user-interview-synthesis

Category: General Risk: Unknown ★ 4.6 · Rating 4.6/5 (1014) mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills MIT

Rating is derived from the repo's GitHub stars and shown for reference.


User Interview Synthesis Skill

Transform raw interview transcripts into a structured synthesis document that surfaces themes, pain points, and actionable insights.

Required Inputs

Ask the user for these if not provided:

  • Interview transcripts or notes (even rough notes work)
  • Number of participants and their profiles (role, company size, context)
  • Research questions (what was the study trying to answer?)
  • Date range of research (for context)

Process

  1. Read all provided transcripts fully before drawing conclusions
  2. Identify recurring themes (minimum 3 mentions to qualify as a theme)
  3. Categorize findings into: Pain Points, Workflow Insights, Feature Requests, Delight Moments
  4. Select 2-3 verbatim quotes per theme that best represent the pattern
  5. Draft "So What" implications for each theme — what does this mean for the product?
  6. Validate — Confirm every theme has quotes from at least 3 participants. Flag any insight resting on fewer as low-confidence.

Output Structure

Research Synthesis: [Study Name]

Participants: [n]
Date Range: [dates]
Research Questions: [list]

Theme 1: [Theme Name]

  • Summary (2-3 sentences)
  • Supporting quotes (from at least 3 participants)
  • Implication for product

[Repeat for each theme]

Low-Confidence Signals (1-2 participants only)

[Findings worth tracking but not acting on yet — note what further research would confirm or deny]

[Specific, actionable recommendations based on findings]

Quality Checks

  • Every theme is supported by quotes from at least 3 participants
  • Implications connect to specific product decisions, not just observations
  • Researcher bias check: no leading language, findings don't all support one hypothesis
  • Single-source signals are flagged separately, not mixed into main themes
  • Research questions from the study brief are each addressed (even if the answer is "inconclusive")

Anti-Patterns

  • Do not mix single-source signals into main themes — insights cited by only one participant must be flagged separately
  • Do not write implications that are observations restated rather than product decisions enabled
  • Do not include themes that only support the project hypothesis — contradictory findings must be surfaced, not omitted
  • Do not present findings without quotes — every theme requires verbatim evidence from at least 3 participants
  • Do not leave research questions unanswered — each question from the study brief must be explicitly addressed, even if the answer is inconclusive