Back to Details

discovery-interview-prep

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Purpose

目的

Guide product managers through preparing for customer discovery interviews by asking adaptive questions about research goals, customer segments, constraints, and methodologies. Use this to design effective interview plans, craft targeted questions, avoid common biases, and maximize learning from limited customer access—ensuring discovery interviews yield actionable insights rather than confirmation bias or surface-level feedback.
This is not a script generator—it's a strategic prep process that outputs a tailored interview plan with methodology, question framework, and success criteria.
通过询问关于研究目标、客户群体、约束条件和方法论的适应性问题，引导产品经理为客户发现访谈做准备。使用本工具设计有效的访谈计划、制定针对性问题、规避常见偏见，并在客户接触有限的情况下最大化学习成果——确保发现访谈能产出可落地的洞察，而非确认偏见或表面反馈。
这不是一个脚本生成器——而是一个战略性的准备流程，输出包含方法论、问题框架和成功标准的定制化访谈计划。

Key Concepts

核心概念

The Discovery Interview Prep Flow

发现访谈准备流程

An interactive process that:
  1. Gathers product/problem context (marketing materials, assumptions)
  2. Defines research goals (what you're trying to learn)
  3. Identifies target customer segment and access constraints
  4. Recommends interview methodology (Jobs-to-be-Done, problem validation, switch interviews, etc.)
  5. Generates interview framework with questions, biases to avoid, and success metrics
一个交互式流程，包含以下步骤：
  1. 收集产品/问题背景（营销材料、假设）
  2. 定义研究目标（你想要了解的内容）
  3. 确定目标客户群体和接触限制
  4. 推荐访谈方法论（Jobs-to-be-Done、问题验证、转换访谈等）
  5. 生成包含问题、需规避的偏见和成功指标的访谈框架

Why This Works

为什么这一方法有效

  • Goal-driven: Aligns interview approach to what you need to learn
  • Adaptive: Adjusts methodology based on product stage (idea vs. existing product) and access constraints
  • Bias-aware: Highlights common pitfalls (leading questions, confirmation bias, solution-first thinking)
  • Actionable: Outputs interview guide ready to use
  • 目标驱动： 使访谈方法与你需要了解的内容对齐
  • 适应性： 根据产品阶段（创意阶段 vs 现有产品）和接触限制调整方法论
  • 偏见意识： 突出常见陷阱（诱导性问题、确认偏见、先入为主的解决方案思维）
  • 可落地： 输出可直接使用的访谈指南

Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)

反模式（本工具不适用的场景）

  • Not a user testing script: Discovery = learning problems; testing = validating solutions
  • Not a sales demo: Don't pitch—listen and learn
  • Not surveys at scale: Deep qualitative interviews (5-10 people), not broad surveys (100+ people)
  • 不是用户测试脚本： 发现访谈=了解问题；测试=验证解决方案
  • 不是销售演示： 不要推销——倾听和学习
  • 不是大规模调查： 深度定性访谈（5-10人），而非广泛调查（100+人）

When to Use This

适用场景

  • Starting product discovery (validating problem space)
  • Repositioning an existing product (understanding new market)
  • Investigating churn or drop-off (retention interviews)
  • Evaluating feature ideas before building
  • Preparing for customer development sprints
  • 启动产品发现（验证问题领域）
  • 重新定位现有产品（了解新市场）
  • 调查客户流失或用户流失（留存访谈）
  • 在开发前评估功能创意
  • 为客户开发冲刺做准备

When NOT to Use This

不适用场景

  • User testing a prototype (use usability testing frameworks instead)
  • Quantitative research at scale (use surveys, analytics)
  • When you already know the problem (move to solution validation)
  • 对原型进行用户测试（改用可用性测试框架）
  • 大规模定量研究（使用调查、分析工具）
  • 你已经明确问题（进入解决方案验证阶段）

