Loading
Discover what customers truly need by analyzing the "job" they hire your product to do. Use when the user mentions "customer discovery", "why customers churn", "what job does this solve", "competing a
The skill file stays in the publisher's repository.
Paste the copied command in a terminal. It installs this SKILL.md into that agent.
npx skills add wondelai/skills --skill jobs-to-be-done -a cursor -y
Discover what customers truly need by analyzing the "job" they hire your product to do. Use when the user mentions "customer discovery", "why customers churn", "what job does this solve", "competing against luck", "product-market fit", "switching behavior", "milkshake moment", or "functional vs emotional jobs". Also trigger when investigating why users choose competitors, designing features around real customer needs, or reframing a value proposition. Covers JTBD interviews, competition analysis, and jobs-oriented roadmaps. For product positioning, see obviously-awesome. For rapid validation, see design-sprint. For non-leading interview technique, see mom-test.
Discover what customers truly need by analyzing the "job" they hire your product to do. Use when the user mentions "customer discovery", "why customers churn", "what job does this solve", "competing against luck", "product-market fit", "switching behavior", "milkshake moment", or "functional vs emotional jobs". Also trigger when investigating why users choose competitors, designing features around real customer needs, or reframing a value proposition. Covers JTBD interviews, competition analysis, and jobs-oriented roadmaps. For product positioning, see obviously-awesome. For rapid validation, see design-sprint. For non-leading interview technique, see mom-test.
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.
Job to Be Done = the progress a customer wants to make in specific circumstances.
Key elements of the definition:
Goal: 10/10. Score 1 point per satisfied row in the Quick Diagnostic (7 rows) plus up to 3 points for depth: +1 if all three job dimensions are evidenced, +1 if the job statement avoids any product/solution name, +1 if competition includes non-consumption. Bands: 9-10 = job stated without the product, all four forces mapped, three dimensions evidenced, non-obvious competition and Little Hire tracked; 5-6 = job named but one or two diagnostic rows fail (usually missing forces or emotional/social dimensions); <=3 = product-first framing, demographic segmentation, or Pull-only thinking. Always state the current score and the specific diagnostic rows to fix.
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 a 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) |
Core concept: A job statement captures the progress a customer seeks in a specific circumstance, in a structured format separating context, desired progress, and expected outcome.
Why it works: Because jobs are stable while solutions churn, anchoring on the job protects a roadmap from chasing features that the next technology shift makes irrelevant.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| New product ideation | Define the job before brainstorming features | "When I'm commuting alone, I want something to occupy me and satisfy hunger, so I'm not hungry until lunch" |
| Feature prioritization | Evaluate whether a feature serves the core job | Features that advance the stated job beat nice-to-haves |
| Positioning & messaging | Use job statement language in copy | Lead with circumstance and progress, not product specs |
Copy patterns:
See references/innovation-process.md when running an innovation project end-to-end -- the job-hunting methodology, the job atlas, and fill-in statement templates.
Core concept: The decision to "hire" a new product results from four forces: Push (frustration with the current situation), Pull (attraction of the new solution), Anxiety (fear of the new), and Habit (comfort with the current behavior). Change happens only when Push + Pull > Habit + Anxiety.
Why it works: Most innovation efforts only increase Pull while ignoring the anti-change forces -- which is why great products still fail to gain adoption.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Onboarding design | Reduce anxiety with trials, guarantees, social proof | Money-back guarantee answers "what if it doesn't work?" |
| Switching campaigns | Make migration effortless to defeat habit | One-click data import from competitor |
| Content marketing | Awaken push in passive seekers by naming the frustration | "5 signs your current tool is costing you hours every week" |
Copy patterns:
See references/competitive-strategy.md when mapping competitors or writing positioning -- forces analysis, the non-obvious-competition tables, and the jobs-based positioning formula with worked examples.
Core concept: Two distinct decision moments: the Big Hire (purchase/signup, happens once) and the Little Hire (decision to use in the moment, happens repeatedly). Winning the Big Hire does not guarantee the Little Hire.
Why it works: Many products win the sale but lose the customer because they optimize only the purchase decision -- understanding both moments reveals where retention problems truly originate.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Retention analysis | Separate Big Hire from Little Hire metrics | Track "first use after signup" and "weekly active usage" apart from signup conversion |
| Product design | Optimize repeated usage, not just first impressions | Reduce daily-workflow friction even when onboarding is smooth |
| Customer success | Monitor Little Hire signals to predict churn | Declining usage frequency signals upcoming churn |
Copy patterns:
See references/case-studies.md when you need a worked precedent to reason from -- full Big Hire / Little Hire breakdowns of SNHU, American Girl, and Intuit.
