We increased conversion ~30% and we don't know exactly how

Jason Fried describes a six-week sprint at Basecamp focused on smoothing the trial-to-paid onboarding experience, which bundled many small changes at once: a sample Getting Started project, a one-step project creation flow, simplified blank slates, faster account creation, a trial-ending email reminder, and clearer in-app tips. The team saw roughly a 30% lift in conversion but chose not to isolate which changes drove it. Fried argues that a result this large is rare, and that spending months on rigorous attribution would have delayed the next project. The piece matters because it challenges the default of testing every change in isolation, while still implicitly accepting that this approach fits only some situations.

01Key takeaways

• Bundling several small improvements into one cycle can produce a bigger combined lift than testing them one at a time.
• Attribution matters less when a result is clearly positive and the team can move on to the next opportunity.
• Rigorous isolated testing can take months, which may cost more in momentum than the knowledge gained is worth.
• Reducing setup steps and showing tools upfront can lower friction during trial onboarding.
• Be cautious: without knowing what drove a win, it is hard to repeat it or to know when to stop.

02Key sections

The onboarding sprint

Basecamp dedicated six weeks to improving how new trials get started, aiming to convert more trials into paying customers. The team focused on clearer teaching, fewer steps, and easier early wins.

The list of changes

The work bundled eight distinct changes, from sample projects and a simplified creation flow to a trial-ending email and rewritten in-app tips. Each was aimed at reducing friction during early use.

The surprising result

Conversion rose about 30%, a gain far larger than the single-digit improvements typical in this kind of work. The team admits they do not know which changes caused it.

Why they didn't dig deeper

Fried concedes that isolating each change would have been more rigorous, but says doing so would take months of testing. The team preferred to ship the wins and move on to the next project.

The bias toward action

The closing argument is that the goal was to improve the product, not to build knowledge about it. Completing the work and getting results was treated as enough.

03From the post

“Not too long ago, we dedicated a 6-week cycle to improving Basecamp's onboarding flows. The aim was to increase conversion from trial to paid by smoothing out the initial experience of getting going, doing a better job of quick-teaching the basics, and making a few things a little bit easier each step of the way. At a high level, these…”

Summary and takeaways written by PM Atlas; quotes are short excerpts. © the original author.