What is synthetic research?

Synthetic research uses AI-powered personas that simulate how real buyers, customers, or market segments would respond to your research questions. It produces directional signal — insights to sharpen your hypotheses — before you invest in real primary fieldwork. Gather Synthetic runs AI-moderated interviews across any audience archetype in minutes, not weeks.

How is synthetic research different from real research?

Synthetic research generates directional signal using AI personas, while real primary research collects data from actual people. Synthetic pre-research is faster (minutes vs. weeks), cheaper, and ideal for hypothesis generation and stakeholder alignment. It is not statistically valid and should be used to focus and prioritize real fieldwork, not replace it. Gather offers both synthetic pre-research and real AI-moderated interviews with actual respondents.

What types of research can Gather Synthetic run?

Gather Synthetic supports 14 study types: Brand Perception, Product Feedback, Concept Testing, Competitive Intelligence, CX/NPS Deep Dive, Messaging & Claims Testing, Win/Loss Analysis, Market Segmentation, Pricing Research, Ad & Creative Testing, Customer Journey Mapping, Feature Prioritization, Churn & Retention Analysis, and Audience Discovery.

How much does synthetic research cost?

The first 5 synthetic interviews are free. After that, B2C audience interviews cost $0.50 each and B2B audience interviews cost $5.00 each. There is no subscription required.

How accurate is synthetic research?

Synthetic research is directional, not statistically accurate. Confidence scores reflect internal AI response consistency, not statistical significance. Quantitative projections carry a ±15–20% margin of error. Treat findings as educated hypotheses to validate with real primary research, not as definitive measurements.

← All brands

Goal alignment & cross-functional planning · PUBLIC RESEARCH BRIEF

AsanaDoes linking work to a goal change what gets prioritized?

Asana's Goals page describes connecting goals with supporting work, assigning owners and tracking progress manually or automatically. The research question is whether that connection helps teams choose what to stop or change, not merely produce another status update. No improvement in business outcomes has been established by this brief.

Sources checked 2026-09-20 · Simulation results not yet generated

Test a question in Gather ↗Explore fictional demo →

CHANGE ONE THING. LEARN WHAT MATTERS.

Three questions for the GTM team.

For an Asana Goals evaluation, would a demonstration of a team deciding which campaign to pause be more useful than one showing goal status rollups? Keep the underlying projects and goal information identical. Ask executives and project owners what evidence would change their decision.

Set up this study →

When a linked Asana project is largely complete but its intended business measure is off target, what information would make a team reassess the work? Test a proposed review prompt alongside the existing goal view. Treat the mismatch as a hypothetical scenario, not a reported product failure.

Set up this study →

What would make project owners keep Asana Goals current after a quarterly planning meeting? Compare proposed ownership agreements for the goal sponsor and project leads. Explore how to resolve competing priorities without assuming the software can choose the right trade-off.

Set up this study →

PROPOSED AUDIENCE

Who should weigh in?

North American marketing operations, product operations and program teams at companies with 200 or more employees. Include goal sponsors, project owners and contributors from the same accounts, spanning current Asana users and teams evaluating it. These are proposed recruitment roles, not independent account-level buying decisions.

TWO TIME HORIZONS

Trial today. A habit tomorrow?

Near term · 0–90 days

Over 0–90 days, run a bounded planning pilot with one consenting cross-functional team. Use realistic priority conflicts and record whether participants identify the relevant goal, agree on an owner and document a decision. Evaluate decision reasoning separately from speed or dashboard engagement.

Longer term · 3–12 months

Over 3–12 months, follow successive planning cycles to see whether goal links are maintained when priorities change. Review abandoned projects, unresolved dependencies and repeated disagreements. Continued use is not proof that the team achieved the outcome the goal represents.

What would make the result actionable?

Predefine the decisions and business measures that matter before the pilot. Compare account-level decision logs, goal freshness, manual reporting effort and observed delivery outcomes against the prior process or a comparable team. Keep task completion separate from independently measured results, and include administration time in any cost comparison.

A Gather simulation returns hypothetical customer reactions. Quantifying revenue, traffic or retention needs actual business inputs and validation against observed behavior.

Public sources

Asana Goals: connecting objectives and supporting work ↗Current product page; checked 2026-09-20