Free Agent Skill
Jobs to Be Done
Diagnose what "job" a customer is actually hiring a product, service, or workaround to do, using the Jobs-to-be-Done framework — progress in a specific circumstance, forces of progress, switch interview, job statements, and desired-outcome scoring
Use when: The user is trying to understand a problem before jumping to a solution, is confused about why customers churn, switch, or don't adopt something that looks objectively better, is segmenting users by demographics/persona and it isn't predicting behavior well, or is scoping a new use case and needs to know what progress the customer is actually trying to make. Not a fit once the problem is already well-understood and the question has shifted to prioritization (use focus-and-tradeoffs) or a go/no-go call (use decision-memo)
Install this skill
Cursor, Claude Code and Codex
- Create a folder named `jobs-to-be-done`.
- Save the skill content below as `SKILL.md` inside that folder.
- Place the folder in `.cursor/skills/` for Cursor or `.claude/skills/` for Claude Code (or the equivalent path for Codex).
- Describe the task normally. Your agent loads the skill when its description matches.
Use this in ChatGPT or Claude (no code)
- Copy or download SKILL.md from this page (or put it in a folder named
jobs-to-be-done). - Zip that folder so the archive contains
jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md. - In ChatGPT (Business, Enterprise, Edu or Healthcare), upload the zip under workspace Skills. In Claude.ai, add a Skill from the zip where your plan supports Skills.
- Describe the task in plain language — the skill loads when its description matches.
---
name: jobs-to-be-done
description: Diagnose what "job" a customer is actually hiring a product, service, or workaround to do, using the Jobs-to-be-Done framework — progress in a specific circumstance, forces of progress, switch interview, job statements, and desired-outcome scoring. Use this whenever the user is trying to understand a problem before jumping to a solution, is confused about why customers churn, switch, or don't adopt something that looks objectively better, is segmenting users by demographics/persona and it isn't predicting behavior well, or is scoping a new use case and needs to know what progress the customer is actually trying to make. Not a fit once the problem is already well-understood and the question has shifted to prioritization (use focus-and-tradeoffs) or a go/no-go call (use decision-memo).
---
# Jobs to Be Done
People don't buy products — they hire something (a product, a service, a
workaround, even doing nothing) to make progress toward a specific goal
in a specific circumstance. The job is the progress being sought; the
product is just whatever gets hired to deliver it. Demographics and
personas often fail to predict behavior because two very different people
can be trying to make the exact same progress, and one person can hire
completely different things for different jobs in different moments of
their own life.
## The core move
Stop asking "who is the customer" and start asking "what progress are
they trying to make, and what's currently getting in the way of making
it." The circumstance matters more than the person — the same person
hires something different for the "get through a boring commute" job than
for the "feel like a good parent on a Saturday" job, even though it's the
same person both times.
## The four forces of progress
When someone switches from an old solution (including "doing nothing") to
a new one, four forces are in tension:
- **Push** — dissatisfaction with the current situation strong enough to
seek an alternative.
- **Pull** — the magnetism of the new solution, specifically how it
promises to make the progress easier or better.
- **Anxiety** — uncertainty about the new solution (will it actually
work, is it worth the risk, what if I look foolish adopting it).
- **Habit of the present** — the comfort and momentum of what's already
being done, even if it's mediocre.
A switch happens when push + pull outweigh anxiety + habit. If adoption
is stalling, name which of the four is actually the blocker — increasing
pull (a better pitch) does nothing if the real blocker is anxiety, and
that's a very common mismatch: teams pour effort into making the pitch
better when the real problem is fear of switching.
## The switch interview
To find the forces at play, reconstruct the actual timeline of the
decision with someone who recently switched (or recently chose not to):
what was happening right before they started looking, what almost stopped
them, what tipped it, what they were worried about. Concrete recent
events beat abstract stated preferences — "walk me through the day you
decided to look for something else" surfaces more than "what do you look
for in a solution."
