About Domain
Group work, real results.
Conversion problems rarely have one cause. Sitting in a room with peers who've hit the same wall tends to surface answers faster than any solo audit.
Where the practice came from
Started in 2016 in Duncan, BC, Domain grew out of a frustration with conversion audits that produced reports nobody acted on. The assumption was simple: people change behaviour more readily when they work alongside others facing the same friction.
Sessions are structured around actual page data — traffic sources, exit points, form abandonment sequences — not abstract frameworks. Participants come in with their own site problems and leave having stress-tested their assumptions against a room of critical, well-informed peers.
Group facilitation isn't a workaround here. It's the method. The collective pressure to articulate a problem clearly, and the variety of perspectives that follow, produce a quality of insight that individual consulting rarely matches.
The people running sessions
Two facilitators with different backgrounds — one from analytics, one from copywriting — means sessions don't default to a single diagnosis.
Tibor Kálmán
Lead Facilitator
Spent eight years in UX analytics before moving into group facilitation. Reads session recordings the way a mechanic reads an engine — looking for what's actually broken, not what looks broken.
Wren Delacroix
Copy & Messaging Lead
Came to conversion work through editorial writing. Focuses on whether a page is saying something a real person would believe — and whether the words are doing the work the designer assumes they are.
How facilitation actually works here
Data comes first
Every participant shares real metrics before the session — heat maps, funnel drop-off, bounce by device. Discussion starts from evidence, not opinion.
Peer pressure as a tool
Explaining your site's problems to eight critical peers forces the kind of clarity that doesn't happen in a solo review. The group catches assumptions you've stopped noticing.
Decisions leave on paper
Sessions close with a written priority list — three to five changes worth testing, ranked by expected effort and likely impact. Not a full report. A starting point.
Inside the sessions
What the working environment looks like
No spectators
Every seat is a working seat. Passive attendance isn't an option — participants bring data and engage with each other's problems directly.
Small enough to be honest
Groups stay under 14 people. Larger audiences shift the dynamic toward performance. Small groups stay in problem-solving mode.
Virtual, not diluted
Remote sessions use screen-sharing and shared documents rather than trying to replicate a physical room. The format fits the medium.