起源故事 · 别人想要的不是钻头
Origin Story · What People Really Want Isn't the Drill
哈佛商学院的 Clayton Christensen 常引用营销学者 Theodore Levitt 的一句话:
「人们想要的不是一把四分之一英寸的钻头,而是墙上那个四分之一英寸的洞。」
Christensen 把它升华成完整理论:客户的购买行为,本质是在某个具体情境下,「雇」一个产品来完成一项任务(Job)。
钻头、奶昔、汽车、软件,都只是被雇来干活的「临时工」 —— 一旦有更称职的临时工出现,旧的随时被解雇。
所以好的需求不写成「客户想要 X 功能」,而写成一句话:当[情境]时,我想[动机],以便[预期结果]。
这句话里没有产品名 —— 因为任务先于产品而存在。
Harvard Business School's Clayton Christensen often quoted marketing scholar Theodore Levitt:
"People don't want a quarter-inch drill — they want a quarter-inch hole in the wall."
Christensen turned it into a full theory: a purchase is really "hiring" a product, in a specific situation, to get a Job Done.
Drill bits, milkshakes, cars, software — all of them are temp labor. The moment a more capable hire shows up, the incumbent gets fired.
That's why a good requirement isn't written as "customer wants feature X," but as a sentence: When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [expected outcome].
Notice there's no product name in it — because the job exists before any product does.
1 三段拼出一句任务陈述 Three Blocks Assemble One Job Statement
—2 钻头视角 vs 任务视角 Product-Centric View vs Job-Centric View
以产品为中心(错)
Product-centric (wrong)
把客户钉死在「他买了什么」,于是只会把钻头做得更快更亮 —— 直到有人卖给客户一个「直接打好的洞」,整把钻头被绕过。
You pin the customer to "what they bought" and end up making the drill faster and shinier — until somebody sells them a "pre-drilled hole" and the drill is bypassed entirely.
以任务为中心(对)
Job-centric (right)
问「客户雇产品去完成什么」,于是看见真正的目的是墙上那个洞 —— 你可以用钻头、用免钉胶、用挂钩,甚至重新定义解决方案。
Ask "what is the customer hiring a product to do" and the real goal — the hole in the wall — comes into view. You can serve it with a drill, with adhesive strips, with a hook, or by redefining the solution entirely.
3 现实里的任务陈述 Job Statements in the Real World
任务定义:先写「完成什么任务」而非「想要什么功能」。任务先于产品存在,产品只是被雇来的手段。
Defining the job: write "what job is getting done," never "what feature is wanted." The job exists before any product — products are just hired hands.
情境驱动:同一个人不同情境雇不同产品 —— 通勤时雇奶昔扛饿,下班陪孩子时雇它做奖励。情境一变,任务全变。
Situation-driven: the same person hires different products in different situations — a milkshake at 7 AM kills commute hunger, the same milkshake at 6 PM rewards the kids. Change the situation, and the job changes with it.
需求陈述:「当…我想…以便…」三段缺一不可。缺情境太空泛,缺结果只剩功能,无法判断成败。
The full sentence: "When… I want to… so I can…" — all three blocks are required. Drop situation and it's too vague; drop outcome and you're left with features and no way to judge success.
跳出产品视角:竞品不只是同类产品 —— 任何能完成同一任务的方案都是对手。你的奶昔,对手可能是香蕉。
Beyond the product category: competitors aren't just look-alikes — anything that gets the same job done is a rival. Your milkshake's real competitor might be a banana.
一句话In One Line
产品经理最容易陷进「我的产品有什么功能」的死胡同,越问越窄。
任务陈述强行换了一个提问角度:不问「客户喜不喜欢这个功能」,而问「客户在什么情境下,雇这东西去完成什么任务」。
一旦把需求写成「当…我想…以便…」,你会立刻发现两件事:
一是真正的竞品远不止同类产品 —— 任何能完成同一任务的方案都在抢这单生意;
二是情境才是任务的主人 —— 脱离情境谈需求,等于不知道客户什么时候、为什么会想起你。
产品会过时,功能会被抄,但任务长期稳定存在。盯住任务,你就不会被自己的产品困住。
Product managers easily get trapped in the dead end of "what features does my product have" — every question narrows the lens.
A job statement forces a different question: instead of "does the customer like this feature," ask "in what situation is the customer hiring this thing to do what job."
The moment you write the requirement as "When… I want to… so I can…", two things become obvious:
first, real competition extends far beyond the product category — anything that gets the same job done is competing for the hire;
second, situation is the master of the job — talking about needs without situation means you have no idea when or why the customer would ever think of you.
Products go obsolete, features get copied, but jobs persist across decades. Anchor on the job and your product will never be your prison.
常见误用Common Mistakes
把功能/产品写成任务(「我想用 Excel」)。那是工具不是任务,写成「我想快速汇总数据看清趋势」。
Writing a feature or product as the job ("I want to use Excel"). That's a tool, not a job. Write "I want to roll up the data fast and see the trend at a glance."
省掉情境只写动机(「我想吃得健康」)。没情境就无法判断何时触发,补上「加班晚没时间做饭时」。
Dropping the situation and writing only the motivation ("I want to eat healthier"). Without situation you can't tell when the job fires — add "when I'm working late and have no time to cook."
预期结果又写成功能(「以便能输入数据」)。结果应是状态/情绪/价值,如「以便不再为吃饭分心、心里踏实」。
Writing the outcome as another feature ("so I can enter data"). The outcome should be a state, an emotion, a value — "so I can stop worrying about dinner and feel at ease."