jobs-to-be-done

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Jobs to Be Done Framework

Jobs to Be Done 框架

Framework for discovering innovation based on a fundamental truth: customers don't buy products - they "hire" them to do a specific job in their lives.

这是基于一个核心真相的创新发现框架：客户购买的不是产品——而是“雇佣”产品来完成生活中的某项特定任务。

Fundamental Principle

核心原则

Job to Be Done = the progress a customer wants to make in specific circumstances.

Key elements of the definition:

Progress (not goal, not solution) - customer wants to move from current state to a better one
Circumstances - context determines the job, not customer attributes (demographics are useless)
Hiring/Firing - customer actively chooses a product for the "job"

需要完成的任务（Job to Be Done） = 客户在特定情境下想要取得的进展。

定义的关键要素：

进展（而非目标或解决方案）——客户希望从当前状态转变为更好的状态
情境——决定任务的是情境，而非客户属性（人口统计数据毫无用处）
雇佣/解雇——客户会主动选择产品来完成“任务”

Scoring

评分机制

Goal: 10/10. When reviewing or creating product strategy or positioning, rate it 0-10 based on adherence to the principles below. A 10/10 means full alignment with all guidelines; lower scores indicate gaps to address. Always provide the current score and specific improvements needed to reach 10/10.

目标：10/10分。在评审或制定产品战略或定位时，根据以下原则的契合度给出0-10分。10分意味着完全符合所有准则；分数越低说明存在需要弥补的差距。请始终给出当前分数以及达到10分所需的具体改进措施。

Three Dimensions of Every Job

每项任务的三个维度

Every job has three inseparable dimensions - omitting any means failure:

Dimension	Question	Example (milkshake)
Functional	What does the customer need to do?	Occupy myself during boring commute
Emotional	How do they want to feel?	Have a small treat for myself
Social	How do they want to be perceived?	As a sensible parent (not buying donuts)

每项任务都包含三个不可分割的维度——忽略任何一个都会导致失败：

维度	问题	示例（奶昔）
功能性	客户需要完成什么？	在无聊的通勤途中打发时间
情感性	他们希望拥有怎样的感受？	给自己一点小奖励
社会性	他们希望给他人留下怎样的印象？	作为明智的家长（不买甜甜圈）

Forces of Progress

进展驱动力

The decision to "hire" a new product results from four forces:

PRO-change forces:

Push - frustration with current situation ("this annoys me")
Pull - attraction of new solution ("I want this")

ANTI-change forces: 3. Habit - attachment to current ("I've always done it this way") 4. Anxiety - fear of the new ("what if it doesn't work?")

Change only happens when:

Push + Pull > Habit + Anxiety

Implication: Often it's more effective to reduce anxiety and habit than to increase push/pull.

“雇佣”新产品的决定源于四种驱动力：

推动变革的力量：

推力——对当前状况的不满（“这让我很烦”）
拉力——对新解决方案的向往（“我想要这个”）

阻碍变革的力量： 3. 习惯——对现有方式的依赖（“我一直都是这么做的”） 4. 焦虑——对新事物的恐惧（“如果没用怎么办？”）

只有当

推力 + 拉力 > 习惯 + 焦虑

时，变革才会发生。

启示： 通常，减少焦虑和打破习惯比增强推力/拉力更有效。

Big Hire vs Little Hire

重大雇佣 vs 日常雇佣

Two decision moments:

	Big Hire	Little Hire
What	Purchase/signup decision	Decision to use in the moment
When	Once	Repeatedly
Risk	Product is never used	Product is abandoned
Focus	Marketing, onboarding	Product, UX, retention

Critical: Winning the Big Hire doesn't guarantee the Little Hire. Many products lose at the Little Hire stage.

两个决策时刻：

	重大雇佣	日常雇佣
定义	购买/注册决策	即时使用决策
发生频率	一次	多次重复
风险	产品从未被使用	产品被弃用
关注重点	营销、用户引导	产品、UX、留存

关键提示： 赢得重大雇佣并不保证能赢得日常雇佣。许多产品都在日常雇佣阶段失败。

Discovering Jobs - Methodology

任务发现方法论

Passive vs. Active Job Seeking

被动寻任务 vs 主动寻任务

Passive seeking: Customer is vaguely aware of a problem but not actively shopping. Easier to influence—they haven't set criteria or budget yet.

Active seeking: Customer is actively comparing solutions. More competitive—they have criteria and may have seen competitors.

Key insight: The best customers are often passive seekers whose jobs you've awakened through content and positioning.

See innovation-process.md for detailed job hunting methodology.