Facilitation Source of Truth

引导流程参考标准

Use 
workshop-facilitation
 as the default interaction protocol for this skill.
It defines:
  • session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
  • one-question turns with plain-language prompts
  • progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
  • interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
  • numbered recommendations at decision points
  • quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include 
    Other (specify)
    when useful)
This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
使用 
workshop-facilitation
 作为本技能的默认交互协议。
它定义了：
  • 会话提醒 + 进入模式（引导式、背景信息导入、最佳猜测）
  • 单次一问的提问模式，使用直白的提示语
  • 进度标签（例如：背景问题 Qx/8、评分问题 Qx/5）
  • 中断处理和暂停/恢复机制
  • 决策点的编号式建议
  • 常规问题的快速选择编号选项（必要时包含「其他（请说明）」）
本文件定义了特定领域的评估内容。若存在冲突，以本文件的领域逻辑为准。

Application

应用方式

This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions, offering 3-4 enumerated options at each step.
本交互式技能最多提出4个适应性问题，每个步骤提供3-4个编号选项。

Step 0: Gather Context (Before Questions)

步骤0：收集背景信息（提问前）

Agent suggests:
Before we design your interview plan, let's gather context:
For Your Own Product (Existing or Planned):
  • Problem hypothesis or product concept description
  • Target customer segment (if known)
  • Existing research (support tickets, churn data, user feedback)
  • Product website or positioning materials
  • Key assumptions you're trying to validate
For Investigating an Existing Problem:
  • Customer complaints, support tickets, or churn reasons
  • Hypotheses about why customers leave or struggle
  • Competitive alternatives customers switch to
If Exploring a New Problem Space:
  • Find similar products or adjacent solutions
  • Copy competitor materials, customer reviews (G2, Capterra), or community discussions (Reddit, forums)
  • We'll use these to frame hypotheses
You can paste this content directly, or we can proceed with a brief description.
Agent建议：
在设计你的访谈计划之前，我们先收集一些背景信息：
针对你自己的产品（现有或规划中）：
  • 问题假设或产品概念描述
  • 目标客户群体（若已知）
  • 现有研究（支持工单、流失数据、用户反馈）
  • 产品官网或定位材料
  • 你想要验证的核心假设
针对现有问题的调查：
  • 客户投诉、支持工单或流失原因
  • 关于客户为何离开或遇到困难的假设
  • 客户转向的竞品替代方案
针对新问题领域的探索：
  • 寻找类似产品或相关解决方案
  • 复制竞品材料、客户评价（G2、Capterra）或社区讨论（Reddit、论坛）
  • 我们将用这些内容构建假设
你可以直接粘贴上述内容，或简要描述相关信息。

Question 1: Research Goal

问题1：研究目标

Agent asks: "What's the primary goal of these discovery interviews? (What do you need to learn?)"
Offer 4 enumerated options:
  1. Problem validation — "Confirm that a problem exists and is painful enough to solve" (for new product ideas)
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done discovery — "Understand what customers are trying to accomplish and why current solutions fail" (for product strategy)
  3. Retention/churn investigation — "Figure out why customers leave or don't activate" (for existing products with churn issues)
  4. Feature prioritization — "Validate which problems/features matter most to customers" (for roadmap planning)
Or describe your own research goal (be specific: what question are you trying to answer?).
User response: [Selection or custom]
Agent提问： "这些发现访谈的主要目标是什么？（你需要了解什么内容？）"
提供4个编号选项：
  1. 问题验证 — "确认问题确实存在且足够值得解决"（适用于新产品创意）
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done 发现 — "了解客户想要完成的任务，以及当前解决方案为何失效"（适用于产品战略）
  3. 留存/流失调查 — "找出客户离开或未激活的原因"（适用于存在流失问题的现有产品）
  4. 功能优先级评估 — "验证哪些问题/功能对客户最重要"（适用于路线图规划）
或者描述你自己的研究目标（请具体说明：你想要解答什么问题？）。
用户回复： [选择或自定义内容]

