Job To Be DoneEdit
Job To Be Done is a framework for understanding why people choose products and services. Instead of focusing solely on features or demographics, it centers on the progress a person is trying to make in a given situation and the outcomes they care about achieving. The idea, associated with thinkers like Clayton Christensen and developed further through methods such as Outcome-Driven Innovation, is that customers “hire” a solution to get a job done, and successful offerings are those that better satisfy that job. This perspective has grown from marketing and product development into broader discussions about innovation, entrepreneurship, and even how public services can be designed to deliver tangible results.
From a policy and market standpoint, the Job To Be Done approach aligns with the practical realities of a competitive economy: consumers vote with their wallets, and firms respond by delivering value efficiently. When companies identify the exact progress customers seek, they can tailor products, streamline processes, and reduce waste—allocating capital to activities that improve real outcomes. In government or quasi-public settings, the same logic can guide service design toward clearer objectives and higher accountability, by asking what job citizens are trying to accomplish and which arrangements best support that outcome.
Core concepts
The job: The core progress a customer wants to make in a given situation. The job is about the outcome, not a specific product. Understanding the job helps distinguish between a customer’s need and the solution they ultimately choose. See Jobs to be done.
Situations and triggers: The circumstances that prompt a search for a solution, including timing, context, and constraints. Recognizing these triggers helps identify opportunities for better offerings. See Consumer behavior.
Outcomes, pains, and gains: The customer’s desired outcomes (functional, emotional, and social) and the pains they want to eliminate or the gains they hope to achieve. This reframes product design around value delivered, not just features. See Value proposition.
Job statements and mapping: A concise statement of the job in the form “When I am in this situation, I want to accomplish this, so I can achieve that.” Mapping journeys reveals touchpoints where a product or service can improve the customer’s progress. See Product design.
Functional, emotional, and social jobs: People hire solutions not only for practical reasons but to feel a certain way or to signal status or belonging. Effective offerings address all three dimensions. See Marketing.
Non-consumption and underserved markets: JTBD highlights opportunities where customers lack a satisfactory solution or where existing options leave significant gaps. See Entrepreneurship.
Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI): A systematic method for prioritizing product opportunities by quantifying the importance and satisfaction of desired outcomes, helping teams allocate resources to high-impact areas. See Outcome-Driven Innovation.
Competition and value networks: Jobs to be done emerge in competitive ecosystems, where different firms compete to satisfy similar jobs across various channels and formats. See Competition and Innovation.
Applications in business and public policy
Product design and development: Teams use JTBD to pinpoint what customers truly want and to craft features and services that directly advance the job. See Product design.
Marketing and segmentation: Rather than relying solely on demographics, firms identify job-based segments—groups of customers who share a common progress need. See Marketing.
Pricing and business models: By focusing on the outcomes customers value, firms can price for the value delivered and explore business models that expand access to essential jobs. See Pricing.
Customer experience and service design: JTBD drives improvements at critical points in the customer journey, reducing friction and accelerating progress toward outcomes. See Customer experience.
Entrepreneurship and startups: Startups leverage JTBD to uncover real-market opportunities and to overcome misalignment between what a firm offers and what customers actually need. See Entrepreneurship.
Public service design: Governments and agencies can use JTBD to redesign processes so citizens complete desired outcomes (e.g., quicker permits, clearer benefits applications) with fewer burdens. See Public policy.
Education and workforce development: By identifying the jobs people seek to accomplish in their lives, policymakers and educators can align curricula and training with real-world demands. See Education policy.
Controversies and debates
What the job is and isn’t: Proponents insist the framework clarifies value by focusing on progress. Critics worry it can reduce human motivation to instrumental tasks and overlook broader social or distributive concerns. Supporters respond that JTBD is a diagnostic tool, not a philosophy of life, and it works best when paired with a fuller view of welfare and opportunity. See Consumer theory.
Overreliance on interviews and data: Some argue that interviews can reveal surface preferences rather than true priorities, leading to biased or incomplete insights. Proponents counter that, when conducted with rigor and supplemented by observation and experimentation, JTBD can reveal actionable patterns and unmet needs that markets reward with better offerings. See Market research.
Privacy and consent: The method often entails collecting customer input. Critics warn about privacy risks. The standard conservative reply is that research should be voluntary, transparent, and protected by robust safeguards, and that the social value of better products and services justifies responsible data collection. See Privacy.
Left-leaning criticisms (often labeled as “woke” concerns): Critics contend that JTBD can be used to justify market-driven changes that neglect equity, power imbalances, or broader social justice goals. They may argue the framework treats people as tasks to be completed rather than as citizens with rights and needs beyond consumption. From a market-oriented perspective, these criticisms are seen as conflating a tool for improving outcomes with a complete social program; JTBD does not by itself prescribe redistribution or governance but helps create better options within voluntary exchange. Critics may also claim it erodes communal or cultural considerations; defenders respond that the framework is agnostic about policy choices and can be compatible with policies that promote opportunity and mobility, so long as those policies preserve informed choice and competitive markets. The practical defense is that better, more affordable, and more effective products and services can expand access and opportunity, while government policy should focus on maintaining fair competition and reducing barriers to entry. See Public policy.
Why some label it as misguided in public discourse: In debates about fairness and opportunity, some argue that a pure JTBD lens ignores structural constraints. Supporters reply that the framework is best used as a tool within a broader policy toolkit, one that includes competition policy, education, and targeted reform to widen access to opportunity. See Economic policy.
The woke criticism, in short, is often overstated when applied to JTBD: critics claim it reduces life to tasks and perpetuates consumerism; defenders argue that understanding real jobs simply helps firms deliver legitimate value more efficiently and ethically, with competition and transparency protecting consumers. They emphasize that the method is descriptive, not prescriptive about social aims, and that it works best when embedded within a framework that also addresses distribution, rights, and opportunity. See Ethics in business.