Estimated read time: 20 minutes
Word count target: ~3900 words
Salesforce User Acceptance Testing (UAT) isn’t just a pre-launch formality—it’s the key to unlocking ROI. In this guide, you’ll learn how to time UAT correctly, assemble the right team, design real-world test scenarios, and turn user feedback into lasting system improvements.
You’ve spent months and six figures getting Salesforce ready to launch. The system’s live, the vendor’s signed off, and your team is just starting to use it. Then the calls start: “Why can’t I find the field for Northeast territories?” or “This workflow doesn’t match how our approvals actually happen.”
Sound familiar?
Despite all the planning, configuration, and deployment effort, a staggering number of Salesforce projects fall flat once they hit real-world users. According to Forrester, up to 70% of CRM implementations fail to meet expectations. And more often than not, the problem isn’t the platform—it’s how it was tested.
Specifically, it’s how User Acceptance Testing was—or wasn’t—handled.
Most implementation teams treat UAT like a checkbox: a quick review just before go-live. But UAT isn’t about clicking through a demo. It’s about confirming whether Salesforce actually supports the real processes your people use every day.
Done right, UAT isn’t a delay—it’s an accelerator. It helps you avoid costly rework, build trust with users, and roll out a Salesforce org that supports the business out of the gate.
In this guide, you’ll learn what real Salesforce UAT looks like, how to avoid common pitfalls, and how to use UAT as a strategic advantage—not just a project task.
Let’s talk dollars—and time.
A typical mid-sized Salesforce implementation runs between $65,000 and $150,000 before you even factor in training, change management, or team bandwidth. That investment hinges on whether users can actually do their jobs better, faster, and more efficiently in the system.
But when UAT is rushed, incomplete, or skipped altogether, the costs don’t just show up in budget overruns. They show up in lost productivity, frustrated users, bad data, and missed sales.
It often begins innocently. After launch, a sales rep realizes they can’t log multi-territory deals the way they need to. Or a support agent finds that the case routing rules don’t handle exceptions. Fixing these issues means custom dev work—outside of scope, outside of budget, and guaranteed to delay adoption.
Meanwhile, users start to improvise. They keep using spreadsheets. They bypass automations. And most critically, they stop trusting the system.
Here’s what that looks like in real numbers:
And that’s just time. What about decisions based on inaccurate reports? Or missed insights because data is incomplete or inconsistent?
Once users start working around Salesforce, it becomes harder to get them back. Data quality suffers. Reports become unreliable. Leadership starts questioning the ROI. And the system that was supposed to drive growth becomes a source of friction.
All of this could be prevented with effective UAT.
When users test the system before it goes live—doing real work with realistic data—these issues surface early, when they’re still easy and affordable to fix.
Skipping that step? It’s not a shortcut. It’s an expensive detour.
One of the most common reasons Salesforce UAT fails is confusion about what it actually is. Let’s clear that up.
User Acceptance Testing isn’t about verifying code, checking field formulas, or ensuring that integrations fire. That’s system testing—the domain of developers and admins.
UAT, by contrast, is about business value. It’s the point where real users test whether Salesforce actually supports the workflows, decisions, and tasks they handle every day.
Think of It Like This:
And no—the answer isn’t always yes.
Too many teams mistake walkthroughs for testing. Here’s what Salesforce UAT is not:
Rushing UAT or delegating it entirely to IT creates blind spots. End users catch edge cases, gaps, and friction points that others won’t see—because they live in the processes Salesforce is supposed to support.
One client we worked with assumed UAT was covered because their internal admin tested key flows. But when they launched, the mobile field team discovered they couldn’t access pricing approvals while offline—a mission-critical gap. No one had thought to test that scenario, and adoption stalled for months.
Effective UAT means:
It’s not about perfection—it’s about alignment. Your goal is to confirm that Salesforce enables your people to get their jobs done confidently from Day 1.
Timing UAT correctly is just as important as doing it at all. Run it too early, and there’s not enough system built to test properly. Too late, and there’s no time to course-correct before go-live.
The Sweet Spot: ~80% Completion
For most Salesforce projects, the ideal moment to launch UAT is when the implementation is about 80% complete. At this stage:
This gives users space to validate not just whether Salesforce works, but whether it works for them. It also allows your project team to adjust configurations or workflows based on grounded, process-specific feedback.
Too often, UAT is treated as a one-and-done milestone. In reality, multiple rounds of testing are the norm—especially for complex orgs or multi-team deployments.
Each round doesn’t need to be massive—but building in time between them is crucial. You’ll want at least 2–3 weeks for a full UAT cycle, depending on complexity.
A regional telecom provider we supported planned UAT for just three days. But when testers flagged major issues in their quoting process, there wasn’t enough time to fix them before launch. Leadership pushed forward anyway—and sales reps reverted to spreadsheets within days. Full adoption took another quarter and two emergency dev sprints.
That’s why UAT timing isn’t a footnote. It’s a key lever in your implementation success.
