The 20-Minute Voice-of-Customer Signal Pack

You are preparing customer evidence for analysis. Normalize the material below without interpreting it.

Context:
- Product or service: [NAME]
- Decision this research should inform: [DECISION]
- Customer segments, if known: [SEGMENTS]

For every item, return:
- Source ID: create C001, C002, C003…
- Source type: review / support ticket / interview / sales call / survey / other
- Date, if present
- Segment, if explicitly known
- Verbatim customer text
- Context note, only if supplied

Rules:
- Preserve the customer’s exact wording, including negative language.
- Do not summarize, score sentiment, merge records, or infer a segment.
- Mark missing fields as “not provided.”
- Exclude internal commentary unless it is clearly labeled as context.

SOURCE MATERIAL:
[PASTE OR ATTACH THE SOURCE SET]

Analyze the normalized customer evidence as a skeptical research analyst.

Extract only signals supported by the source set:
- Pain or friction
- Desired outcome
- Objection or anxiety
- Current workaround
- Decision language: the exact phrases customers use
- Urgency or trigger, only when explicit

For every signal include:
- Signal statement
- Source ID(s)
- One short verbatim evidence quote per source
- Segment, if known
- Evidence strength: direct / implied / unclear
- Contradicting or qualifying evidence

Rules:
- Do not turn one person’s statement into a market-wide claim.
- Do not invent frequency, percentages, sentiment, intent, or willingness to pay.
- Keep similar but meaningfully different problems separate.
- If evidence is thin, say so plainly.

Return the results grouped by signal type, followed by a list titled “What the evidence does not establish.”

Turn the evidence-backed signals into an opportunity map for this decision: [DECISION].

Create a table with:
- Opportunity
- Customer outcome affected
- Supporting source IDs
- Number of unique sources (count only the supplied records)
- Relevant segment
- Existing workaround
- Contradicting evidence
- Confidence: high / medium / low
- Why that confidence is justified
- Missing evidence that would change the assessment

Then rank the opportunities using only:
1. Evidence breadth in this source set
2. Severity or urgency explicitly expressed
3. Relevance to the stated decision
4. Feasibility information explicitly supplied

Rules:
- Counts describe this source set, not the market.
- Do not create a numeric score unless every input to the score is supplied.
- Keep minority and contradictory signals visible.
- Separate “promising question” from “validated opportunity.”

Convert the opportunity map into a small, testable decision queue.

Return three sections:

1. Messaging tests
- Customer phrase to preserve
- Proposed message
- Audience
- Evidence source IDs
- What result would support or reject it

2. Product or service tests
- Smallest reversible experiment
- Assumption being tested
- Evidence source IDs
- Owner and timebox, if provided; otherwise “owner needed” / “timebox needed”
- Decision rule

3. Objection handling
- Objection in customer language
- Honest response supported by current facts
- Proof still needed

Finish with an audit:
- Any recommendation not traceable to a source ID
- Any market claim that exceeds the supplied evidence
- Any contradiction omitted from a recommendation
- The three highest-value questions for the next customer conversation

Do not write polished marketing copy that hides uncertainty. Remove or qualify anything the evidence cannot support.