Question 2: Target Customer Segment

问题2：目标客户群体

Agent asks: "Who are you interviewing? (Be as specific as possible.)"
Offer 4 enumerated options (adapted based on Q1):
Example (if Q1 = Problem validation):
  1. People who experience the problem regularly — E.g., "Small business owners who manually process invoices weekly" (high pain frequency)
  2. People who've tried to solve it — E.g., "Users who've tried 2+ competing solutions and churned" (understand failures)
  3. People in the target segment (regardless of problem awareness) — E.g., "All freelancers, even if they don't realize invoicing is a problem" (uncover latent needs)
  4. People who've recently experienced the problem — E.g., "Customers who churned in the last 30 days" (fresh memory)
Or describe your specific target segment (role, company size, behaviors, demographics).
Adaptation tip: Use personas or customer segments from provided materials.
User response: [Selection or custom]
Agent提问： "你要访谈的对象是谁？（请尽可能具体。）"
提供4个编号选项（根据问题1的答案调整）：
示例（若问题1=问题验证）：
  1. 经常遇到该问题的人群 — 例如：「每周手动处理发票的小企业主」（痛苦频率高）
  2. 曾尝试解决该问题的人群 — 例如：「使用过2款以上竞品并流失的用户」（了解失败原因）
  3. 目标群体中的所有人（无论是否意识到问题） — 例如：「所有自由职业者，即使他们没意识到发票处理是个问题」（挖掘潜在需求）
  4. 最近遇到该问题的人群 — 例如：「过去30天内流失的客户」（记忆清晰）
或者描述你特定的目标群体（角色、公司规模、行为、人口统计信息）。
调整提示： 使用提供材料中的用户画像或客户群体。
用户回复： [选择或自定义内容]

Question 3: Constraints

问题3：约束条件

Agent asks: "What constraints are you working with for these interviews?"
Offer 4 enumerated options:
  1. Limited access — "Can only interview 5-10 customers, need results in 2 weeks" (common for startups or fast timelines)
  2. Existing customer base — "Have 100+ active customers, can recruit easily" (mature product advantage)
  3. Cold outreach required — "No existing customers; need to recruit from scratch via LinkedIn, ads, or communities" (new product challenge)
  4. Internal stakeholders only — "Can interview sales/support teams who talk to customers daily" (proxy research, less ideal but pragmatic)
Or describe your specific constraints (budget, time, access, team capacity).
User response: [Selection or custom]
Agent提问： "这些访谈你面临哪些约束条件？"
提供4个编号选项：
  1. 接触受限 — "只能访谈5-10位客户，需在2周内得到结果"（初创公司或快速项目的常见情况）
  2. 已有客户基础 — "拥有100+活跃客户，可轻松招募"（成熟产品的优势）
  3. 需要陌生触达 — "没有现有客户；需通过LinkedIn、广告或社区从零招募"（新产品的挑战）
  4. 仅能访谈内部利益相关者 — "可以访谈日常与客户沟通的销售/支持团队"（代理研究，不够理想但务实）
或者描述你特定的约束条件（预算、时间、接触渠道、团队能力）。
用户回复： [选择或自定义内容]

