/prd-v10-mom-test-interview

name: prd-v10-mom-test-interview
description: >
  Apply Rob Fitzpatrick's Mom Test discipline to customer interviews during PRD v1.0 Market
  Adoption. Triggers on requests to interview customers, run discovery calls, validate ideas
  with users, or when user asks "how do I interview customers?", "Mom Test", "Rob Fitzpatrick",
  "customer interview", "user research without lies", "talking to humans", "discovery
  conversation". Outputs CFD-* discovery entries with Mom Test-calibrated confidence.
context: fork
allowed-tools:
  - Read
  - Write
  - Edit
  - Glob
  - Grep

execution_modes:
  default: standard
  supports: [quick, standard, deep]

Mom Test Interview Discipline

Position in workflow: v1.0 Continuous Discovery (Torres) → **v1.0 Mom Test Interview** → v1.0 Case Study Builder, Testimonial Collector

Execution Mode

Default is **standard**. See [`.claude/rules/08-skill-execution-modes.md`](../../rules/08-skill-execution-modes.md) for selection logic.

| Mode | What this skill produces | |------|--------------------------| | **quick** | Single interview prep + question list + CFD-* discovery entry post-interview | | **standard** | Interview prep + scripted opening + 5–7 questions + CFD-* entry with confidence calibration + Bad Data flagged | | **deep** | Multi-interview cohort plan + cross-interview synthesis + pattern flagging at 3-mention threshold + assumption-test handoff |

Framework: The Mom Test

From *The Mom Test: How to Talk to Customers and Learn If Your Business is a Good Idea When Everyone is Lying to You* (Rob Fitzpatrick, 2013). Premise: People lie to spare your feelings — especially about your business idea. Learn to ask questions that get truth.

The three Mom Test rules

1. **Talk about their life, not your idea.** Ask about how they actually live and work, not whether they'd like your hypothetical feature. 2. **Ask about specifics in the past, not generics or opinions about the future.** "Last time you faced X, what did you do?" beats "Would you use a tool that does Y?" 3. **Talk less and listen more.** If you're talking more than 30% of the time, you're pitching, not learning.

Three types of Bad Data to avoid

| Bad Data type | Example | Why it's bad | What to do | |---------------|---------|--------------|------------| | **Compliments** | "That sounds awesome!" | Politeness; not predictive | Discard; don't update confidence | | **Fluff** | "I usually..." "I would probably..." | Generics, future hypotheticals | Anchor to specifics: "When did you last do that?" | | **Ideas** | "You should add X" | Solution suggestions disguised as needs | Note as IDEA; ask "what would solving X enable you to do?" — get the underlying job |

Confidence calibration

Mom Test-disciplined interviews produce **higher-confidence CFD- entries** because the data is grounded in observed past behavior, not opinion. Confidence floors per P4:

• 2/5 — Generic statement ("I sometimes have this problem")
• 3/5 — Specific past instance ("Last Tuesday, I spent 2 hours doing X")
• 4/5 — Specific past instance + paid-money-for-a-workaround / hired-a-person / built-a-script ("I'm paying $30/mo for a tool that almost solves this")
• 5/5 — Repeated specific past instances + ongoing willingness to invest in better solution (commit > talk)

Consumes

• **ADO-BEACHHEAD-\* and PER-\* personas** — Defines the interview pool; non-segment interviews are still useful but get lower weight
• **Opportunity Solution Tree** (from prd-v10-continuous-discovery-torres) — Interview goals trace to specific opportunities being tested
• **CFD-\* prior research** — Patterns to validate or contradict
• **KPI-\* outcomes** — Why we're interviewing (anchor to what we're trying to move)

Produces

• **CFD-\* discovery interview entries** — One per interview, with confidence calibrated by Mom Test rules
• **CFD-\* pattern entries** — When 3+ interviews mention the same specific behavior, promote to a pattern entry with frequency
• **Bad Data inventory** — Compliments, fluff, ideas captured for context but not data
• **Discovery Tree updates** — Each interview either strengthens an opportunity, weakens an opportunity, or surfaces a new one

Execution

Step 1: Define the goal of this interview

Not "validate the idea." Specifically: which opportunity / assumption from the Opportunity Solution Tree is this interview testing?

| Goal | Example | |------|---------| | Validate opportunity exists | "Do beachhead pragmatists actually struggle with pricing-tier selection?" | | Test assumption | "Will users engage with a pricing wizard before signup?" | | Map workaround | "How are they solving this today?" | | Quantify pain | "How much time/money does this cost them currently?" |

Write the goal at the top of the interview notes.

Step 2: Prep the question list (Mom Test-shaped)

Use specifics-in-the-past form. Avoid hypotheticals.

| Bad question | Better (Mom Test) version | |--------------|---------------------------| | "Would you use a pricing wizard?" | "Walk me through how you picked the tier when you signed up." | | "Do you think analytics is important?" | "Tell me about the last time you looked at analytics." | | "What features do you wish we had?" | "Tell me about the last time the tool didn't do what you needed." | | "How would you describe X?" | "Tell me about the last time X came up at work." |

5–7 questions is plenty for a 25–30 minute interview. Leave room to follow threads.

Step 3: Run the interview

• **Open** with a short framing: who you are, why this conversation, no sales pitch
• **Ask the past-behavior questions**, listen, follow threads
• **Probe specifics** when they generalize: "When was that specifically?" / "What was the dollar / time cost?" / "What did you do next?"
• **Flag Bad Data internally**: when they compliment, smile and move on; when they fluff, anchor to specifics; when they suggest ideas, note as IDEA and dig for the underlying job
• **Talk less t