tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

thinking-jobs-to-be-done

Deciding what to build or why adoption fails.

소스 보기

사용 방법

  1. 설치 명령을 복사하고 자신의 에이전트 환경에 설치하기 전에 소스 패키지를 확인하세요.
  2. 필요한 도구, 인증 정보, 지원 환경은 원본 문서에서 확인하세요.
  3. 입력과 원하는 산출물을 설명하고 출처와 결과를 대조하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-jobs-to-be-done

시작 전 확인

  • 설치에는 모델 구독, API 한도, 파일 접근 권한이 포함되지 않습니다.
  • 별점 수와 설치 수는 활동 지표이며 독립적인 품질·보안 검증이 아닙니다.
원본 Skill 문서

원본 저장소의 제목, 예시, 코드, 표, 링크, 이미지를 유지해 표시합니다.

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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:

text
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.
같은 저장소의 Skills

더 많은 Skills

모든 Skills