User Value Articulation Skill

Transform validated pain points into evidence-anchored value statements.

Workflow Position

Problem Framing → User Value Articulation → v0.2 Market Definition
     (pain)              (value)                  (who cares most)

Consumes

This skill requires prior work from v0.1:

• **CFD-* entries (pain points, from Problem Framing) — Evidence for what problems users face
• PRD.md Why section (problem statement table) — Context for pain-to-value transformation

This skill assumes v0.1 Problem Framing is complete.

Produces

This skill creates/updates:

• CFD-* entries (tagged as value hypotheses) — Transformation of pain points into value statements, with confidence scoring
• MVP scope signal — Identifies which value dimensions will drive MVP feature scope (handed to v0.3)

All CFD value hypothesis entries should include:

• confidence: 2-3/5 (based on evidence tier from users or market)
• Evidence tier (1-5 per value hierarchy)
• Forward target: "Would move to 4/5 if we validate with beta cohort"

Example value hypothesis entry:

CFD-015: Value Hypothesis — Eliminate manual reconciliation workflow

Source Pain: CFD-001 (sales teams waste 5+ hours/week)
Evidence Tier: 2-3 (workaround + quantified cost)
Confidence: 3/5 (source: 3-customer-interviews-jan-2026)
Value Statement: "Reclaim 5 hours/week for strategic pipeline management"
Transformation: [5 hours wasted] → [5 hours available for growth]
Framing Type: Negative Removal (acute quantified loss)
Quantification: 5 hours/week = ~250 hours/year = $12,500 (at $50/hr)
Next Target: "Would move to 4/5 if we observe beta cohort using this feature"

Workflow Overview

1. Receive pain points → Read CFD-IDs from Problem Framing
2. Identify value unit → Time / Money / Risk / Capability
3. Transform pain → value → Apply transformation pattern
4. Anchor to evidence → What proof users want this outcome?
5. Create CFD entry → Tag as value hypothesis with tier

Core Output Template

See assets/value-statement.md for copy-paste template.

Pain → Value Transformation

Framing Type Selection

Value Evidence Tier Hierarchy

Gate rule: ≥1 value statement must have Tier 1-3 evidence before v0.2.

CFD Entry Format

CFD-###: Value Hypothesis — [Title]
Type: Value Hypothesis
Source Pain: CFD-###
Evidence Tier: [1-5]

Value Statement: "[User gains X measured in Y]"
Transformation: [Pain] → [Value]
Framing Type: [Type]
Quantification: [Number with unit]

See references/transformation-examples.md for worked examples.

Quality Gates

Pass Checklist

• Every pain point has corresponding value statement
• ≥1 value statement has Tier 1-3 evidence
• All values quantified (time, money, risk, capability)
• No feature-as-value statements
• Value unit matches pain unit

Testability Check

• Can explain value in <10 seconds to prospect?
• Can test with landing page headline?
• Value statement contains no features (no "dashboard", "tool")?

Anti-Patterns

Bundled Resources

• references/transformation-examples.md — 3 worked examples from real PRDs with step-by-step transformation process.
• references/research-prompts.md — Deep research templates when value evidence is Tier 4-5.
• assets/value-statement.md — Copy-paste template for value tables and CFD entries.

Handoff

Value articulation complete when quality gates pass. Combined with Problem Framing, v0.1 Spark is ready.

Next: v0.2 Market Definition (Who cares MOST about this value? Who pays FIRST?)