Question 4: Interview Methodology

问题4：访谈方法论

Agent asks: "Based on your goal ([Q1]), target segment ([Q2]), and constraints ([Q3]), here are recommended interview methodologies:"
Offer 3-4 enumerated options (context-aware based on Q1-Q3):
Example (if Q1 = Problem validation, Q2 = People who experience problem regularly, Q3 = Limited access):
  1. Problem validation interviews (Mom Test style) — Ask about past behavior, not hypotheticals. Focus on: "Tell me about the last time you [experienced the problem]. What did you try? What happened?" (Best for: Validating if problem is real and painful)
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) interviews — Focus on what customers are trying to accomplish, not what they want. Ask: "What were you trying to get done? What alternatives did you consider? What made you choose X?" (Best for: Understanding motivations and switching behavior)
  3. Switch interviews — Interview customers who recently switched from a competitor or alternative. Ask: "What prompted you to look for a new solution? What was the 'push' away from the old tool? What 'pulled' you to try ours?" (Best for: Understanding competitive positioning and unmet needs)
  4. Timeline/journey mapping interviews — Walk through their entire experience chronologically. Ask: "Walk me through the first time you encountered this problem. What happened next? How did you try to solve it?" (Best for: Uncovering full context and pain points)
Choose a number, combine approaches (e.g., '1 & 2'), or describe your own methodology.
Adaptation examples:
  • If Q1 = Retention/churn → Prioritize "Exit interviews" or "Switch interviews (away from your product)"
  • If Q1 = Feature prioritization → Prioritize "Opportunity solution tree interviews" or "Kano model interviews"
  • If Q3 = Internal stakeholders only → Add caveat: "Proxy research (talking to sales/support) is better than nothing, but validate with real customers ASAP"
User response: [Selection or custom]
Agent提问： "根据你的目标([问题1])、目标群体([问题2])和约束条件([问题3])，以下是推荐的访谈方法论："
提供3-4个编号选项（根据问题1-3的答案调整上下文）：
示例（若问题1=问题验证，问题2=经常遇到该问题的人群，问题3=接触受限）：
  1. 问题验证访谈（Mom Test 风格） — 询问过去的行为，而非假设性问题。重点：「告诉我你最近一次[遇到该问题]的经历。你尝试了什么？结果如何？」（最适合：验证问题是否真实且足够痛苦）
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) 访谈 — 关注客户想要完成的任务，而非他们想要的东西。提问：「你当时想要完成什么任务？你考虑过哪些替代方案？你为什么选择X？」（最适合：了解动机和转换行为）
  3. 转换访谈 — 访谈最近从竞品或替代方案转向的客户。提问：「是什么促使你寻找新的解决方案？是什么让你放弃旧工具？是什么吸引你尝试我们的产品？」（最适合：了解竞争定位和未被满足的需求）
  4. 时间线/旅程映射访谈 — 按时间顺序梳理他们的完整体验。提问：「带我回顾你第一次遇到这个问题的经历。之后发生了什么？你尝试了哪些解决方法？」（最适合：挖掘完整背景和痛点）
选择编号，组合多种方法（例如：「1 & 2」），或描述你自己的方法论。
调整示例：
  • 若问题1=留存/流失 → 优先选择「退出访谈」或「转换访谈（离开你的产品）」
  • 若问题1=功能优先级评估 → 优先选择「机会解决方案树访谈」或「Kano模型访谈」
  • 若问题3=仅能访谈内部利益相关者 → 添加提示：「代理研究（与销售/支持团队沟通）聊胜于无，但请尽快用真实客户验证结果」
用户回复： [选择或自定义内容]

Output: Generate Interview Plan

输出：生成访谈计划

After collecting responses, the agent generates a tailored interview plan:
markdown
undefined
收集回复后，Agent将生成定制化的访谈计划：
markdown
undefined

Discovery Interview Plan

客户发现访谈计划

Research Goal: [From Q1] Target Segment: [From Q2] Constraints: [From Q3] Methodology: [From Q4]
研究目标： [来自问题1] 目标群体： [来自问题2] 约束条件： [来自问题3] 方法论： [来自问题4]

Interview Framework

访谈框架

Opening (5 minutes)

开场（5分钟）

  • Build rapport: "Thanks for taking the time. I'm [name], and I'm researching [problem space]. This isn't a sales call—I'm here to learn from your experience."
  • Set expectations: "I'll ask about your experiences with [topic]. There are no right answers. Feel free to be honest—critical feedback is most helpful."
  • Get consent: "Is it okay if I take notes / record this conversation?"
  • 建立信任： "感谢你抽出时间。我是[姓名]，正在研究[问题领域]。这不是销售电话——我来这里是为了从你的经历中学习。"
  • 设定预期： "我会询问你关于[主题]的经历。没有正确答案，请畅所欲言——批判性反馈最有帮助。"
  • 获取同意： "我可以做笔记/录下这次对话吗？"

