Customer interview

Customer Interview

Most interviews fail before they start: the interviewer pitches their idea, asks people to predict the future, and walks away with polite lies that feel like validation. The Mom Test (Rob Fitzpatrick) fixes this — talk about the customer's life and what they've actually done, not your idea or what they think they'd do. This skill plans a discovery interview and writes a script that can't be answered with empty compliments. It's the BEFORE; once you've run the interviews, use the synthesize-research skill to analyze what you heard.

Grounded in: The Mom Test — Rob Fitzpatrick: ask about specific past behavior, never pitch or ask hypotheticals. Go deeper (The Product Channel): Mastering Customer Interviews

When to use this

• You're about to talk to users and want a plan + question script, not just a vibe
• You're testing a risky assumption (is this problem real? painful enough? who has it?)
• You keep getting "yeah I'd totally use that" and want truth instead of flattery
• You're doing problem discovery, not a demo or a sales call

The Mom Test rules (the spine of a good interview)

• Talk about THEIR life and past behavior, not your idea. Their world is fact; your idea is a hypothetical they'll be nice about.
• Ask about specifics in the past, not generics or the future. "Tell me about the last time…" beats "Do you usually…" beats "Would you…".
• Talk less, listen more. Aim for them talking ~80% of the time. Silence is a tool — let them fill it.
• Dig: "tell me about the last time that happened" · "what did you do about it?" · "how much does it cost you today (time/money/sanity)?" · "what have you already tried?" · "why is that hard?"

Retention / churn / win-back interviews (invert the frame)

The standard problem-story frame assumes the pain is external to your product — you're hunting for a problem worth solving. For retention, churn, and win-back interviews the product is already in the story, so invert it: anchor on the last time they actually USED the product and the specific moment or week engagement trailed off, not on a generic problem.

• Start from real usage, not the problem. "Walk me through the last time you used <product>" → "When was the last time before that?" Find the moment the rhythm broke.
• Pinpoint the drop-off. "Which week did you stop reaching for it, and what changed that week?" Dated specifics beat "I just got busy."
• Find who disengaged first. In a team or household, one person usually drifts first — "who stopped using it before you did?" surfaces the real failure mode.
• Ask what filled the gap. "What do you do now instead?" The replacement (a competitor, a spreadsheet, nothing) tells you what job you stopped doing well.
• Stay out of pitch mode. It's tempting to defend or re-sell the product when they describe leaving it. Don't — the goal is the honest story of why it stopped earning their time, not a save attempt.

Before you start (gather these)

• Who you're interviewing and which segment they represent (role, context, why them)
• The riskiest assumption you're trying to kill — the one belief that, if wrong, sinks the idea
• The learning goal: the single most important thing you must learn from this conversation
• Logistics: length (20–40 min is plenty), recording consent, who takes notes

If any of these are unclear, ask the user before generating the script — a script with no learning goal produces unfocused interviews.

Process

1. Define the learning goal + riskiest assumption. Write one sentence: "I believe [X], and if it's false, [consequence]." That's what the interview must test.
2. Write past-behavior questions mapped to it. For each assumption, draft questions that surface real, dated behavior ("the last time…", "walk me through how you…"). Every question should trace back to the learning goal — cut the rest. Budget the time: cap the script to the handful of questions that map to the riskiest assumption, and treat the probe follow-ups as optional depth you reach for when an answer is rich — not a checklist to grind through. That keeps a session to ~30 min and leaves room for them to talk.
3. Sequence the conversation: warm-up (rapport, context on their role) → context (how their day/workflow actually works) → problem story (the last time the pain hit) → current workarounds (what they do today, what they've already tried, what they've paid for) → wrap (anyone else I should talk to? anything I should've asked?).
4. Prep follow-up probes. For each main question, stage 2–3 digging probes so you can go deeper on the spot instead of moving on too soon.
5. Set up note capture. Have the note template open so you log verbatim quotes and signals live, not from memory afterward.

Output template

Produce three copy-pasteable blocks.

1. Interview plan

LEARNING GOAL: <the one thing this interview must teach you>
RISKIEST ASSUMPTION: I believe <X>; if false, <consequence>.
SEGMENT: <segment this plan targets> — chosen because <why this segment>
WHO (repeat per interviewee; same plan reused across the segment):
  - <name/role> — <any context specific to this person>
  - <name/role> — …
LOGISTICS: <length> · recording consent? <y/n> · notetaker: <who>
SUCCESS LOOKS LIKE: <what a useful interview surfaces>

2. Question script (grouped, non-leading, with probe follow-ups)

WARM-UP
- Tell me a bit about your role and what a typical week looks like.

CONTEXT
- Walk me through how you currently handle <relevant task/area>.
  ↳ probe: What tools or people are involved? Where does it break down?

PROBLEM STORY
- Tell me about the last time <problem area> came up.
  ↳ probe: What did you do about it? How long did it take?
  ↳ probe: How much did that cost you — in time, money, or stress?
  ↳ probe: When did you first notice this was a problem?
  ⤿ RETENTION / CHURN VARIANT — swap this whole block for the inverted frame:
    - Walk me through the last time you actually used <product>.
      ↳ probe: When was the time before that? (find where the cadence thinned)
      ↳ probe: Which week did it stop being part of your routine — what changed that week?
      ↳ probe: Who stopped first, and what filled the gap?

CURRENT WORKAROUNDS
- What have you already tried to fix this?
  ↳ probe: Why did/didn't that work? Have you paid for anything to solve it?
  ↳ probe: What do you do today when it happens?

WRAP
- What's the hardest part of this for you, and why?
- Who else deals with this that I should talk to?
- Is there anything I should have asked but didn't?

3. Note template

| Quote (verbatim) | Observation | Pain (1–5) | Workaround | Surprise |
|------------------|-------------|-----------|------------|----------|
|                  |             |           |            |          |

After the interviews, hand the filled-in notes to the synthesize-research skill to cluster themes, rank findings by frequency and impact, and turn them into recommendations.

Avoid (anti-patterns)

• Leading questions / pitching your solution — "Don't you hate when…?" or "Would this feature help?" plants the answer.
• Hypothetical "would you use…" questions — people are terrible at predicting their own future behavior; ask what they did, not what they'd do.
• Asking for opinions instead of past behavior — "Do you think this is a good idea?" gets you flattery, not facts.
• Fishing for compliments — if you leave feeling great, you probably learned nothing. Useful interviews surface friction, not praise.

Tips

• Bad data is worse than no data — a false "yes" sends you building the wrong thing.
• Anchor every claim to a specific moment: "when exactly?" turns a generic into evidence.
• Watch for emotion and curse words — that's where the real pain lives.
• If they say a problem matters, ask what they've spent (time/money) on it. Commitment > compliments.
• Embrace awkward silence after a question; the second thing they say is usually the honest one.
• Take notes in their words, not your paraphrase — verbatim quotes are gold in synthesis.