Use when a selective defect needs IS/IS-NOT difference analysis or a consequential option choice needs must/want weighting and adverse-consequence comparison.
Coding
thinking-jobs-to-be-done
Try itDeciding what to build or why adoption fails. Recover the progress users hire a solution for under a circumstance, then rank by outcome and competing workarounds.
What it does
Deciding what to build or why adoption fails. Recover the progress users hire a solution for under a circumstance, then rank by outcome and competing workarounds.
The skill document
Jobs to Be Done
Core rule: users hire solutions for progress in a situation. Prioritize the job, forces, outcome, and competing workaround—not the feature list.
When to Use
- Choosing what to build, cut, or prioritize when user need is unclear
- Explaining low adoption of a shipped feature
- Mapping competition beyond same-category products (email, spreadsheets, manual work, non-consumption)
- Positioning or research when the progress sought is contested
Requires at least one evidence source: PRD/spec, tickets, support/sales notes, analytics/logs, or current product behavior. If none exist, name the research gap; do not invent quotes.
When NOT to Use
- Pure execution once the job is known (bug fix, schema, CI, performance)—implement, do not rediscover the job
- Retro-justifying a decision already locked—framework theater
- Infrastructure/internal work with no end-user progress decision
- When the open question is only how to implement a settled job
Procedure
- Name performers and circumstance. Who hires a solution, in what trigger situation, how often, and with what stakes. Prefer primary performers with daily high-stakes jobs over rare secondary ones.
- State the job, not the solution. Frame:
When [circumstance], I want to [progress], so I can [outcome]. Reject solution-shaped statements ("use Slack", "add a dashboard"). Capture functional, emotional, and social dimensions only if evidence supports them. - Map forces and switch. From artifacts: what push made the old way fail, what pull the new progress offers, what anxiety blocks switching, what habit keeps the status quo. List what they hire today—including non-software and non-consumption.
- Define done and outcome metrics. How the performer knows the job is finished. List outcomes to minimize and maximize (time-to-progress, rework, confidence, surprises). Prefer frequent, poorly served jobs over rare, adequately worked-around ones.
- Score candidates against the job. For each feature/priority: which job step it serves, performer share, frequency, quality of alternatives. Promote high-frequency underserved dimensions; demote polished work for well-served or low-stakes jobs.
- Strongest countercase. State the best case that the stated job is wrong (wrong performer, vanity metric, process-is-the-job, competition is actually non-consumption). If the countercase fits evidence better, revise the job before recommending build.
- Stop. Stop when one primary job statement, competing set, and outcome metrics are evidence-backed enough to change a build/position decision—or when artifacts cannot answer and research is the only next step.
Output
Produce a JTBD decision artifact:
Job statement: When …, I want to …, so I can …
Performers: primary / secondary (frequency, stakes)
Forces: push / pull / anxiety / habit
Competition: direct | indirect | non-consumption
Outcomes: minimize […] ; maximize […]
Priority implication: build / cut / reposition — because job gap is …
Countercase checked: …
Evidence used / gaps: …
Verification
- Falsify: If replacing the job statement with a feature name does not change the recommendation, you never left solution-space—rewrite the job from circumstance and progress.
- Stop: Do not keep mapping job steps once the ranking decision is stable.
- Over-application guard: Skip on pure implementation tasks and known jobs. Never fabricate user quotes or personas to fill missing evidence.
Related skills
Use when search or investigation could run forever. Set an explicit good-enough threshold first, then stop at the first option that clears it.
Use when longevity of a non-perishable option matters. Treat survival duration as a remaining-life prior, then check domain drift before favoring the proven.
Use when the reflex is to add a feature, layer, or process. Prefer removing harmful or nonessential elements first, with an irreversibility guard before deletion.
Before heavy deliberation, classify the decision as cheap or costly to undo; decide two-way doors fast and stage one-way doors to preserve options.
When unsure which thinking skill fits, map domain and problem type, then return NONE or one primary skill by default (at most three complementary).