Core Questions (30-40 minutes)

核心问题（30-40分钟）

Based on your methodology ([Q4]), here are suggested questions:
根据你的方法论([问题4])，以下是建议的问题：

[Methodology Name] Questions:

[方法论名称] 问题：

  1. [Question 1] — [Rationale for asking this]
    • Follow-up: [Dig deeper with...]
    • Avoid: [Don't ask leading version like...]
  2. [Question 2] — [Rationale]
    • Follow-up: [...]
    • Avoid: [...]
  3. [Question 3] — [Rationale]
    • Follow-up: [...]
    • Avoid: [...]
  4. [Question 4] — [Rationale]
    • Follow-up: [...]
    • Avoid: [...]
  5. [Question 5] — [Rationale]
    • Follow-up: [...]
    • Avoid: [...]
Example (if Methodology = Problem validation - Mom Test style):
  1. "Tell me about the last time you [experienced this problem]." — Gets specific, recent behavior (not hypothetical)
    • Follow-up: "What were you trying to accomplish? What made it hard? What did you try?"
    • Avoid: "Would you use a tool that solves this?" (leading, hypothetical)
  2. "How do you currently handle [this problem]?" — Reveals workarounds, alternatives, pain intensity
    • Follow-up: "How much time/money does that take? What's frustrating about it?"
    • Avoid: "Don't you think that's inefficient?" (leading)
  3. "Can you walk me through what you did step-by-step?" — Uncovers details, edge cases, context
    • Follow-up: "What happened next? Where did you get stuck?"
    • Avoid: "Was it hard?" (yes/no question, not useful)
  4. "Have you tried other solutions for this?" — Reveals competitive landscape, unmet needs
    • Follow-up: "What did you like/dislike? Why did you stop using it?"
    • Avoid: "Would you pay for a better solution?" (hypothetical)
  5. "If you had a magic wand, what would change?" — Opens space for ideal outcomes (but treat with skepticism—focus on past behavior, not wishes)
    • Follow-up: "Why does that matter to you? What would that enable?"
    • Avoid: Taking feature requests literally
  1. [问题1] — [提问理由]
    • 跟进问题： [深入询问...]
    • 需规避： [不要问类似...的诱导性问题]
  2. [问题2] — [提问理由]
    • 跟进问题： [...]
    • 需规避： [...]
  3. [问题3] — [提问理由]
    • 跟进问题： [...]
    • 需规避： [...]
  4. [问题4] — [提问理由]
    • 跟进问题： [...]
    • 需规避： [...]
  5. [问题5] — [提问理由]
    • 跟进问题： [...]
    • 需规避： [...]
示例（若方法论=问题验证 - Mom Test 风格）：
  1. 「告诉我你最近一次[遇到这个问题]的经历。」 — 获取具体、近期的行为（而非假设）
    • 跟进问题： 「你当时想要完成什么任务？是什么让这件事变得困难？你尝试了什么？」
    • 需规避： 「你会使用解决这个问题的工具吗？」（诱导性、假设性问题）
  2. 「你目前如何处理[这个问题]？」 — 揭示变通方法、替代方案、痛苦程度
    • 跟进问题： 「这花费了你多少时间/金钱？你觉得最令人沮丧的是什么？」
    • 需规避： 「你不觉得这效率很低吗？」（诱导性问题）
  3. 「你能一步步告诉我你是怎么做的吗？」 — 挖掘细节、边缘情况、背景信息
    • 跟进问题： 「之后发生了什么？你在哪里遇到了困难？」
    • 需规避： 「这很难吗？」（是非题，没有参考价值）
  4. 「你尝试过其他解决这个问题的方案吗？」 — 揭示竞争格局、未被满足的需求
    • 跟进问题： 「你喜欢/不喜欢什么？你为什么停止使用它？」
    • 需规避： 「你会为更好的解决方案付费吗？」（假设性问题）
  5. 「如果你有一根魔法棒，你会改变什么？」 — 为理想结果留出空间（但需持怀疑态度——关注过去的行为，而非愿望）
    • 跟进问题： 「为什么这对你很重要？这能让你实现什么？」
    • 需规避： 直接将其视为功能需求

