I’d like to share a tool that formalizes the elements that you have intuitively identified.

It’s called SSNiF scenarios, because a complete user story always has these elements: a Stakeholder (usually the customer) in a Situation, with a resulting Need, that is resolved by a Feature.

To apply this to one of your examples: Stakeholder: someone living in a cold climate
Situation: It gets icy, sometimes with very slippery wet ice
Need: to spread salt
Feature: (TBD; need an invention that spreads salt even on highly slippery surfaces. Spiked wheels for traction?Independent motorized spreader? Sled with separate lever to spread salt?)

In the end the salt spreader might have two or three big SSNFs expressing its big-picture purpose, and perhaps twenty or thirty little SSNiFs to isolate each use case. SSNiFs scale well, so a sophisticated product would have scores of SSNiFs if needed.

SSNiF scenarios can be tabulated, prioritized, and snapped together like Lego blocks to compose detailed requirements (with little SSNiFs) or even product visions (with big SSNFs).

What’s also nice is they are explicit about the problem, they state WHY the problem exists and for which sub-group of customers. They also cleanly separate the problem from the solution, so that if a better F comes along to resolve the SSN, then it’s a better solution.

SSNiFs make a great output of ethnographic research, because they are actionable.

For the rundown on SSNiFs, including free templates, please see: http://bit.ly/ItBXs

Thanks for listening and if you find this technique interesting, please pass on the word!

Best regards,
Philip Haine
ProductVision.org
@dphaine

Just tie the two socks of a pair together before putting them into the box having all other socks. Thats it.

Normally people don’t wash all the socks in one go. Also they will not be in a great hurry when then they takeout dried socks from washing machine. So at this time they just have to tie two socks of a pair together (one knot is enough) and then place it along with other socks. So when they want the socks they see pairs of socks always together.

Nothing personal to those who’ve suggested it, but the recommendation to buy new socks all the same colour or of limited colours to eliminate the “lost sock” problem is akin to the situation where Technical Support suggests a customer reinstall their software when some strange problem occurs. It’s not an appropriate solution.

Now were I a sock vendor, I’d absolutely love these kinds of suggestions. Making my product into a true consumable item will do wonders for my volume.

But as a sock wearer AND a Product Manager (as many of us are), I have, while sorting out socks, wondered how to efficiently address this problem. My solution — and I fear only a software PM would spend any time thinking about this — is for enlightened sock manufacturers to put a variety of marks on soles of matching socks. e.g. something simple such as a diamond or circle with a letter in it or something else. That way, it becomes a very simple exercise to match paired socks — at least from that manufacturer.

The value to me as a consumer is clear. And by solving the consumer’s problem — although not necessarily in a competitively sustainable way — it does help differentiate my offering and gain some customer loyalty.

And to be perfectly honest, I think it’s much better than this solution