Basic Survey Pain Point Ranking

Demonstrates prioritization from a simple list of 5 pain points identified in customer surveys, showing how the skill handles limited data with transparency about assumptions.

Input

What you provide to the skill

We have 5 pain points from 20 customer surveys: slow loading, confusing navigation, missing export feature, no dark mode, poor search. Which should we fix first?

Output

What the skill generates for you

Pain Point Prioritization Report

Product: User’s Product
Sources: 20 customer surveys
Pain Points: 5

Executive Summary

Top 3 Urgent Priorities:

Slow loading (frequency unknown from surveys, severity 8/10) - Daily workflow blocker affecting user experience
Confusing navigation (frequency unknown, severity 7/10) - Prevents users from accessing features efficiently
Missing export feature (frequency unknown, severity 6/10) - Workflow completion barrier

Key Pattern: Without raw survey data showing mention counts, frequency calculations rely on equal weighting. Severity assessments are based on typical impact patterns for these pain point categories.

Complete Inventory

Rank	Pain Point	Frequency	Severity	Confidence	Priority Score	Quadrant
1	Slow loading	20%	8/10	★★★	16.0	Low/High
2	Confusing navigation	20%	7/10	★★★	14.0	Low/High
3	Missing export feature	20%	6/10	★★☆	12.0	Low/Med
4	Poor search	20%	5/10	★★☆	10.0	Low/Med
5	No dark mode	20%	3/10	★★☆	6.0	Low/Low

Note: Frequency is calculated as equal (20% = 1/5) since mention counts weren’t provided. For more accurate prioritization, provide raw survey data showing how many respondents mentioned each pain point.

Priority Matrix

                SEVERITY
            Low (1-5) | High (6-10)
    --------+---------+-------------
    High    |         |
    (>40%)  |         |
FREQ        |         |
    --------+---------+-------------
    Low     | Dark    | Loading
    (<40%)  | mode    | Navigation
            | Search  | Export

Top 3 Justifications

#1: Slow Loading

Frequency: 20% (assumed equal) | Severity: 8/10 | Score: 16.0 | Confidence: ★★★

Severity Rationale: Performance issues create daily friction for all users. Slow loading:

Impacts every session and page view
Creates perception of unreliable product
Increases abandonment rates
Compounds frustration with other features

Business Impact: Direct correlation with user engagement metrics, session duration, and retention.

Action: Prioritize performance optimization - analyze load bottlenecks, implement caching strategies, optimize asset delivery, measure improvement with performance monitoring.

Expected Outcome: Faster load times improve overall product perception and reduce frustration with all other features.

#2: Confusing Navigation

Frequency: 20% (assumed equal) | Severity: 7/10 | Score: 14.0 | Confidence: ★★★

Severity Rationale: Navigation issues prevent feature discovery and create workflow friction:

Users can’t find features they need
Increases learning curve for new users
Wastes time hunting for functionality
May lead to underutilization of product value

Business Impact: Reduces feature adoption, increases support burden, affects perceived product value.

Action: Conduct usability testing on navigation patterns, review information architecture, implement clearer labeling/grouping, add contextual guidance or onboarding tooltips.

Expected Outcome: Improved feature discoverability, reduced support tickets, better feature adoption.

#3: Missing Export Feature

Frequency: 20% (assumed equal) | Severity: 6/10 | Score: 12.0 | Confidence: ★★☆

Severity Rationale: Export functionality is often critical for workflow completion:

Users need to share data with colleagues/tools
Blocks integration with existing workflows
May be deal-breaker for certain customer segments
Creates manual workaround burden

Business Impact: May limit adoption in certain customer segments, creates competitive disadvantage if competitors offer export.

Action: Implement export functionality - identify required formats (CSV, PDF, Excel), design UI trigger, implement backend generation, add proper formatting/validation.

Expected Outcome: Enables workflow completion, removes adoption barrier, improves professional user satisfaction.

Recommended Action Plan

Phase 1 (Immediate - Weeks 1-4): Critical Performance & Usability

Slow loading - Performance optimization sprint
- Why First: Affects every user interaction, compounds other problems
- Resources: 1 backend engineer + 1 frontend engineer
- Success Metric: Reduce load time by 50% or achieve <2s target
Confusing navigation - UX improvement sprint
- Why Second: Unlocks feature value, reduces support burden
- Resources: 1 designer + 1 frontend engineer + usability testing
- Success Metric: Reduce navigation-related support tickets by 30%

Phase 2 (Weeks 5-8): Feature Completion

Missing export feature - Feature development
- Why Third: Removes workflow barrier for professional users
- Resources: 1 backend engineer + 1 frontend engineer
- Success Metric: Export adoption by target user segment
Poor search - Search enhancement
- Why Fourth: Improves efficiency but has workarounds
- Resources: 1 backend engineer
- Success Metric: Improved search success rate

Phase 3 (Backlog): Nice-to-Have

No dark mode - Polish feature
- When: After critical issues resolved OR if technically trivial
- Resources: 1 frontend engineer (low effort)
- Success Metric: User satisfaction improvement

Data Quality Note

Limitation: This prioritization assumes equal frequency (20% each) because raw survey data wasn’t provided. For more accurate prioritization, please provide:

Raw survey responses or mention counts per pain point
Context about which customers mentioned which issues
Customer segment information (enterprise vs SMB, power users vs casual)
Any urgency signals (threats to cancel, revenue at risk)

With actual frequency data, the prioritization may change significantly.