Development
访谈我
提取用户真正想要的东西，而非他们以为自己应该想要的东西。通过每次只问一个问题的访谈来实现，直到达到约 95% 的确信度。
人们所要求的与他们真正想要的是两回事。这个技能在差距造成任何代价之前就将其弥合。
在提出任何问题之前，先写下你当前的最佳判断，外加一个诚实的确信度数字（0–100%）：
HYPOTHESIS: You want a way to answer "how are we doing?" in standup, and "dashboard" was the convention that came to mind.
CONFIDENCE: ~30% — missing: who it's for, what "metrics" means, and what success looks like
Q: <one focused question>
GUESS: <your hypothesis for the answer, with reasoning>
为什么一次只问一个，而非一次性抛出一批：
为什么要附上一个猜测：
注意：
当你听到这些时，就问：
"如果你不必向任何人解释这件事，你究竟会想要什么？"
当确信度较高时，把你认为用户想要的东西写回去：
Here's what I now think you want:
- Outcome: <one line>
- User: <one line — who benefits>
- Why now: <one line — what changed>
- Success: <one line — how we know it worked>
- Constraint: <one line — the binding limit>
- Out of scope: <one line — what we're explicitly not doing>
Yes / no / refine?
关卡是一个明确的"是"。以下都不算"是"：
当你能对以下问题回答"是"时，你就完成了：
我能否预测用户对我接下来要问的三个问题的反应？
如果能，你们就达成了共识。停止访谈，并产出那份复述。
User: build me a dashboard for our metrics
Agent:
HYPOTHESIS: You want a way to answer "how are we doing?" in standup.
CONFIDENCE: ~30% — missing: who it's for, what "metrics" are, success criteria
Q: When you say "how are we doing?", who's asking — you alone, the team, or up the chain?
GUESS: engineering team in standup, because "we" usually scopes that way
User: It's actually for me. I keep losing track of which experiments are running.
Agent:
Updated read: not a team dashboard. It's a personal experiment tracker. Confidence: ~60%
Q: Is the gap that you don't know which experiments exist, or that you can't see their results in one place?
GUESS: the second one. Results live in five different tools.
User: First one actually. I literally don't have a list.
Agent: Two questions in, the actual ask isn't "a dashboard." It's "a list."
应用 interview-me 之后：