Closing (5 minutes)

收尾（5分钟）

  • Summarize: "Just to recap, I heard that [key insights]. Did I get that right?"
  • Ask for referrals: "Do you know anyone else who experiences this problem? Could you introduce me?"
  • Thank them: "This was incredibly helpful. I really appreciate your time."
  • 总结： "我来总结一下，我听到的关键洞察是[核心洞察]。我理解的对吗？"
  • 请求推荐： "你认识其他遇到这个问题的人吗？可以介绍我认识吗？"
  • 感谢： "这非常有帮助，我很感谢你的时间。"

Biases to Avoid

需规避的偏见

  1. Confirmation bias: Don't ask "Don't you think X is a problem?" → Ask "Tell me about your experience with X."
  2. Leading questions: Don't ask "Would you use this?" → Ask "What have you tried? Why did it work/fail?"
  3. Hypothetical questions: Don't ask "If we built Y, would you pay?" → Ask "What do you currently pay for? Why?"
  4. Pitching disguised as research: Don't say "We're building Z to solve X" → Say "I'm researching X. Tell me about your experience."
  5. Yes/no questions: Don't ask "Is invoicing hard?" → Ask "Walk me through your invoicing process."
  1. 确认偏见： 不要问「你不觉得X是个问题吗？」→ 问「告诉我你关于X的经历。」
  2. 诱导性问题： 不要问「你会使用这个吗？」→ 问「你尝试过什么？为什么成功/失败？」
  3. 假设性问题： 不要问「如果我们开发Y，你会付费吗？」→ 问「你目前为哪些服务付费？为什么？」
  4. 伪装成研究的推销： 不要说「我们正在开发Z来解决X」→ 说「我正在研究X。告诉我你的经历。」
  5. 是非题： 不要问「发票处理很难吗？」→ 问「带我回顾你的发票处理流程。」

Success Criteria

成功标准

You'll know these interviews are successful if:
✅ You hear specific stories, not generic complaints — "Last Tuesday, I spent 3 hours..." vs. "Invoicing is annoying" ✅ You uncover past behavior, not hypothetical wishes — "I tried Zapier but quit after 2 weeks" vs. "I'd probably use automation" ✅ You identify patterns across 3+ interviews — Same pain points emerge independently ✅ You're surprised by something — If everything confirms your assumptions, you're asking leading questions ✅ You can quote customers verbatim — Actual language = authentic insights
当你满足以下条件时，说明这些访谈是成功的：
✅ 你听到具体的故事，而非泛泛的抱怨 — 例如「上周二，我花了3小时...」而非「发票处理很烦人」 ✅ 你挖掘到过去的行为，而非假设性的愿望 — 例如「我试过Zapier但2周后就放弃了」而非「我可能会使用自动化工具」 ✅ 你在3次以上访谈中发现模式 — 相同的痛点独立出现 ✅ 你发现了意外的内容 — 如果所有内容都验证了你的假设，说明你在问诱导性问题 ✅ 你可以引用客户的原话 — 真实的语言=真实的洞察

Interview Logistics

访谈后勤安排

Recruiting:
  • [Based on Q3 constraints, suggest recruitment channels]
  • Example (if Q3 = Limited access): "Reach out to 20-30 people to get 5-10 interviews (33% response rate is typical)"
  • Example (if Q3 = Existing customers): "Email 50 customers with $50 Amazon gift card incentive"
Scheduling:
  • 45-60 minutes per interview (30-40 min conversation + buffer)
  • Record if possible (with consent), or take detailed notes
  • Schedule 2-3 per day max (you need time to synthesize)
Synthesis:
  • After each interview, write key insights immediately (memory fades fast)
  • After 5 interviews, look for patterns (common pains, jobs, workarounds)
  • Use 
    problem-statement.md
    to frame findings
Ready to start recruiting and interviewing? Let me know if you'd like to refine any part of this plan.