## Job statements and desired outcomes
For a sharper, more structured version of the same idea:
- **Job statement**: verb + object + context, stripped of any reference
to a specific solution. "Reduce time spent reconciling expense reports
during month-end close," not "get a better expense tool."
- **Desired outcome statements**: "minimize/increase [metric] of [process
step] when [context]" — specific and measurable, not "make it easier."
- **Opportunity = importance × (satisfaction gap)**: outcomes that are
highly important but poorly satisfied by current options are where the
real opportunity sits — not the outcomes people mention most often,
which are usually just the ones already well served (and therefore top
of mind).
## Functional, emotional, and social dimensions
The job usually isn't purely functional. Ask what emotional progress
("feel more in control," "feel confident/competent") and social progress
("feel or be seen as good at this") are bundled into the functional one —
missing these is a common reason a functionally-superior alternative
still loses to something that resonates more emotionally or socially.
## Common failure mode
Segmenting or designing around who the customer is (age, title, company
size) rather than what job they're hiring for, then being surprised when
the segment doesn't predict behavior. If demographic segmentation isn't
predicting adoption or churn, that's the signal to re-run this framework
instead of collecting more demographic detail.
## Output
Name the job in one job-statement sentence, identify which of the four
forces is actually the blocker (if this is about a stalled decision), and
flag whether the current segmentation approach is actually job-based or
just demographic. If this feeds into scoping a use case, hand off to
`outcome-hypothesis` with the job statement as the starting point rather
than a vague value proposition.
More free skills
Prompt Refiner
Turns a vague request into an executable brief without silently inventing missing requirements.
Decision Framer
Separates the real choice from noise, then tests options against explicit criteria and uncertainty.
Meeting to Actions
Converts messy notes into decisions, owned actions, deadlines and unresolved questions.
Agent Charter
Write a one-page charter for an AI agent or bot staff member: one job, anti-jobs, what needs human approval, what is never allowed, and how it proves work
Calibrated Forecasting
Turn a vague prediction or unstated confidence level into an explicit, calibrated probability estimate, using superforecasting practices — breaking questions into sub-questions, checking base rates, updating in small increments as new information arrives, and tracking predictions against outcomes
Decision Memo
Structure a real, consequential decision as a written narrative memo — full sentences and paragraphs rather than bullet points, forcing the logic to be checked rather than gestured at, plus explicit classification of whether the decision is reversible (a "two-way door") or not (a "one-way door")
Teachback
Test and build genuine understanding of a concept using teachback — explain it as simply as possible, notice exactly where the simple explanation breaks down, and treat that break point as the thing to actually go learn
First Principles
Rebuild a problem from fundamental truths (physics, economics, unit costs, what's actually true regardless of convention) rather than by analogy to how things are normally done
Focus and Tradeoffs
Cut a bloated plan, roadmap, or list of priorities down to the one or two things that actually matter — real focus means saying no to a thousand things
Mental Models
Apply a latticework of cross-disciplinary thinking tools (inversion, second-order effects, incentives, circle of competence, opportunity cost, base rates) to frame a vague or general problem
Moat Analysis
Assess whether a competitive advantage is durable (a real "moat") or temporary, by checking it against the standard sources of durable advantage — switching costs, network effects, economies of scale, brand/trust, and regulatory or IP protection — rather than taking "we're ahead right now" at face value
Negotiation Prep
Prepare for a high-stakes negotiation or hard conversation using tactical-empathy techniques — labeling emotions, calibrated open-ended questions, mirroring, and getting to genuine "that's right" rather than a grudging "yes."
Postmortem / Retro
Extract a specific, reusable lesson after something succeeded or failed, following the principle that pain plus reflection equals progress — outcomes only compound into better judgment if they're deliberately converted into a written, checkable lesson rather than just felt and moved past
Premortem
Run a premortem — imagine a plan has already failed and work backward to explain why, which surfaces risks that forward planning misses because it counteracts the social and psychological pressure to seem confident
More skills on the way.
Subscribe to How I Grok Bot for new free skills and practical notes on running AI agent workflows.