.5% said none of the listed items would unlock payment.
- Sage is not one product in the open text (Sage 50, Sage 200, Sage Business Cloud, Sage Accounting). Integration scope and cost may be larger than a single connector.
- The test of 'too expensive' by size has low power (n=168 vs n=110). Absence of significance is not proof of no difference, only that this survey cannot detect one that small.
- Q5 was asked of everyone who uses accounting software, including Xero and QuickBooks users who already have a connection, so the 37.6% all-respondent net likely mixes a hypothetical new integration with a plain price question.
- A few open-text size labels contradict the stated headcount (e.g. T010 tagged 50-249 but 'only nine people'; T023 tagged 1-9 but '15 employees'), so segment assignment in verbatims is imperfect.
- No data on converted paid accounts, on in-trial product telemetry, or on which unsupported packages sit inside 'Other' (3.7%), so we cannot yet size a KashFlow/Clear Books bet.
Next steps
- decisionKeep the 30-day trial. Reject the cut to 14 days. Reframe sales and in-trial messaging around finished setup, not deadline urgency.
- experimentOffer assisted setup (a 30-minute onboarding call, or Tallyroom configures categories, approvers and the accounting link) to a randomised half of new trials, prioritising 1-9 employee admins and Xero/QuickBooks users.
- decisionGreenlight a Sage integration as the quarter's principal product investment, scoped across the Sage products named in verbatims (Accounting / Business Cloud, Sage 50, Sage 200).
- experimentDo not launch a cheaper headline plan. Test per-company pricing against per-user on the pricing page and in new trials, especially for low-usage multi-user teams.
- monitorInstrument the trial funnel: account created, accounting software connected, first receipt scanned, first approval, team invited. Review weekly by company size and software.
- researchRun 15-20 depth interviews: half with lapsed Sage users, half with 1-9 employee admins who abandoned setup. Include a price-continuum question at £4 / £6 / per-company.
- researchField a short top-up of at least 150 1-9 employee lapsed admins, or publish all decision metrics on a 55/35/10 weighted base with confidence intervals.
Open-text themes it coded
Missing accounting integration (Sage, FreeAgent, KashFlow, Clear Books, unsupported software) 22No time to set up / setup unfinished when trial ended 24Too expensive / per-user pricing for low-usage teams 23Approval workflow did not match how the team signs off 15No perceived need / too few expenses to justify a tool 12Unreliable mobile app or receipt scanning / OCR 10Chose a competitor (Dext, Rydoo, Soldo, Expensify, Webexpenses, Pleo, Emburse) 8
The survey it planned
4 screening questions and 10 questions, as the model wrote them.
-
S1
The email for this survey went to the admin on the Tallyroom account. Was that you?
One answer- Yes, I was the admin
- I was one of the admins
- No, I wasn't an admin on the account
Continues if Yes, I was the admin; I was one of the admins
-
S2
Your team's free Tallyroom trial ended in the last 90 days. Did your team pay for Tallyroom during or after that trial?
One answer- No, we didn't pay
- Yes, we paid during the trial
- Yes, we paid after the trial ended
- I'm not sure
Continues if No, we didn't pay
-
S3
Is your business based in the UK?
One answer- Yes
- No
Continues if Yes
-
S4
Including you, how many people work in your business?
One answer- 1 to 9
- 10 to 49
- 50 to 249
- 250 or more
- Prefer not to say
Continues if 1 to 9; 10 to 49; 50 to 249; Prefer not to say
-
Q1
Which accounting software does your business use for its books? Select all that apply.
Any that apply- Xero
- QuickBooks
- Sage
- FreeAgent
- KashFlow
- Another accounting software
- Spreadsheets only (for example Excel)
- Paper records
- I'm not sure
-
Q2
Which of these, if any, got in the way of your team paying for Tallyroom? Select all that apply.
Any that apply- Setting it up took too long or was too complicated
- We couldn't connect Tallyroom to our accounting software
- The Xero or QuickBooks connection didn't work well enough
- £6 per user per month was too expensive
- We found a cheaper way to manage expenses (another app or spreadsheets)
- It was missing features we needed
- Staff didn't find it easy to use
- We ran out of time to try it properly
- We forgot about the trial until it had ended
- We don't have enough expenses to justify paying for software
- We chose another expenses app instead
- Nothing in particular - we just didn't get round to it
- Other (please tell us what)
-
Q3
What was the single biggest reason your team didn't subscribe?