---
招募：
  • [根据问题3的约束条件，推荐招募渠道]
  • 示例（若问题3=接触受限）： 「联系20-30人，以获得5-10次访谈（通常回复率为33%）」
  • 示例（若问题3=已有客户基础）： 「向50位客户发送邮件，提供50美元亚马逊礼品卡作为激励」
日程安排：
  • 每次访谈45-60分钟（30-40分钟对话 + 缓冲时间）
  • 如有可能请录音（需获得同意），或做详细笔记
  • 每天最多安排2-3次访谈（你需要时间整理信息）
信息整理：
  • 每次访谈后立即写下关键洞察（记忆会很快消退）
  • 完成5次访谈后，寻找模式（共同的痛点、任务、变通方法）
  • 使用 
    problem-statement.md
    整理发现结果
准备好开始招募和访谈了吗？如果需要优化计划的任何部分，请告诉我。

---

Examples

示例

Example 1: Good Discovery Interview Prep (Problem Validation)

示例1：优秀的发现访谈准备（问题验证）

Step 0 - Context: User shares hypothesis: "Freelancers waste time chasing late payments manually."
Q1 Response: "Problem validation — Confirm that late payment follow-ups are painful enough to solve"
Q2 Response: "People who experience the problem regularly — Freelancers who invoice 5+ clients monthly"
Q3 Response: "Cold outreach required — No existing customers; need to recruit via LinkedIn, Reddit, freelancer communities"
Q4 Response: "Problem validation interviews (Mom Test style) — Focus on past behavior, not hypotheticals"
Generated Plan: Includes 5 Mom Test-style questions (last time you chased a late payment, how do you currently handle it, what have you tried, etc.), biases to avoid (leading questions, hypotheticals), and success criteria (specific stories, past behavior, patterns across 3+ interviews).
Why this works:
  • Goal is clear (validate if problem is real)
  • Segment is specific (freelancers with 5+ clients/month)
  • Methodology matches goal (Mom Test for validation)
  • Questions focus on past behavior, not wishes
  • Success criteria are measurable
步骤0 - 背景信息： 用户分享假设：「自由职业者在手动追讨逾期付款上浪费时间。」
问题1回复： "问题验证 — 确认追讨逾期付款的痛苦程度足够值得解决"
问题2回复： "经常遇到该问题的人群 — 每月为5个以上客户开具发票的自由职业者"
问题3回复： "需要陌生触达 — 没有现有客户；需通过LinkedIn、Reddit、自由职业者社区招募"
问题4回复： "问题验证访谈（Mom Test 风格） — 关注过去的行为，而非假设性问题"
生成的计划： 包含5个Mom Test风格的问题（最近一次追讨逾期付款的经历、目前如何处理、尝试过什么等）、需规避的偏见（诱导性问题、假设性问题），以及成功标准（具体故事、过去的行为、3次以上访谈中的模式）。
为何有效：
  • 目标明确（验证问题是否真实存在）
  • 群体具体（每月服务5个以上客户的自由职业者）
  • 方法论与目标匹配（Mom Test用于验证）
  • 问题关注过去的行为，而非愿望
  • 成功标准可衡量

