jtbd-analysis

What this skill does

# JTBD Analysis

You perform Jobs-to-be-Done analysis. The core idea: users don't buy products, they "hire" solutions to get a job done in a specific situation. Your output makes that job explicit, structured, and actionable for product, strategy, and ideation work.

## Core rules

- **Formal structure**: main job uses `When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [outcome]`
- **Functional, not solutional**: the job is what the user is trying to accomplish — never a product feature
- **Situation-anchored**: the job lives in a concrete moment/context, not a vague state
- **Non-consumption is always an alternative**: "doing nothing" / manual workaround is a valid competitor
- **Evidence or `[Assumed]`**: every claim traces to supplied research, or is labeled `[Assumed]` with rationale and confidence
- **No fabrication**: do not invent quotes, statistics, interview findings, or competitor facts not in the input

## Input handling

Follow shared foundation §7 — interview mode. Gather at minimum:

| Dimension | Required | Default |
|---|---|---|
| **Target** (product / market / feature / segment) | Yes | — |
| **Mode** (`synthesis` / `autonomous`) | No | `synthesis` if research supplied, else `autonomous` |
| **Research input** (transcripts, quotes, surveys, reviews) | Required in synthesis mode | — |
| **Target user segment** | No | Inferred from target |
| **Known alternatives / competitors** | No | Researched from context |
| **Job level** (`main` / `related` / `both`) | No | `both` |

**Exit interview when**: target is clear and (synthesis mode) research input is available.

## Phase 1 — Setup

### 1. Collect input

Accept:
- A product / feature / market / segment (string, business case, or document reference)
- Research input: interview transcripts, quotes, survey open-text, reviews, observation notes
- No / vague input → interview mode (§7)

### 2. Detect scope

- **Target**: the thing being "hired"
- **Mode**: synthesis (from research) or autonomous (from product context + `[Assumed]` inferences)
- **Research input**: list and identify per-source IDs (e.g., `R-01` = interview with Alex, `R-02` = review excerpt)
- **Target user segment**
- **Job level**

### 3. Confirm scope

Present:

```
**Target**: [product / market / feature]
**Mode**: [synthesis / autonomous]
**Research input**: [N items from K sources, or "none"]
**Target segment**: [segment]
**Job level**: [main / related / both]
```

Ask for confirmation. Ask render mode (per `diagram-rendering` mixin) and output path (default: `/documentation/[case]/jtbd-analysis/`).

## Phase 2 — Context analysis

Identify:
- **Situational triggers**: what moment/event kicks off the job
- **User state before**: emotional, physical, task state at the trigger
- **Environment**: where, with what, with whom
- **Constraints**: time pressure, tools available, stakes

This context feeds the `When [situation]` clause of the main job.

## Phase 3 — Main job identification

Single formal statement:

```
When [situation],
I want to [motivation],
so I can [outcome].
```

Rules:
- **Situation**: concrete moment, not "in general"
- **Motivation**: a verb + functional objective, never a product feature
- **Outcome**: observable or measurable success condition

Examples:
- ✅ "When I'm about to buy something expensive online, I want to compare options quickly, so I can feel confident I'm making the right choice."
- ❌ "I want a comparison tool." (solution, not job)
- ❌ "When shopping, I want a good experience." (too vague)

## Phase 4 — Related jobs

3–6 jobs that surround the main job:

| Relationship | Example |
|---|---|
| **Prerequisite** | Needs to be done before the main job is possible |
| **Parallel** | Happens alongside and contributes |
| **Follow-on** | Happens after and locks in the outcome |

Format each with the same formal structure.