被动寻任务： 客户隐约意识到问题，但并未主动寻找解决方案。这类客户更容易被影响——他们还没设定标准或预算。

主动寻任务： 客户正在积极对比解决方案。竞争更激烈——他们已有评判标准，可能已经了解过竞品。

核心洞察： 最优质的客户往往是那些通过内容和定位被唤醒任务需求的被动寻任务者。

详细的任务挖掘方法论请参考 innovation-process.md。

Signals Indicating an Undiscovered Job

未被发现任务的信号

Workarounds - people tinker, hack, combine products
Non-consumption - people opt out of entire category
Compensating behaviors - "I buy X but then need Y and Z too"
Negative emotions - frustration, shame, fear with current solutions

替代方案——人们自行改造、组合产品来解决问题
非消费行为——人们完全避开某一品类
补偿性行为——“我买了X，但还需要Y和Z来配套”
负面情绪——对现有解决方案感到沮丧、羞愧或恐惧

Job Interview - Discovery Questions

任务访谈——发现类问题

Don't ask directly "what do you need" - customers don't know. Investigate the purchase timeline:

First thoughts:

"When did you first think about looking for a solution?"
"What was happening in your life then?"
"What was frustrating you?"

Search:

"What alternatives did you look for?"
"What eliminated options?"
"Who did you talk to about this decision?"

Purchase moment:

"Where were you? What were you doing?"
"What ultimately convinced you to decide?"
"What were you afraid of?"

Usage:

"Is the product doing what you expected?"
"What surprised you?"
"What's still missing?"

不要直接问“你需要什么”——客户自己也不知道。请调查购买时间线：

最初想法阶段：

“你第一次考虑寻找解决方案是什么时候？”
“当时你的生活中发生了什么？”
“什么让你感到沮丧？”

搜索阶段：

“你考虑过哪些替代方案？”
“哪些因素让你排除了一些选项？”
“你和谁讨论过这个决策？”

购买时刻：

“你当时在哪里？在做什么？”
“最终是什么让你下定决心？”
“你当时担心什么？”

使用阶段：

“产品是否达到了你的预期？”
“有什么让你感到意外的地方？”
“还有哪些需求没被满足？”

Job Statement - Format

任务陈述——格式

When _____________ [circumstances/situation]
I want to ______________ [progress to achieve]  
so I can ________ [outcome/benefit]

Example: "When I'm driving alone to work in the morning and have a boring hour ahead, I want something to keep my hands busy and satisfy my hunger, so I'm not hungry until lunch and have a small pleasure to start my day."

当 _____________ [情境/场景]
我想要 ______________ [想要取得的进展]  
这样我就能 ________ [成果/收益]

示例：“当我早上独自开车上班，还有一个小时的无聊路程时，我想要有东西能让手忙起来，同时满足饥饿感，这样我到午餐前都不会饿，还能给一天开个有小确幸的头。”

Competition Through the Jobs Lens

从任务视角看竞争

True competition is everything a customer can "hire" for the same job - often from completely different categories.

Examples of non-obvious competition:

Milkshake competes with: banana, bagel, boredom, podcast
Netflix competes with: TikTok, sleep, family conversation, games
Online course competes with: book, YouTube, mentoring, doing nothing

Strategic implication: Analyze competitors through jobs lens, not product categories.

真正的竞品是客户可以“雇佣”来完成同一任务的所有事物——通常来自完全不同的品类。

非典型竞品示例：

奶昔的竞品包括：香蕉、百吉饼、无聊感、播客
Netflix的竞品包括：TikTok、睡眠、家庭对话、游戏
在线课程的竞品包括：书籍、YouTube、导师指导、什么都不做

战略启示： 从任务视角分析竞品，而非产品品类。

Integration vs Modularization

集成化 vs 模块化

When job is poorly understood → integrate (control entire experience) When job is well understood → modularize (specialize components)

Rule: Integrate where performance is "not good enough" for the job. Modularize where it's "good enough."

Decision criteria for integration:

Do you need to control the experience end-to-end?
Is performance on key dimensions "not good enough"?
Can partners deliver reliably to your standards?

See competitive-strategy.md for strategic positioning.

当任务未被充分理解时 → 集成化（掌控整个体验）当任务被充分理解时 → 模块化（专注于组件专业化）

规则：在任务所需表现“不够好”的环节采用集成化；在表现“足够好”的环节采用模块化。

集成化决策标准：

你是否需要端到端掌控体验？
关键维度的表现是否“不够好”？
合作伙伴能否可靠地达到你的标准？

基于任务的定位请参考 competitive-strategy.md。

Building an Organization Around Jobs

构建以任务为导向的组织

Jobs-Oriented Metrics

任务导向型指标

Instead of measuring:

Customer satisfaction → Measure: whether the job got done
NPS → Measure: reasons for hiring and firing
Feature usage → Measure: progress on the job

不要衡量：

客户满意度 → 改为衡量：任务是否完成
NPS净推荐值 → 改为衡量：雇佣和解雇的原因
功能使用率 → 改为衡量：任务进展情况

Decision Structure

决策架构

Every product decision should answer: "Will this help the customer better accomplish their job?"

If you can't answer this question - you don't understand the job yet.

每个产品决策都应回答：“这能否帮助客户更好地完成他们的任务？”

如果无法回答这个问题——说明你还没理解任务。

Quick Product Diagnostics

快速产品诊断

See: references/diagnostics.md for diagnostic checklist.

诊断清单请参考：references/diagnostics.md。

Examples and Case Studies

示例与案例研究

See: references/case-studies.md for detailed analyses (SNHU, American Girl, Intuit).

详细分析请参考：references/case-studies.md（南新罕布什尔大学、美国女孩、Intuit）。