G2

Jeremy G.

Small-Business (50 or fewer emp.)

8/30/2023

"Using Proof Jump for QA Collaboration"

5/5

What do you like best about ProofJump?

We use Proof Jump as an integral part of our Email Production QA process. We love the ability to make annotations exactly where the defect occurs and have that annotation emailed back to our team members so they can begin making edits for the next round of testing. We share Proof Jump links with our clients so they too can make annotations and communicate back to the team in near real time. The ability to maintain versions between rounds of QA is very useful to us as well. In the very least it allows us to monitor the number of rounds of QA that have taken place. This indicates whether there's an issue in coding, design, client understanding or all three. Our production effort would slow down greatly if we didn't have a tool that is so intuitive and easy to use. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What do you dislike about ProofJump?

I can't really think of anything that Proof Jump does or doesn't do that I dislike. The product team has been top notch in taking our requests into account and allowing us to help them improve the tool. I like the product and don't have any recommendations for improvement at this point. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What problems is ProofJump solving and how is that benefiting you?

Proof Jump provided us a platform to consolidate and organize our Email Production QA efforts. Historically we would proof messages to our inbox and then start a long thread of emails trying to describe where a defect occurred. With Proof Jump (aka PJ) our QA team can make annotations to correct grammar, spelling, phrasing that is off brand, or anything else that doesn't match the final version approved by our clients legal teams. The consolidation and organizational options offered by Proof Jump have help us to tame the sometimes hectic QA process that agencies experience. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.