tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills

thinking-jobs-to-be-done

Deciding what to build or why adoption fails.

查看源码

使用方法

  1. 复制安装命令,在自己的智能体环境安装前先检查源码包。
  2. 从原始文档核对所需工具、凭据和支持的宿主。
  3. 说明输入材料与期望交付物,并对照来源检查输出。
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-jobs-to-be-done

开始前需了解

  • 安装不包含模型订阅、API 额度或访问文件的权限。
  • 仓库星数和安装量反映活跃情况,不等于独立质量或安全测试。
仓库原始内容

按源仓库内容呈现,保留标题、案例、代码、表格、链接以及原文引用的演示图片。

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.
来自同一仓库

更多 Skills

全部 Skills