/nw-interviewing-techniques

name: nw-interviewing-techniques
description: Mom Test questioning toolkit, JTBD analysis, interview conduct, assumption testing framework, and hypothesis design
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: true

Interviewing Techniques

Questioning Toolkit by Purpose

Problem Discovery

Understand if problem is real and worth solving.

• "Tell me about the last time you [encountered this problem]."
• "What was the hardest part about that?"
• "What did you do about it?" | "What don't you love about that solution?" | "What else have you tried?"

Understanding the Job

Map the job-to-be-done and desired outcomes.

• "What are you ultimately trying to accomplish?"
• "Walk me through your process step by step."
• "At each step, how do you know if you've succeeded?"
• "What slows you down or frustrates you most?" | "What workarounds have you created?"

Probing Assumptions

Challenge beliefs and uncover truth.

• "What makes you believe that?" | "What would need to be true for this to work?"
• "What could we assume instead?" | "What would change your mind?"

Testing Commitment

Distinguish interest from commitment.

• "Would you be willing to [specific action]?" | "What would you pay for this?"
• "Can you introduce me to someone else with this problem?" | "When can we schedule a follow-up?"

Exploring Implications

Understand impact and urgency.

• "If this were solved, what would change?" | "What would that enable you to do?"
• "What would happen if we didn't solve this?"

Interview Conduct Rules

**Do**: Ask about past specifics | Open, non-directive questions | Seek commitment not praise | Keep informal | 80% listening | Talk about their life first

**Avoid**: Future behavior questions | Leading questions | Accepting compliments as validation | Talking >20% | Mentioning idea before understanding problem | Formal settings

Assumption Challenging

Triggers

Challenge when: belief without evidence | prediction about future | negative feedback dismissed | skipping to solution | single data point relied on

Challenge Format

1. "What evidence supports this?" -- specific past examples 2. "What would disprove this?" -- falsification criteria 3. "What's the opposite assumption?" -- explore alternatives 4. "Who would disagree and why?" -- disconfirming perspectives

Tone: curious and supportive, not confrontational -- goal is truth-seeking.

Assumption Testing Framework

Assumption Categories

| Category | Core Question | |----------|--------------| | Value | Will customers want this? | | Usability | Can customers use this? | | Feasibility | Can we build this? | | Viability | Does this work for our business? |

Risk Scoring

| Factor | Weight | Low (1) | Medium (2) | High (3) | |--------|--------|---------|------------|----------| | Impact if wrong | 3 | Minor adjustment | Significant rework | Solution fails | | Uncertainty | 2 | Have data | Mixed signals | Speculation | | Ease of testing | 1 | Days, low cost | Weeks, moderate | Months, high cost |

**Risk Score** = (Impact x 3) + (Uncertainty x 2) + (Ease x 1)

| Priority | Score | Action | |----------|-------|--------| | Test first | > 12 | Immediate | | Test soon | 8-12 | Schedule | | Test later | < 8 | Backlog |

Hypothesis Template

We believe [doing X] for [user type] will achieve [outcome].
We will know this is TRUE when we see [measurable signal].
We will know this is FALSE when we see [counter-signal or absence of signal].

Test Methods by Category

| Category | Methods | |----------|---------| | Value | Landing page, Fake door, Mom Test interviews | | Usability | Prototype testing, 5-second tests, Task completion | | Feasibility | Spike, Technical prototype, Expert review | | Viability | Lean Canvas review, Stakeholder interviews |

Decision Rules

| Result | Criteria | Action | |--------|----------|--------| | Proven | >80% meet success criteria | Proceed | | Disproven | <20% meet criteria | Pivot or kill | | Inconclusive | 20-80% | Increase sample, try different method, segment |