Lune

CHI2026Top-tier venue

Results-Actionability Gap: Understanding How Practitioners Evaluate LLM Products in the Wild

Willem van der Maden, Malak Sadek, Ziang Xiao, Aske Mottelson, Q. Vera Liao, Jichen Zhu

2026Year
2Citations

Abstract

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.

Ask about this paper

Your agent reads all of it.

Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.

Questions to start from

Your agent calls

Luneget_paper_fulltext

Ask in Lune

Free to start. No credit card required.

lune papers fulltext 4ae6f49f-7c88-4d45-88fc-0618f17855d0

Builds on14

Related papers

Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines