Problem Framing Skill

Transform market signals into evidence-anchored problem statements.

Workflow Overview

Assess gaps → Identify what evidence is missing
Anchor evidence → Create CFD-IDs for each pain point
Extract dimensions → Pull multiple problems from each source
Quantify costs → Add time/money/risk numbers
Draft statement → Populate the problem table

Core Output Template

Populate this table for every problem statement:

Element	Definition	Evidence
Who is hurting?	Specific, findable, countable persona	Segment size
What pain exists?	Observable behavior or workflow friction	CFD-ID
Cost of problem	Time, money, or opportunity lost	Quantified
Why now?	Market trigger creating urgency	Trend/event
What's impossible?	Opportunity cost—what can't they do	User quote

See assets/problem-statement.md for copy-paste template.

Step 1: Gap Assessment

Before drafting, create this status table:

Element	Status	Source
Who is hurting?	⚠️ Hypothesis / ✅ Validated / ❌ Missing
What pain exists?	⚠️ / ✅ / ❌
Cost of problem	⚠️ / ✅ / ❌
Why now?	⚠️ / ✅ / ❌
What's impossible?	⚠️ / ✅ / ❌

Gate: Require ≥2 elements ✅ Validated before drafting. If ≥3 elements ❌ Missing, run deep research first. See references/research-prompts.md for research templates.

Step 2: Evidence Anchoring

Create CFD entries for each pain point:

CFD-###
Source: [Platform/Person]
Tier: [1-5]
Quote: "[Verbatim]"
Dimensions: [List problems extracted]

Evidence Tier Hierarchy:

Tier 1: Buying behavior (invoices, subscriptions, job budgets)
Tier 2: Active workarounds (spreadsheets, hired help)
Tier 3: Complaints with cost ("costs me X hours")
Tier 4: General complaints ("this is annoying")
Tier 5: Speculation — REJECT

Step 3: Pain Dimension Extraction

Extract multiple problems from each source. One quote often contains 3-4 distinct pain dimensions.

Example: "USB sticks removed for every update, no scheduling, screens don't communicate, priced for 100+ displays" → Sneakernet workflow, No dynamic scheduling, No centralization, Price mismatch

Step 4: Cost Quantification

Every problem needs a number:

Type	Calculation
Time	Hours/week × hourly rate
Money	Current spend on workaround
Opportunity	Revenue/outcomes missed
Risk	Penalty × probability

Step 5: Draft Problem Statement

Use the core output template. Reference CFD-IDs for every claim.

See references/examples.md for good/bad examples with explanations.

Quality Gates

Pass Checklist

≥1 Tier 1-2 evidence item
Cost quantified (time, money, or risk)
"Who" specific enough to build prospect list
"Why now" has at least Tier 3 hypothesis

Testability Check

Can find 10 people with this problem in 48 hours?
Can observe the pain behavior?
Can quantify cost without leading questions?

Anti-Patterns

Pattern	Example	Fix
Vague "Who"	"Small businesses"	→ "SMBs with 1-10 screens"
Feature-as-problem	"Need a dashboard"	→ "Can't see status"
Solution creep	"MVP must solve X"	→ Stay on problem (v0.4)
Missing cost	"This is annoying"	→ "Costs X hrs/week"
Speculation	"Users might want"	→ Find evidence or reject

Bundled Resources

references/research-prompts.md — Deep research templates by gap type. Use when gap assessment shows ≥3 missing elements.
references/examples.md — Good/bad problem statement examples with explanations.
assets/problem-statement.md — Copy-paste template for problem tables and CFD entries.

Handoff

Problem statement complete when quality gates pass. Next: v0.2 Market Definition (segments, sizing, ICP).

Search AI Tools

prd-v01-problem-framing

Install this agent skill to your Project

SKILL.md