Synthesize Interviews: User Research Synthesis

Turn raw interview transcripts, notes, or feedback dumps into structured insights. Produces two outputs: a synthesis report (themes + recommendations) and a standalone pain points document (problems only, no solutions).

When to Activate

• User says "synthesize interviews", "what did users say about X"
• User provides interview transcripts or notes to analyze
• User says "analyze this feedback", "research findings"
• After 3+ customer conversations (suggest proactively)

Input Modes

Accept input three ways:

1. Pasted content: Raw transcript or notes directly in conversation
2. File path: Point to a file or directory of transcripts
3. Workspace reference: "Look at the interview notes in /research"

If input is a single interview, produce per-interview notes. If 3+ interviews, produce a cross-interview synthesis.

Process

Step 1: Extract Raw Observations

For each interview/feedback source:

1. Identify the participant (role, context, seniority if available)
2. Extract direct quotes that reveal pain, motivation, or behavior
3. Note behaviors (what they actually do, not what they say they do)
4. Flag surprises (anything that contradicts assumptions)
5. Tag source:

   [Interview: {participant}, {date}]

Step 2: Identify Themes

Group observations across interviews:

1. Cluster related observations into themes (3-7 themes typical)
2. For each theme, count how many participants mentioned it
3. Rank themes by: frequency (how many said it) x intensity (how strongly they felt it)
4. Distinguish between stated needs (what they say) and observed needs (what they do)

Step 3: Generate Pain Points Document

Produce a standalone document of problems only. No solutions. This prevents premature solutioning.

# Pain Points: {Research Topic}

**Status:** Draft
**Interviews:** {count}
**Date:** {date}

## Critical Pain Points (mentioned by 60%+ participants)

### 1. {Pain point title}
- **Frequency:** {n}/{total} participants
- **Intensity:** High/Medium/Low
- **Evidence:**
  - "{Direct quote}" - {participant} [Interview: {name}, {date}]
  - "{Direct quote}" - {participant}
- **Current workaround:** {how they cope today}

## Significant Pain Points (mentioned by 30-60%)

### 2. {Pain point title}
...

## Emerging Signals (mentioned by <30% but high intensity)

### 3. {Pain point title}
...

Step 4: Generate Synthesis Report

# Research Synthesis: {Topic}

**Status:** Draft
**Interviews:** {count}
**Date:** {date}
**Researcher:** {name}

## Executive Summary
{2-3 sentence summary of the most important finding}

## Methodology
- {count} interviews with {participant profile}
- Conducted {date range}
- Method: {structured/semi-structured/contextual inquiry}

## Key Themes

### Theme 1: {Title} ({n}/{total} participants)
**Summary:** {1-2 sentences}
**Evidence:**
- "{Quote}" - {participant} [Interview: {name}, {date}]
- "{Quote}" - {participant}
**Implication:** {What this means for the product}

### Theme 2: {Title}
...

## Contradictions and Tensions
- {Where participants disagreed and why it matters}

## Surprises
- {Things that challenged our assumptions} [Assumption invalidated]

## Recommendations
1. **{Action}**: {Why, based on which themes}
2. **{Action}**: {Why}
3. **{Action}**: {Why}

## Open Questions
- {What we still don't know after this research}

## Appendix: Participant Summary
| # | Role | Context | Key Quote |
|---|------|---------|-----------|
| P1 | {role} | {context} | "{quote}" |

Step 5: Cross-Reference

After synthesis:

• "Use

  prd

  to spec solutions for the top pain points"
• "Use

  prioritize

  to rank which pain points to solve first"
• "Use

  lenny-podcast

  for Teresa Torres' Opportunity Solution Tree approach"
• Offer to update

  context/personas.md

  with new insights

Rules

• Never fabricate quotes. Every quote must come from the provided input.
• Separate observation from interpretation. Label which is which.
• Pain points doc has NO solutions. This is deliberate. Solutions come later.
• Tag evidence provenance. Every claim links to a specific participant and source.
• Preserve contradictions. If participants disagree, that's data, not noise.
• Count frequency honestly. "1 out of 3 mentioned it" is not a pattern. Say so.
• Flag small sample sizes. If fewer than 5 interviews, add

  [Small sample: {n} interviews. Treat as directional, not conclusive.]