Management & Thinking
ProJobs to be Done
JTBD 任務理論 · Source: Clayton Christensen
Understanding the actual "job" users hire your product or service to perform — focusing on situational tasks, not demographics
Core Concept
Christensen: people don't buy products, they "hire" them to do a job. The same person hires different products in different situations; the same product is hired for different jobs across contexts. The famous milkshake case — research showed McDonald's milkshakes were hired not as a "snack" but as a "one-handed boredom solution during a commute." Job-driven analysis replaces attribute-driven, fundamentally changing positioning.
✓ When to use this
When product positioning is unclear, user persona doesn't match actual usage, or competitor analysis is stuck on feature comparison. Shifting focus from "who the user is" to "what job they hire me for" reveals new competitive landscapes.
✗ When not to use this
Skip for purely technical B2B tools or spec-driven products (databases, APIs) where the job is already explicit — JTBD shines when uncovering unstated real situations.
Questions you will be asked
Using this framework, you will work through —
- 1.How is your product/service currently described?
- 2.What "job" do users hire your product to do? Describe their situation at that moment.
- 3.What alternatives did they hire before yours? Why did they switch?
- …and 3 more
Worked example
Expand to see what a filled-in run looks like
›
Worked example
Expand to see what a filled-in run looks like
Situation
我們的記帳 App 用戶成長停滯。功能比競品多、價格也便宜，但 retention 第 30 天剩 15%。團隊以為要再加功能。
1. How is your product/service currently described?
一款記帳 App，主打「全自動分類、漂亮報表、家庭共享」，給「想理財的年輕人」。
2. What "job" do users hire your product to do? Describe their situation at that moment.
當「月底發現信用卡帳單比預期高」時，使用者想「找出哪幾筆是亂花」，這樣他能「下個月避免再犯」。任務不是「記帳」，是「自我管教」。
3. What alternatives did they hire before yours? Why did they switch?
前用過：手寫帳本、Excel、銀行 App。換掉是因為「太麻煩」。但現在他們也不用我們了——換成什麼？訪談發現很多人「直接不記帳了，每月底估個大概」。
4. Could users hire non-obvious alternatives for the same job?
不顯而易見的競品：YouTube 理財節目（給罪惡感+知識，產生「下次要省」的決心）、家人嘮叨（外部監督機制）。這些跟「記帳」毫無關係但完成同一個任務。
5. From the job's perspective, what should your product strengthen, and what should you let go?
應強化：每月「亂花診斷」報告（5 分鐘讀完、有具體建議）。應放掉：誇張的視覺化、過度自動分類（用戶不在意精確）。
6. Reposition your product based on JTBD — in one sentence.
新定位：「當你想搞懂自己的錢花到哪、避免重蹈覆轍時，5 分鐘讀懂的月報，讓你下個月有底氣。」
Use it inside ChatGPT / Claude
Paste the prompt below and the AI will walk you through this framework, one question at a time.
你現在是引導使用者跑 Jobs to be Done 的產品教練（Clayton Christensen）。 依序問： 1) 你的產品/服務目前是怎麼描述的？（功能、目標客群、使用情境） 2) 使用者在什麼情境下「雇用」你的產品？用「當 [情境] 時，我想 [功能性目標]，這樣我才能 [情緒/社交目標]」公式回答。 3) 雇用你之前，他雇用過什麼替代方案？為什麼換？ 4) 同一個任務，他可能雇用什麼「非顯而易見」的替代品？（不只是同類競品） 5) 從任務角度看，你該強化什麼、放掉什麼？ 6) 用 JTBD 重新寫一句你的產品定位。 特別追問：當使用者只描述「使用者畫像」（年齡、職業、性別），逼他切到「情境 + 任務」。畫像不是 JTBD。 互動規則： 1. 一次只問一題，等使用者回答後再進入下一題。 2. 使用者答完所有題目前，不要做總結或下結論。 3. 若答案太抽象、太籠統，請追問一次具體例子或數字後再繼續。 4. 全部答完後，輸出三段：(a) 摘要使用者的關鍵判斷；(b) 你看到的盲點或張力；(c) 一個具體下一步行動建議。 5. 不要替使用者做決定，只把判斷攤開讓他自己決定。
Related Frameworks
Management & Thinking
First Principles Thinking
Breaking "we've always done it this way" inertia — rebuilding solutions from the ground up
Management & Thinking
Kano Model
Understanding how product features actually affect customer satisfaction — not every feature is "more is better"
Management & Thinking
Porter's Five Forces
Assessing the long-term attractiveness of an industry or market — both before entry and to clarify your position once inside
Related studies