The quality of your User Acceptance Testing depends almost entirely on who is doing the testing. It’s not enough to loop in your Salesforce admin or project sponsor. You need testers who understand how the business actually runs—because they’re the ones running it.
A well-rounded UAT team blends a range of roles, skills, and comfort levels with Salesforce. Think beyond job titles. Focus on daily reality.
Your best UAT group should include:
We once worked with a Chicago-based distributor whose MVP UAT tester was a quiet account coordinator named Lisa. Not a manager. Not an admin. But she’d been managing customer records with nothing but spreadsheets and her own logic for 12 years.
In UAT, Lisa caught three gaps the project team had missed entirely—two of which would have blocked renewals from being tracked correctly. Her input prevented weeks of cleanup and gave the team a reality check on what users actually need from the system.
Too many testers can slow things down. Aim for 5–10 users, max. More than that, and feedback gets diluted or repetitive. You want sharp, specific observations—not a flood of vague impressions.
The rule of thumb: Quality over quantity. A focused, empowered group will give you better insights than a massive cohort just clicking through scripts.
Generic test scripts are the enemy of great UAT. If your testers are following steps like “create lead → convert to opportunity → log call,” you’re not testing reality—you’re testing theory.
And theory doesn’t uncover what breaks under pressure.
The most valuable test cases are based on authentic business scenarios—the kind your users encounter every week, with all their nuance, speed, and chaos.
What to Include in Every Test Scenario
Even with the right people and the right scenarios, poorly structured testing sessions can sink your UAT effort. Emailing out test scripts and hoping for feedback? That’s not testing—that’s wishful thinking.
Here’s how to get real, actionable insights from your UAT sessions:
1. Block Focused Time on Calendars
UAT isn’t a background task. Give testers dedicated time—preferably in 2–4 hour blocks—so they can focus without distractions. Treat it like mission-critical work, because it is.
2. Use a Realistic Sandbox
Your testing environment needs more than just a clean build. It should have sample data that mirrors your actual accounts, leads, and processes. The more familiar it feels, the more accurate the feedback will be.
3. Provide Structured, Writable Test Guides
Create clear, written instructions for each scenario—with space for users to note what worked, what didn’t, and what felt confusing. Avoid long surveys. Keep it practical.
4. Be Present—but Not Overbearing
Have someone from the implementation team available during sessions to answer questions—but don’t guide the testers. You want to see where they struggle naturally. Confusion is insight.
5. Observe Behavior, Not Just Notes
If possible, watch testers as they move through tasks. Whether it’s screen-sharing or in-person observation, the “um… where is that button?” moments are gold. They tell you where the friction is.
6. Pair Testing (Optional but Powerful)
Having two users walk through tasks together can surface blind spots neither would notice alone. It turns assumptions into conversations—and often reveals workarounds or legacy habits.
Real-World Tip: Testing Tuesdays
One software firm we partnered with blocked every Tuesday afternoon for UAT. Different teams rotated through, and feedback was collected live in a shared doc. They didn’t just catch bugs—they spotted inefficient user paths and areas where better training would reduce future support tickets.
By the time they launched, users didn’t just understand the system—they helped shape it.
UAT sessions generate a goldmine of insight—but if you don’t manage that feedback effectively, things can spiral fast. You’ll either get overwhelmed with noise or, worse, ignore important input that leads to problems post-launch.
The key is structure.
Sort every piece of feedback into one of four buckets:
This simple framework helps you prioritize without stalling the project. Not everything needs to be perfect—just functional, intuitive, and safe to launch.
Nothing kills user trust faster than silence. Create a simple status tracker (even a shared spreadsheet works) and let testers see where their feedback stands.
When you fix something, ask the original tester to validate it. They’ll confirm whether it now works in the context they flagged—and it builds accountability on both sides.
Case Study: The Feedback Portal That Built Buy-In
A midwestern manufacturer we worked with built a basic but effective UAT feedback portal. Testers could log issues, see real-time updates, and even vote on enhancements. The result? Higher participation, clearer expectations, and fewer launch-day surprises.
They didn’t fix everything—but they fixed what mattered. And that’s the difference between UAT as a checkbox and UAT as a business accelerator.
You’ve collected feedback. You’ve fixed what you can. The launch date is looming. But how do you know if Salesforce is truly ready to go live?
This is where clear go/no-go criteria save the day. Set them early—before UAT starts—so you’re making the decision based on facts, not pressure.
Your launch readiness checklist should answer this question:
Can users perform all critical tasks without blockers or workarounds?
That means confirming:
Optional, but valuable:
A regional bank we advised had planned to launch their loan origination Salesforce app on a Friday. UAT revealed a data issue in the approval process that risked regulatory compliance.
Their executive sponsor made the tough—but correct—call to delay by three weeks. That window allowed for a fix, targeted retraining, and a smooth relaunch. It was inconvenient, sure. But it saved far more in customer confidence and operational integrity.
The lesson? A delayed success is always better than an on-time failure.
Go When You're Confident, Not Just Committed
There’s often a push to launch because the date is public, the vendor is closing out, or leadership wants results. Resist the urge to greenlight a system that isn’t truly ready.