Core concept: True competition is everything a customer can "hire" for the same job, often from completely different categories. Competitors are defined by the job, not by industry classification.
Why it works: Category-based analysis creates blind spots: a milkshake competes with bananas, bagels, and podcasts; Netflix competes with TikTok, sleep, and family conversation. Mapping the full landscape around the job reveals threats and opportunities traditional analysis misses.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive analysis | Map all hires for the same job across categories | A PM tool competes with spreadsheets, sticky notes, email, and memory |
| Positioning strategy | Position against the real alternative | Position against "doing it manually", not a named competitor |
| Pricing strategy | Price against the job's value | If the job saves 10 hours/week, price against that time, not similar SaaS |
Copy patterns:
Core concept: Don't ask customers "what do you need" -- they don't know. Instead, reconstruct the purchase timeline (first thought, search, purchase, usage) to uncover the real job.
Why it works: Customers rationalize decisions after the fact and can't articulate latent needs; walking backward through concrete events reveals the true circumstances, forces, and tradeoffs that drove behavior.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| New market entry | Interview recent switchers | Reconstruct what pushed them away and pulled them in |
| Churn reduction | Interview churned customers on their timeline | Was it Big Hire (wrong expectations) or Little Hire (poor daily experience)? |
| Feature discovery | Interview customers using workarounds | Spreadsheets alongside your product reveal an unmet job dimension |
Copy patterns:
Core concept: Build the entire experience -- features, metrics, organization -- around helping the customer accomplish their job, not around internal capabilities or feature parity.
Why it works: When every decision answers "will this help the customer better accomplish their job?", teams avoid feature bloat and build coherent products; if you can't answer it, you don't understand the job yet.
Key insights:
Product applications:
| Context | Application | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Metrics design | Measure job completion | "Time from problem to resolution", not "features used per session" |
| Product roadmap | Prioritize across job dimensions | A functional fix that ignores the emotional dimension may not move the needle |
| Organizational alignment | Structure teams around jobs | A "morning commute job" team owns content, packaging, and distribution |
Copy patterns:
See references/organizational-change.md when adoption is the bottleneck rather than the analysis -- escaping the feature-factory trap, winning executive buy-in, and managing the change.
| Mistake | Why It Fails | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Defining jobs narrowly around your product | Misses the real competitive landscape | Define the job from the customer's perspective, never mentioning your product |
| Ignoring emotional and social dimensions | Functional-only jobs miss why customers choose and stay | Always complete all three dimensions |
| Confusing jobs with goals or tasks | Goals too abstract ("be healthy"), tasks too specific ("click button") | Jobs = progress in specific circumstances |
| Only increasing Pull | Great products fail when switching costs and fear stay high | Map all four forces; design interventions for Anxiety and Habit |
| Winning the Big Hire, ignoring the Little Hire | High acquisition, high churn -- purchased but never used | Track and optimize repeated usage separately from purchase |
| Asking customers "what do you want?" | Rationalization and incremental feature requests | Use timeline-based interviews reconstructing actual behavior |
| Defining competition by category | Blind spots from adjacent categories and non-consumption | Map every alternative hire for the job, including doing nothing |
| Question | If No | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Can you state the job in one sentence without mentioning your product? | Product-focused, not job-focused | Write: "When [circumstances], I want to [progress], so I can [outcome]" |
| Have you mapped all four forces? | Over-investing in Pull, ignoring barriers | Design specific interventions for Anxiety and Habit |
| Do you know the emotional and social dimensions? | May win functionally but lose on experience | Run discovery interviews on feelings and social context |
| Have you identified non-obvious competitors? | Competitive blind spots | List everything hireable for the job, including non-consumption |
| Are you tracking Little Hire separately from Big Hire? | Can't tell acquisition problems from retention problems | Separate purchase-conversion and repeated-usage metrics |
| Can your team explain how each feature serves the job? | Building without strategic grounding | Require proposals to name the job dimension served |
| Have you interviewed customers about their purchase timeline? | Job understanding based on assumptions | Run 10+ interviews reconstructing first-thought-to-usage |
When the inline Quick Diagnostic above is not enough -- you are diagnosing a symptom (low signups, high churn, "used wrong") or need JTBD-specific metrics -- see references/diagnostics.md: the "why aren't they buying" symptom table, churn-pattern tables, and traditional-vs-JTBD metric swaps.
For the complete methodology, case studies, and deeper insights:
Clayton M. Christensen (1952-2020) was the Kim B. Clark Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, best known for the theory of disruptive innovation introduced in The Innovator's Dilemma (1997). He developed Jobs to Be Done as a practical innovation methodology in Competing Against Luck (2016) and was repeatedly ranked the world's #1 management thinker by Thinkers50.