/layers-user-needs
Assumes /layers-intro has been loaded for framework context.
User needs are what we think users are trying to achieve, and why — an interpretation built on observed behaviour and domain knowledge, not a direct capture of reality. This layer sits between the messy raw material of observation and the deliberate decisions of the solution space.
In OST terms, the outputs here are opportunities: needs (what users want to achieve), pains (what's causing friction), and desires (improvements they'd value). All three are valid inputs; elicit all three.
Decisions this layer needs to make:
- Who exactly are the users whose needs we're defining — and in what situation?
- What jobs are they trying to do — functional, emotional, and social?
- Which needs are grounded in evidence, and which are assumptions?
- Which needs matter most, and why?
Methods:
| Method | When |
|---|---|
| Job stories (JTBD) | Default. Situation → motivation → outcome. Keeps solutions out; forces specificity through the "When" clause. |
| User stories | Team prefers role-based framing, or integrating with an existing Agile workflow. |
| Top tasks analysis (Gerry McGovern) | Large existing user base. Identify which tasks matter most by frequency. Statistical, survey-based. |
| Persona + scenario | Communicating to stakeholders who think in archetypes. Good for alignment; less precise for design decisions. |
| ODI desired outcomes (Ulwick) | Precise, measurable statements. Format: "Minimize [metric] when [context]." Maps directly to opportunity scoring. |
Default: job stories.
Three types of need — elicit all three:
- Functional — the practical task. Feeds interaction structure and conceptual model directly.
- Emotional — how the user wants to feel while doing the job. Feeds surface (tone, copy, feedback).
- Social — how the user wants to be perceived by others in this context. Also feeds surface; sometimes strategy.
Emotional and social needs are chronically under-articulated in briefs and research reports, even when they're genuinely shaping behaviour. Asking for them explicitly is usually what surfaces them.
Quality signals — what good looks like:
- The "When" clause is specific enough to picture the moment it happens
- The motivation is a genuine goal, not a solution sneaking in
- Functional, emotional, and social dimensions all explored
- Confidence marked: observed / inferred / assumed
- Workarounds surfaced — a need real enough to motivate improvisation is a strong signal
Guided session
Tell me who your users are and what you're working on, or say "guide me" to start a structured session.
Ask: "Where should I capture the work from this session?" (see /layers-intro for options)
Ask: "What's the source of the user needs we're working with — user research, domain knowledge, team assumptions, or a mix?" If working from assumptions, mark them clearly throughout and plan to validate.
Phase 1 — Frame the users
- Who are the users whose needs we're defining? Be specific — not "users" but which type, in which situation.
- What context are they in when the relevant need arises?
- Is there more than one distinct user type with meaningfully different needs? Work through them separately.
Phase 2 — Elicit needs
Work through the needs the designer raises. Format: When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [expected outcome].
The "When" clause is the most important part — it must be specific enough to picture the moment. Push until it is.
For each need, ask: "Is there a functional job here, an emotional job, a social job — or all three?"
Probe each:
- On "When": "Could you picture the moment this happens? Is this triggered by an event, a feeling, a rhythm, or a threshold being crossed?"
- On motivation: "Is a solution sneaking in? Why does this matter to them? What's at stake if unmet?"
- On expected outcome: "What does success look like for the user — not the product?"
Phase 3 — Surface hidden needs
- "What needs do users have that the product currently ignores?"
- "What do users do before and after the moment we normally focus on?"
- "What do users have to do that they really wish they didn't?"
- "What need are users currently meeting with a workaround — a spreadsheet, an email — that a product could serve better?"
Phase 4 — Challenge and filter
Review all needs together. For each:
- Need or solution? "When I need a report, I want to export to CSV" is a solution. Push to the underlying need.
- Specific enough to design from? A need so broad that any feature could serve it is not useful.
- Grounded? Mark: observed / inferred / assumed.
- Important? How frequently does this situation arise? How painful is it unmet?
Phase 5 — Prioritise
Rough ordering: highest importance × most poorly currently served. A need that matters a lot and is badly served is a high-value opportunity. A need that matters a lot but is already well served is not.
Don't over-engineer this. Precise prioritisation is strategy work at /layers-product-strategy. A rough ranking is enough here.
Completion
Produce:
- User needs — final list, priority order, with confidence ratings (observed / inferred / assumed)
- Unprioritised needs — surfaced but not ranked, so they aren't lost
- Gaps — needs probably real but not yet grounded; research questions to answer
- Contradictions — if different user types have conflicting needs, name them explicitly
Close with: "These needs are the opportunities for your product strategy. Run /layers-product-strategy to build a strategy tree connecting them to business outcomes and solution bets."
If needs are mostly assumed: "Several of these are marked as assumed. Before building strategy on them, consider running /layers-observed-behaviour to gather evidence."