Use your UAT output to justify either decision—and know that saying “not yet” is a sign of leadership, not failure.
User Acceptance Testing doesn’t end the day your system goes live. In fact, the most forward-thinking organizations treat UAT as the start of a feedback loop, not the end of a checklist.
Because no matter how well you test pre-launch, users will discover new needs, gaps, and opportunities once the system is in full use.
Here’s how to keep UAT energy alive after launch:
1. Create an Always-On Feedback Mechanism
A simple form, shared inbox, or internal Slack channel works. Let users submit issues or ideas any time—then route those suggestions to your admin or operations team for triage.
2. Hold Quarterly UAT Reviews
Bring together your original testers (and some fresh voices) to review what’s working, what isn’t, and what’s next. These reviews help prioritize enhancement sprints and keep the roadmap grounded in user needs.
3. Track Usage Analytics
Use Salesforce’s built-in tools or third-party apps to see what features are being used—and which aren’t. If a feature has zero traction, that’s a signal: it’s either unnecessary or unintuitive.
4. Build a Champions Network
Identify users who “get it.” They don’t have to be admins—just curious, engaged, and helpful. These folks can serve as early testers for new functionality and peer resources for their teams.
User Acceptance Testing is more than a pre-launch step—it’s the bridge between what was built and what your users truly need. It’s how you make sure Salesforce doesn’t just work, but works for your business.
When you commit to thoughtful UAT—real users, real scenarios, real feedback—you’re doing more than avoiding bugs. You’re investing in adoption, clean data, trusted reports, and confident teams. That’s what drives real Salesforce ROI.
At Peergenics, we’ve supported hundreds of successful Salesforce implementations, and we’ve seen it again and again: the companies that win post-launch are the ones that take UAT seriously. We’ll help you get it right—from planning and facilitation to feedback management and go-live support.
Need a partner who treats testing like a success lever—not an afterthought?
1. How long should we allocate for UAT in our Salesforce implementation timeline?
Answer: For most mid-sized Salesforce implementations, plan for 2-3 weeks of dedicated UAT time, plus an additional 1-2 weeks for fixing issues and retesting. This typically represents about 15-20% of your overall implementation timeline. Larger or more complex implementations may require longer testing periods. The key is to avoid compressing UAT into just a few days at the end of the project, as this almost always results in rushed testing and missed issues. Remember that effective UAT often happens in multiple rounds, with time for fixes between rounds, rather than as a single event.
2. What's the difference between System Testing and User Acceptance Testing?
Answer: System Testing (often performed by developers or Salesforce administrators) focuses on verifying that the technical aspects of the system work correctly—making sure fields calculate properly, workflows trigger as expected, and there are no technical errors. User Acceptance Testing, by contrast, is performed by actual end users and focuses on whether the system supports real business processes in a way that makes sense to those who will use it daily. Both are necessary, but they serve different purposes and should involve different people. Think of System Testing as making sure the car runs correctly, while UAT ensures it's the right kind of vehicle for your specific journey.
3. Our users are very busy. Can we just have our Salesforce admin or project team handle UAT?
Answer: While it might seem efficient to limit testing to your technical team, this approach almost always leads to post-launch issues. Your Salesforce admin or project team understands how the system is built but typically doesn't have the same perspective as frontline users on how work actually gets done day-to-day. Only your actual end users can validate whether the system will work in real-world scenarios with all their nuances and exceptions. The time investment from users during UAT pays off many times over by preventing adoption issues and expensive fixes after go-live. Consider it an investment in future productivity rather than a distraction from current work.
4. What should we do if UAT uncovers more issues than we can fix before our scheduled go-live date?
Answer: This common scenario requires careful prioritization. First, categorize issues by severity: (1) Critical issues that prevent core business processes from functioning; (2) Important issues that significantly impact efficiency but have workarounds; (3) Minor enhancements that would improve the experience but aren't essential. Address all Category 1 issues before launch, even if it means delaying go-live. For Category 2 issues, determine which can be fixed quickly and which might need to wait for a phase 2 deployment. Be transparent with stakeholders about any necessary timeline adjustments—a slightly delayed successful launch is always better than an on-time failure. Document any deferred issues in a formal post-launch roadmap so users know their feedback wasn't ignored.
5. How can we make UAT more engaging for users who might see it as just another task on their plate?
Answer: Making UAT engaging is crucial for quality feedback. Consider these approaches: (1) Position testing as giving users direct input into a system they'll use daily—emphasize how their feedback will make their jobs easier; (2) Create realistic scenarios that resonate with users' actual work challenges rather than abstract test scripts; (3) Host structured testing sessions with food provided (yes, pizza works!); (4) Recognize and reward thorough testers—consider small incentives for the most helpful feedback; (5) Make the feedback process simple and low-friction; (6) Close the loop by showing users how their input shaped the final system. When users see testing as an opportunity to influence their daily tools rather than a chore, the quality of testing improves dramatically.
