5 ms·

Personas are problematic when they assume goals and values of users. I've seen many product teams create personas or jobs to be done that literally come from th

by laurex 6y ago

Personas are problematic when they assume goals and values of users. I've seen many product teams create personas or jobs to be done that literally come from their own idea of what "someone like that" or "someone in this role" would need. Conversely, when we start with the idea that we don't know, define a customer and then ask them unbiased and non-leading questions about what they have done (NOT what they 'want'), it doesn't matter as much whether the framework is personas, JTBD, or any other approach.

jrdnbwmn 6y ago
Agree. Good tools like personas, JTBD, or whatever are a result of well-done research, not assumptions. As soon as assumptions enter the mix, the tool (and therefore decision-making) is biased and will give you the wrong information.
Groxx 6y ago
Yeah, there's the same kind of problem with pretty much all "mental frameworks for improving the quality of X". If you follow the steps mindlessly, you get nothing. Potentially less than nothing, since now you appear to have more authority than if you had not. If you use it to think better, i.e. to expose your blind-spots or do something more carefully than normal, the steps barely matter - the goal was achieved, you're thinking better. Every system can be "gamed" / undercut if you're determined or lazy enough. The goal of these systems is to break people out of that habit (whether they're aware of it or not), they can't guarantee it's done.
cm11 6y ago
The article touches a bit on this in terms of "proto-personas" and suggests an alternative method (assumption maps). To me, there's a point that you can build products from assumptions. You'd be trading risk (less validation) for speed and perhaps focus, which isn't inherently wrong. But most importantly you shouldn't pretend it's unbiased, user-driven, or that there aren't blindspots. And you shouldn't use personas as the tool of choice in that case. The distinction is rarely made though and problematic.

by laurex 6y ago

jrdnbwmn 6y ago

Agree. Good tools like personas, JTBD, or whatever are a result of well-done research, not assumptions. As soon as assumptions enter the mix, the tool (and therefore decision-making) is biased and will give you the wrong information.

Groxx 6y ago

Yeah, there's the same kind of problem with pretty much all "mental frameworks for improving the quality of X". If you follow the steps mindlessly, you get nothing. Potentially less than nothing, since now you appear to have more authority than if you had not. If you use it to think better, i.e. to expose your blind-spots or do something more carefully than normal, the steps barely matter - the goal was achieved, you're thinking better. Every system can be "gamed" / undercut if you're determined or lazy enough. The goal of these systems is to break people out of that habit (whether they're aware of it or not), they can't guarantee it's done.

cm11 6y ago

The article touches a bit on this in terms of "proto-personas" and suggests an alternative method (assumption maps). To me, there's a point that you can build products from assumptions. You'd be trading risk (less validation) for speed and perhaps focus, which isn't inherently wrong. But most importantly you shouldn't pretend it's unbiased, user-driven, or that there aren't blindspots. And you shouldn't use personas as the tool of choice in that case. The distinction is rarely made though and problematic.