One answer- Setting it up took too long or was too complicated
- We couldn't connect Tallyroom to our accounting software
- The Xero or QuickBooks connection didn't work well enough
- £6 per user per month was too expensive
- We found a cheaper way to manage expenses (another app or spreadsheets)
- It was missing features we needed
- Staff didn't find it easy to use
- We ran out of time to try it properly
- We forgot about the trial until it had ended
- We don't have enough expenses to justify paying for software
- We chose another expenses app instead
- There wasn't one single main reason
- Other (please tell us what)
Routing Shown only if Q2 is: Setting it up took too long or was too complicated; We couldn't connect Tallyroom to our accounting software; The Xero or QuickBooks connection didn't work well enough; £6 per user per month was too expensive; We found a cheaper way to manage expenses (another app or spreadsheets); It was missing features we needed; Staff didn't find it easy to use; We ran out of time to try it properly; We forgot about the trial until it had ended; We don't have enough expenses to justify paying for software; We chose another expenses app instead; Other (please tell us what)
-
Q4
To show you are reading carefully, please select 'Difficult' from the list below.
One answer- Very easy
- Easy
- Neither easy nor difficult
- Difficult
- Very difficult
-
Q5
How easy or difficult was it to set Tallyroom up for your business - adding the app, trying approvals, and connecting your accounts?
One answer- Very difficult
- Difficult
- Neither easy nor difficult
- Easy
- Very easy
- We started setting it up but never finished
- We never set Tallyroom up
Judges: double-barrelledOne difficulty rating covers adding the app, trying approvals and connecting accounts, which may have had substantially different levels of difficulty.
It asks about a single difficulty rating for three separate tasks (adding the app, trying approvals, and connecting accounts).
-
Q6
Which of these is closest to your experience of connecting Tallyroom to your accounting software?
One answer- We use Xero or QuickBooks, and Tallyroom connected to it
- We use Xero or QuickBooks, but Tallyroom didn't connect to it properly
- We use accounting software that Tallyroom doesn't connect to (for example Sage or FreeAgent)
- We don't use accounting software
- Not sure
Judges: assumptiveFor Xero or QuickBooks users, the substantive options assume a connection was attempted. Respondents who never attempted it remain eligible, but neither connection outcome describes them; 'Not sure' is not equivalent to never having tried.
The Xero/QuickBooks options assume the team tried to connect Tallyroom. A Xero or QuickBooks user who never attempted the connection has no accurate option.
-
Q7
Tallyroom costs £6 per user per month. Which is closest to your view?
One answer- It was too expensive for a business of our size
- The price was fair, but we hadn't got enough value from it yet
- The price was fair, but we wanted a cheaper starter plan or a free plan
- Price was not a reason we didn't subscribe
- We never got as far as thinking about price
-
Q8
The free trial lasted 30 days. Which is closest to how that worked for you?
One answer- We needed more than 30 days to decide
- 30 days was about the right length
- We had already decided before the trial ended that we wouldn't pay
- We forgot about the trial and it ran out
- The length of the trial didn't make any difference
-
Q9
If the free trial had been 14 days instead of 30 days, would you have been more or less likely to subscribe?
One answer- More likely to subscribe
- No difference
- Less likely to subscribe
- Not sure
-
Q10
Which one of these would most have made your team subscribe?
One answer- Tallyroom connecting to more accounting software (for example Sage or FreeAgent)
- A member of the Tallyroom team helping us set it up
- A cheaper plan
- A shorter trial
- None of these
- Something else (please tell us what)
Sample plan
Invite the account admin of every UK team whose Tallyroom trial ended in the last 90 days with no paid subscription during or after the trial (pull from the product database; one invite per team; exclude test, internal, duplicate and already-paid accounts). Expected frame is roughly 1,500-1,600 admins (about 82% of the ~1,900 trials that start each quarter, subject to the UK share). Mode: personalised email from the product database with a £10 voucher on completion, reminders to non-completers on day 3 and day 7, survey open 14 days. Target about 450 completes. Soft quotas on S4 (1-9 / 10-49 / 50-249): monitor daily, never close the 50-249 band, and census that band if it is scarce. Precision: ±6pp at 95% confidence needs n≈267 per size band (p=0.5). 450 completes cannot guarantee that in all three bands unless each band reaches ~267; overall n=450 from a frame of ~1,550 gives roughly ±4pp (with finite population correction), and band-level margins will be wider and will be reported from achieved counts. If product requires ±6pp in every band, either lift completes to ~800 or accept wider band margins. 'Prefer not to say' respondents stay in the overall figures only. Quality: exclude Q4 attention failures and completes under 2 minutes; pilot with 25 admins before full send; randomise option order on Q2 and Q10 (Nothing / Other / None of these fixed last). If response is below 450 (15-25% is realistic for this frame), report achieved n and widen margins; do not extend the lookback beyond 90 days without a separate decision.