## Phase 5 — Emotional and social jobs

These sit alongside the functional main job:

- **Emotional jobs** — how the user wants to *feel* during / after (e.g., "Feel in control, not overwhelmed")
- **Social jobs** — how the user wants to *be perceived* (e.g., "Be seen as a savvy shopper by peers")

Rules:
- Must be distinct from the functional job, not restatements
- Must trace to evidence (research quotes) or be labeled `[Assumed]`
- Social jobs may not apply to every context — honest "none evident" is acceptable

## Phase 6 — Desired outcome statements (Ulwick)

Produce 5–15 outcome statements in this format:

```
[Direction: minimize | maximize | increase speed of | decrease likelihood of] the [metric] of [object] when [context]
```

Examples:
- "Minimize the time it takes to identify the best option when comparing across 3+ products."
- "Increase the confidence I feel in my choice when committing to a purchase over €200."
- "Decrease the likelihood of missing a better alternative when a deadline is approaching."

Rules:
- Direction is always explicit
- Metric is specific (time, count, likelihood, error rate, ease-of, confidence-level)
- Object is concrete
- Context ties back to the `When [situation]` of the main job

## Phase 7 — Forces of progress

Four forces operating on any switch/hire decision:

| Force | Description | What to capture |
|---|---|---|
| **Push** | Pain / dissatisfaction with status quo | Specific pains from evidence |
| **Pull** | Attraction of the new solution | Benefits users seek |
| **Anxiety** | Fear of the new solution (risk, uncertainty) | Concerns about switching |
| **Habit** | Inertia of the current solution | Reasons to stay with status quo |

For each force:
- **Strength**: `strong` / `moderate` / `weak`
- **Evidence**: ≥1 reference to research input OR `[Assumed]` with rationale
- **Specific items**: list of pushes/pulls/anxieties/habits

## Phase 8 — Competitive alternatives

What else gets hired for the same job:

| Alternative | Category | Why it's hired | Strengths | Gaps |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ... | Direct / Indirect / Non-consumption | ... | ... | ... |

Rules:
- ≥1 direct competitor (another product in the same category)
- ≥1 indirect competitor (different product category, same job)
- ≥1 non-consumption option (doing nothing, manual workaround, delaying) — mandatory
- Non-consumption label rationale: "Most users are actually 'hiring' [X] (e.g., an Excel sheet, a colleague, procrastination)"

## Phase 9 — Underserved outcomes

From Phase 6 outcomes, identify opportunity signals:

| Outcome | Importance | Current satisfaction | Opportunity signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| ... | high / medium / low | high / medium / low | high importance + low satisfaction = high opportunity |

Rules:
- Importance and satisfaction estimates are qualitative (or quantitative if research supports)
- In synthesis mode: anchor in evidence
- In autonomous mode: label estimates `[Assumed]` with rationale
- Opportunity signal = importance − satisfaction (higher gap = higher opportunity)

## Phase 10 — Recommendations

One or two paragraphs:
- Which outcomes have the biggest opportunity signal?
- Where should this analysis feed next? (e.g., `opportunity-scoring`, `brainstorming`, `hmw-framing`)
- What additional research would sharpen low-confidence claims?

## Phase 11 — Diagrams

### 1. Job hierarchy (flowchart)

```mermaid
flowchart TD
    M["MAIN JOB:<br/>[situation → motivation → outcome]"]
    M --> P["Prerequisite:<br/>[job]"]
    M --> PAR["Parallel:<br/>[job]"]
    M --> F["Follow-on:<br/>[job]"]
    M --> E["Emotional:<br/>[how they want to feel]"]
    M --> S["Social:<br/>[how they want to be seen]"]
```

### 2. Forces of progress

```mermaid
flowchart LR
    SQ["Status Quo"]
    NEW["New Solution"]
    SQ -- "PUSH<br/>[strong/moderate/weak]" --> NEW
    NEW -- "PULL<br/>[strong/moderate/weak]" --> SQ
    NEW -. "ANXIETY<br/>[strong/moderate/weak]" .-> SQ
    SQ -. "HABIT<br/>[strong/moderate/weak]" .-> NEW
```

### 3. Outcome opportunity quadrant

```mermaid
quadrantChart
    title Desired Outcome Opportunities — [Target]
    x-axis Low Satis