plugins/pm-essentials/skills/user-research-synthesis/SKILL.md
Analyze and synthesize user research findings into structured, actionable insights. Use when given user research data, interview transcripts, survey results, or user feedback that needs to be analyzed and summarised. Produces a themed synthesis with prevalence data, supporting quotes, pain points analysis, feature request prioritisation, and recommended next steps. For interview transcripts specifically use user-interview-synthesis instead.
npx skillsauth add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills user-research-synthesisInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
This skill helps analyze user research data and transform it into actionable insights following a structured methodology.
Ask the user for these if not provided:
If a professional-brain (brain/) exists, use it before asking:
hypotheses/ (which assumptions this research can validate or invalidate) and context.md (who the users are).knowledge/users.md, and keep the raw notes in source/. Tag interview-derived claims [interview] — never launder them into [data].Organize findings into themes using this structure:
Theme Name
Aim for 4-8 major themes per research effort.
For each identified pain point:
Categorize requests:
For each request:
Document actual workflows observed:
If research reveals distinct user segments:
If users mentioned competitors or alternatives:
Prioritized recommendations based on insights:
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority / Future Consideration
Research gaps identified:
When synthesizing interviews:
When analyzing quotes:
When identifying themes:
**Theme: Information Overload During Onboarding**
**Description**: Users consistently expressed feeling overwhelmed by the amount of information presented during initial setup, leading to incomplete onboarding and delayed time-to-value.
**Prevalence**: 9 out of 12 participants mentioned this issue unprompted
**Supporting Quotes**:
- "I just wanted to get started, but it felt like I needed to read a manual first" [P3, Marketing Manager]
- "By the third screen of instructions, I started clicking 'Next' without reading" [P7, Sales Rep]
- "I wish there was a 'quick start' option for people like me who just want to try it" [P11, Product Designer]
**Implication**: Our current onboarding flow prioritizes completeness over engagement. We should consider a progressive disclosure approach where users can start using the product quickly and learn advanced features contextually.
**Recommended Action**:
- Design a "Quick Start" path that gets users to first value in <3 minutes
- Move advanced configuration to contextual help within the app
- Test with 5-10 new users before full rollout
- Expected impact: +20-30% activation rate improvement
When synthesizing research, use this structure:
# User Research Synthesis: [Research Topic]
## Research Overview
- **Date**: [Date range]
- **Methodology**: [Interview/Survey/Testing]
- **Participants**: [Number] [User types]
- **Research Questions**:
1. [Question 1]
2. [Question 2]
3. [Question 3]
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentence overview of key findings and implications]
## Key Themes
### Theme 1: [Theme Name]
[Full theme documentation as shown in example above]
### Theme 2: [Theme Name]
[Full theme documentation]
[Continue with 4-8 themes]
## Pain Points Summary
| Pain Point | Severity | Frequency | Current Workaround |
|------------|----------|-----------|-------------------|
| [Pain 1] | High | 10/12 users | [How they cope] |
| [Pain 2] | Medium | 7/12 users | [How they cope] |
## Feature Requests
### Must-Have
1. **[Request]** - Mentioned by [X] participants
- Quote: "[Representative quote]"
- Underlying need: [Why they want this]
### High Value
[Similar structure]
### Nice-to-Have
[Similar structure]
## Recommendations
### High Priority (0-3 months)
1. **[Recommendation]**
- Supporting evidence: [Data from research]
- Expected impact: [What will improve]
- Effort estimate: [Rough sizing]
### Medium Priority (3-6 months)
[Similar structure]
### Future Consideration (6+ months)
[Similar structure]
## Open Questions
1. [Question requiring more research]
2. [Uncertainty to validate]
3. [Follow-up study needed]
## Appendix
- Interview guide used
- Full participant demographics
- Raw notes/transcripts (link)
business
Analyze why deals are won and lost and turn it into an action plan. Use when asked to run a win/loss analysis, review closed-won and closed-lost deals, understand why the team is losing to a competitor, or summarize sales feedback into patterns. Produces a structured win/loss report with themes, win/loss rates by segment and competitor, representative quotes, and prioritized actions for product, marketing, and sales.
development
Route a fuzzy request to the right skill in this library. Use when the user is unsure which skill fits, asks 'which skill should I use for X', describes a task without naming a skill, or when a request could plausibly match several skills. Produces a best-fit recommendation with the inputs to gather, a runner-up with the tie-breaker, and a workflow recipe when the job spans multiple skills.
testing
Triage a vulnerability or scanner finding — assess real severity, exploitability, and how urgently to fix. Use when asked to triage a CVE, prioritize scanner/pentest findings, assess a vuln's risk, or decide what to patch first. Produces a triage verdict: CVSS-informed severity adjusted for your context, exploitability, real risk, a fix/mitigation, and an SLA — so you fix what matters, not just what's red.
development
Stand up a Voice of Customer (VoC) program that turns feedback into action. Use when asked to build a VoC program, design a customer feedback loop, consolidate feedback sources, or set up a closed-loop feedback process. Produces a VoC program design — objectives, feedback sources and channels, a taxonomy, collection and analysis cadence, closed-loop routing, ownership, and success metrics.