Write a user-centered problem statement with who is blocked, what they are trying to do, why it matters, and how it feels. Use when framing discovery, prioritization, or a PRD.

Purpose Articulate a problem from the user's perspective using an empathy driven framework that captures who they are, what they're trying to do, what's blocking them, why, and how it makes them feel. Use this to align stakeholders on the problem before jumping to solutions, and to frame product work around user outcomes rather than feature requests. This is not a requirements doc—it's a human centered problem narrative that ensures you're solving a problem worth solving. Input Works best with: Who the user is and what they're struggling to do. Also useful: What's blocking them, why it matters, how it feels, and supporting evidence. Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re ask. Arriving empty handed? That works too. The skill asks for the user and their goal first — a problem statement without a specific 'who' is a solution looking for cover. Example invocation: Problem statement: clinic schedulers double book exam rooms because the calendar doesn't show equipment availability. Key Concepts The Problem Framing Framework Based on Jobs to be Done and empathy mapping, the framework structures problems as: Problem Framing Narrative: I am: [Describe the persona experiencing the problem] Trying to: [Desired outcomes the persona cares about] But: [Barriers preventing the outcomes] Because: [Root cause of the problem] Which makes me feel: [Emotional impact] Context & Constraints: [Geographic, technological, time based, demographic factors] Final Problem Statement: [Single, concise, empathetic summary] Why This Structure Works Persona centric: Forces you to see the problem through the user's eyes Outcome focused: "Trying to" emphasizes desired results, not tasks Root cause analysis: "Because" pushes past symptoms to underlying issues Emotional validation: "Makes me feel" humanizes the problem and builds empathy Contextual: Constraints acknowledge real world limitations Anti Patterns (What This Is NOT) Not a solution in disguise: "The problem is we lack AI powered analytics" = sneaking in a solution Not a business problem: "Our revenue is down" isn't a user problem (it's a symptom) Not a feature request: "Users need a dashboard" isn't a problem (what are they trying to do?) Not generic: "Users want better UX" is too vague to be actionable When to Use This Kicking off discovery or problem validation work Aligning stakeholders before solutioning Socializing a problem with engineering, design, or exec teams When you have feature requests but unclear underlying problems Pitching why a problem is worth solving When NOT to Use This When you haven't done any user research yet (don't guess—interview first) For internal operational problems (this is for user facing problems) As a substitute for a PRD (this frames the problem; PRD defines the solution) Application Use template.md for the full fill in structure. Step 1: Gather User Context Before drafting, ensure you have: User interviews or research: Direct quotes, observed behaviors, pain points Jobs to be Done insights: What users are "hiring" your product to do (reference skills/jobs to be done/SKILL.md ) Persona clarity: Who specifically experiences this problem (reference skills/proto persona/SKILL.md ) Constraints data: Geographic, tech, time, demographic limitations If missing context: Run discovery interviews, contextual inquiries, or user shadowing. Don't fabricate problems. Step 2: Draft the Problem Framing Narrative Fill in the template from the persona's point of view: Quality checks: "I am" specificity: Can you picture this person? Or is it generic ("busy professionals")? "Trying to" clarity: Is this an outcome (measurable) or a task (activity)? "But" depth: Are these real barriers or just inconveniences? "Because" honesty: Is this the root cause or just a symptom? "Makes me feel" authenticity: Do these emotions come from research or assumptions? Step 3: Document Context & Constraints Quality checks: Relevance: Do these constraints directly impact the problem? Specificity: Are they concrete enough to inform design decisions? Step 4: Craft the Final Problem Statement Synthesize the narrative into one powerful sentence: Formula: [Persona] needs a way to [desired outcome] because [root cause], which currently [emotional/practical impact]. Example: "Enterprise IT admins need a way to provision user accounts in under 5 minutes because current processes take 2+ hours with manual approvals, which causes project delays and frustrated end users." Quality checks: One sentence: If it requires multiple sentences, the problem isn't crisp yet Measurable: Can you tell if you've solved it? Empathetic: Does it resonate emotionally? Shareable: Could you say this in a meeting and have stakeholders nod? Step 5: Validate and Socialize Test with users: Read it aloud to people who experience the problem. Do they say "Yes, exactly!"? Share with stakeholders: Product, engineering, design, exec. Does it align everyone? Iterate based on feedback: If anyone says "I don't think that's the real problem," dig deeper. Examples See examples/sample.md for full examples (good and bad problem statements). Mini example excerpt: Common Pitfalls Pitfall 1: Solution Smuggling Symptom: "The problem is we don't have [specific feature]" Consequence: You've predetermined the solution without validating the problem. Fix: Reframe around the user's desired outcome, not the feature. Ask "What are they trying to achieve?" Pitfall 2: Business Problem Disguised as User Problem Symptom: "Users want to increase our revenue" or "The problem is our churn rate" Consequence: These are company problems, not user problems. Users don't care about your metrics. Fix: Dig into why users churn or what would make them spend more. Frame it from their perspective. Pitfall 3: Generic Personas Symptom: "I am a busy professional trying to be more productive" Consequence: Too broad to be actionable. Every product claims to help "busy professionals." Fix: Get specific. "I am a sales rep managing 50+ leads manually in spreadsheets, trying to prioritize follow ups without missing high value opportunities." Pitfall 4: Symptom Instead of Root Cause Symptom: "Because the UI is confusing" Consequence: You're describing a symptom, not the underlying issue. Fix: Ask "Why is the UI confusing?" Keep asking "why" until you hit the root cause (e.g., "Because users have no mental model for how the system works"). Pitfall 5: Fabricated Emotions Symptom: "Which makes me feel empowered and delighted" Consequence: These sound like marketing copy, not real user emotions. Fix: Use actual quotes from user interviews. Real emotions: "frustrated," "overwhelmed," "anxious," "stuck." References Related Skills skills/jobs to be done/SKILL.md — Informs the "Trying to" and "But" sections skills/proto persona/SKILL.md — Defines the "I am" persona skills/positioning statement/SKILL.md — Problem statement informs positioning skills/user story/SKILL.md — Problem statement guides story prioritization External Frameworks Clayton Christensen, Jobs to Be Done — Origin of outcome focused problem framing Osterwalder & Pigneur, Value Proposition Canvas — Customer pains/gains/jobs Dave Gray, Empathy Mapping — Emotional framing techniques Dean's Work [Link to relevant Dean Peters' Substack articles if applicable] Provenance Adapted from prompts/framing the problem statement.md in the https://github.com/deanpeters/product manager prompts repo. Skill type: Component Suggested filename: problem statement.md Suggested placement: /skills/components/ Dependencies: References skills/jobs to be done/SKILL.md , skills/proto persona/SKILL.md

problem-statement