The 19 Judgment Points
Critical decision moments where human judgment determines discovery outcomes
Signal Evaluation
Do we have initial evidence supporting this signal?
Customer Segment Selection
Are we researching the right people?
Problem Framing
Have we correctly identified the job and breakdown?
Opportunity Prioritisation
Which opportunities deserve focus?
Scope Definition
Which job steps are in/out?
Solution Generation
Are we generating good solution options?
Solution Selection
Are we selecting the right approach?
Critical Assumption Identification
Which assumptions could make the solution fail?
Risk Prioritisation
Which assumptions should we test first?
Prototype Scope and Quality
What scope and quality does the prototype need to validly test our assumptions and deliver representative experience quality?
Test Design
How will we test our assumptions?
Evidence Interpretation
What does this evidence mean?
Signal vs. Noise
Is this finding meaningful or noise?
Confidence Assessment
How confident are we in our conclusions?
Proceed, Iterate, Pivot, or Stop
Do we proceed, iterate, pivot, or stop?
Success Metrics Definition
What outcomes will indicate success, for whom, over what horizon and against which baseline?
Monitoring Signal Selection
Which leading, lagging, risk and harm signals will show whether the outcome is emerging or the decision needs review?
Outcome Interpretation
Did we achieve intended outcomes?
Learning Extraction
What did this discovery effort teach us about our reasoning and practice, and what will we change?
Four Quality Dimensions
Framework for assessing how well you're exercising judgment
Evidence Rigour
How good is the evidence underlying your decisions?
High Rigour
- Multiple independent sources
- Quality honestly assessed
- Gaps acknowledged
- Conclusions proportional
Low Rigor
- Single or convenient sources
- All evidence treated equal
- Gaps ignored
- Strong claims, weak data
Reasoning Transparency
Can you explain how you got from evidence to conclusion?
High Transparency
- Clear evidence → conclusion chain
- Assumptions explicit
- Reasoning challengeable
- Documents explain "why"
Low Transparency
- Conclusions without reasoning
- "Gut feel" as analysis
- Relies on implicit knowledge
- Records "what" not "why"
Bias Awareness
Are you recognizing and compensating for cognitive biases?
High Awareness
- Active bias recognition
- Deliberate countermeasures
- Updates when bias found
- Seeks challenging views
Low Awareness
- Assumes objectivity
- No countermeasures
- Defensive when challenged
- Similar perspectives only
Learning Depth
Are you extracting maximum learning from experience?
High Depth
- Examines wrong decisions
- Updates beliefs on evidence
- Applies lessons across contexts
- Teaches others
Low Depth
- Blames circumstances
- Holds beliefs despite evidence
- Each project isolated
- Learning stays personal
Stages, Activities & Artefacts
The complete discovery process from signal to handoff
| Stage | Activities | Key Artefacts | Judgment Points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 0 Initiation |
0.1 Initial Stakeholder Check-in 0.2 Signal Validation 0.3 Domain Orientation (conditional) 0.4 Draft JTBD Artefacts 0.5 Research & Technical Planning 0.6 Discovery Charter & Stakeholder Alignment |
Discovery Charter Signal Evidence Summary Research Plan Technical Landscape Assessment | JP1 JP2 |
| Stage 1 Problem Discovery |
1.1 Segment Selection 1.2 Interview Protocol Design 1.3 JTBD Research & Validation 1.4 Job Step Needs Analysis 1.5 Opportunity Selection |
Segment Priorities Interview Protocol Job Statement Universal Job Map Job Steps Flow Diagram Problem Statement Opportunity Scores | JP3 JP4 JP5 |
| Stage 2 Solution Design |
2.1 Solution Ideation (OST) 2.2 Solution Evaluation 2.3 Assumption-Risk Mapping 2.4 Job Stories with Acceptance Criteria 2.5 Prototype Creation |
Opportunity Solution Tree Evaluation Grid Assumption Map Job Stories Solution Experience Map Fit-for-purpose Prototype | JP6 JP7 JP8 JP9 JP10 |
| Stage 3 Validation |
3.1 Experiment Design 3.2 D/U/F/V Testing 3.3 Evidence Synthesis 3.4 Confidence Assessment |
Test Plans Success/Failure Criteria Test Results Evidence Map Synthesis Summary Confidence Profile | JP11 JP12 JP13 JP14 JP15 JP16 |
| Stage 4 Handoff |
4.1 Handoff Package Assembly 4.2 Success Metrics & Monitoring 4.3 Risk Documentation 4.4 Discovery Retrospective |
Nine-component Handoff Package Measurement Plan Monitoring Signals Risk Register Retrospective Summary Practice Changes | JP16 JP17 JP19 |
Stage 4 lifecycle: JP16 begins as Stage 3 evidence clarifies intended outcomes and is formalised in Activity 4.2 before delivery. Activity 4.2 formalises outcomes, beneficiaries, baselines, indicators, thresholds, methods/data sources, cadence, owners and response rules. The handoff retrospective uses JP19 while reasoning is fresh; the later post-delivery outcome review uses JP18 → JP19 once observable outcomes exist.
Prototype state at Gate 4: Disposable Prototype · Retained Learning Asset · Internal Pilot · Production Candidate. Vision Prototype ≠ authorised backlog; the Validated Build Boundary defines authorised delivery scope.
Nine-component Handoff Package: problem definition, solution rationale, validation evidence, design specifications, research findings, success criteria, known risks, technical translation and experience intent.
Gate Decision Criteria
Evidence-and-judgment conversations with four legitimate outcomes and explicit return paths
Worth Exploring?
After Stage 0: Initiation
Key Criteria
- Credible signal and strategic relevance
- Known constraints and initial assumptions
- Agreed Discovery Charter
- Evidence proportionate to the risk of proceeding
Primary JPs
Possible Outcomes
Worth Solving?
After Stage 1: Problem Discovery
Key Criteria
- Defined segment and validated job
- Problem evidence is decision-relevant
- Underserved-need signal interpreted with qualitative evidence and context
- Scope clearly defined
- Evidence proportionate to solution-investment risk
Primary JPs
Possible Outcomes
Ready to Test?
After Stage 2: Solution Design
Key Criteria
- Distinct solution options and reasoned selection
- Critical assumptions and risks identified
- Acceptance criteria and experience intent defined
- Least expensive, least risky prototype capable of testing the uncertainty
- Triggered governance risks escalated
Primary JPs
Possible Outcomes
Confident to Build?
After Stage 3: Validation
Key Criteria
- Decision-relevant D/U/F/V and other required evidence
- Confidence Profile proportionate to decision risk
- Material gaps, contradictions, residual risks, and dissent explicit
- Validated Build Boundary and conditions defined
- AI Use Record and prototype-promotion controls complete where applicable
Primary JPs
Possible Outcomes
Decision Record: Every gate decision records the accountable owner, evidence, rationale, outcome, conditions, return path and review triggers.
Gate 4 boundary: Proceed authorises delivery of the documented Validated Build Boundary. Production release remains subject to separate delivery and governance controls.
JTBD Artefact Chain
The hierarchy of artefacts that anchor discovery in customer jobs
I want to [motivation]
So I can [outcome]
Maximize [desired]
+ Importance/Satisfaction scores
I want to [action]
So I can [benefit]
Don't skip levels. Each artefact builds on the previous. Job Stories without Step Needs are just dressed-up feature requests. The chain creates traceability: story → need → step → job.