Results-Actionability Gap: Understanding How Practitioners Evaluate LLM Products in the Wild
How do product teams evaluate LLM-powered products? As organizations integrate large language models (LLMs) into digital products, their unpredictable nature makes traditional evaluation approaches inadequate, yet little is known about how practitioners navigate this challenge. Through interviews with nineteen practitioners across diverse sectors, we identify ten evaluation practices spanning informal ‘vibe checks’ to organizational meta-work. Beyond confirming four documented challenges, we introduce a novel fifth we call the results-actionability gap, in which practitioners gather evaluation data but cannot translate findings into concrete improvements. Drawing on patterns from successful teams, we contribute strategies to bridge this gap, supporting practitioners’ formalization journey from ad-hoc interpretive practices (e.g., vibe checks) toward systematic evaluation. Our analysis suggests these interpretive practices are necessary adaptations to LLM characteristics rather than methodological failures. For HCI researchers, this presents a research opportunity to support practitioners in systematizing emerging practices rather than developing new evaluation frameworks.
Authors
- Jichen Zhu
- Aske Mottelson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1827-8513)
- Malak Sadek (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8284-890X)
- Willem; id_orcid 0000-0003-0245-1633 van der Maden
- Ziang Xiao
- Aske ; id_orcid 0000-0003-1827-8513 Mottelson
- Q. Vera Liao
Institutions
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Group Image (Poland) (PL)
- Human Computer Interaction (Switzerland) (CH)
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada) (CA)
- Interaction Design (United Kingdom) (GB)
- IT University of Copenhagen (DK)
Publication Details
- Published
- 2026-04-13
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3772318.3791069
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- Novo Nordisk
- Novo Nordisk Fonden