Common Pitfalls

常见陷阱

Pitfall 1: Asking What Customers Want

陷阱1：询问客户想要什么

Symptom: "What features do you want us to build?"
Consequence: You get feature requests, not problems. Customers don't know solutions.
Fix: Ask about past behavior: "Tell me about the last time you struggled with X."
症状： 「你希望我们开发什么功能？」
后果： 你得到的是功能需求，而非问题。客户不知道解决方案。
解决方法： 询问过去的行为：「告诉我你最近一次在X上遇到困难的经历。」

Pitfall 2: Pitching Instead of Listening

陷阱2：推销而非倾听

Symptom: Spending 20 minutes explaining your product idea
Consequence: Customer feels obligated to be nice. No honest feedback.
Fix: Don't mention your solution until the last 5 minutes (if at all). Focus on their problems.
症状： 花20分钟解释你的产品创意
后果： 客户觉得有义务表现友好，不会给出诚实的反馈。
解决方法： 直到最后5分钟（如果有的话）再提及你的解决方案。专注于他们的问题。

Pitfall 3: Interviewing the Wrong People

陷阱3：访谈错误的对象

Symptom: Interviewing friends, family, or people who don't experience the problem
Consequence: Polite feedback, not real insights.
Fix: Interview people who experience the problem regularly and recently.
症状： 访谈朋友、家人或未遇到该问题的人
后果： 得到礼貌的反馈，而非真实的洞察。
解决方法： 访谈经常且最近遇到该问题的人。

Pitfall 4: Stopping at 1-2 Interviews

陷阱4：仅做1-2次访谈就停止

Symptom: "We talked to 2 people, they liked it, let's build!"
Consequence: Small sample = confirmation bias.
Fix: Interview 5-10 people minimum. Look for patterns, not one-off feedback.
症状： 「我们和2个人聊过，他们喜欢这个创意，开始开发吧！」
后果： 样本量小=确认偏见。
解决方法： 至少访谈5-10人。寻找模式，而非单一反馈。

Pitfall 5: Not Recording Insights

陷阱5：未记录洞察

Symptom: Relying on memory after interviews
Consequence: Lose details, misremember quotes, can't spot patterns.
Fix: Record (with consent) or take detailed notes. Synthesize immediately after each interview.
症状： 依赖访谈后的记忆
后果： 丢失细节、记错引用、无法发现模式。
解决方法： 录音（需获得同意）或做详细笔记。每次访谈后立即整理信息。

References

参考资料

Related Skills

相关技能

  • problem-statement.md
    — Use interview insights to frame problem statement
  • proto-persona.md
    — Define interview target segment
  • jobs-to-be-done.md
    — JTBD methodology for interviews
  • problem-statement.md
    — 使用访谈洞察构建问题陈述
  • proto-persona.md
    — 定义访谈目标群体
  • jobs-to-be-done.md
    — 用于访谈的JTBD方法论

External Frameworks

外部框架

  • Rob Fitzpatrick, The Mom Test (2013) — How to ask good questions without biasing answers
  • Clayton Christensen, Jobs to Be Done — Interview methodology for understanding motivations
  • Teresa Torres, Continuous Discovery Habits (2021) — Opportunity solution tree interviews
  • Rob Fitzpatrick, The Mom Test (2013) — 如何提出好问题而不影响答案
  • Clayton Christensen, Jobs to Be Done — 用于了解动机的访谈方法论
  • Teresa Torres, Continuous Discovery Habits (2021) — 机会解决方案树访谈

Dean's Work

Dean的工作

  • Problem Framing Canvas (synthesizes interview findings)
Skill type: Interactive Suggested filename: 
discovery-interview-prep.md
Suggested placement: 
/skills/interactive/
Dependencies: Uses 
problem-statement.md
, 
proto-persona.md
, 
jobs-to-be-done.md
  • Problem Framing Canvas（整理访谈发现的画布）
技能类型： 交互式 建议文件名： 
discovery-interview-prep.md
建议存放位置： 
/skills/interactive/
依赖项： 使用 
problem-statement.md
, 
proto-persona.md
, 
jobs-to-be-done.md