agentleFS
fzfcleefzfclee/consulting-skills/skills/empathy-map/SKILL.md

empathy-map

Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use when stakeholder motivation is unclear and the work requires a grounded, human view before messaging or intervention design. Use when applying the Empathy Map consulting method and when a user asks for Empathy Map, method execution, structured diagnosis, or action planning.

3 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈4

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Use this skill to run Empathy Map as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.

    line 9
  2. Distinctive:

    Use Says, Thinks, Does, Feels.

    line 13
  3. Distinctive:

    Never put guesses into Says or Does.

    line 14
  4. Very specific:

    If an input is missing, do not block automatically.

    line 25
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not use to invent what users think or feel, or to map organizational power.

    line 29
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.

    line 86

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Empathy Map

Use this skill to run Empathy Map as a practical consulting method, not as a generic framework explanation.

Method Notes

  • Use Says, Thinks, Does, Feels; optionally add pains, gains, pressures, and trust signals.
  • Never put guesses into Says or Does.

Required Inputs

Collect or infer these inputs before execution:

  • target person or segment
  • observed behavior
  • quotes or facts
  • uncertain assumptions

If an input is missing, do not block automatically. Mark it as missing, state the assumption used, and add a validation action.

When Not To Use

Do not use to invent what users think or feel, or to map organizational power. Base the map on a defined user and context, with observations or interviews separated from assumptions.

Adjacent Methods

  • jobs-to-be-done: customer progress and switching forces.
  • user-journey-mapping: chronological experience across stages.
  • service-blueprint: service operations and handoffs.

Step-by-Step Execution

StepRequired inputHow to executeOutput
Choose targetOne user, persona, buyer, stakeholder, or segment.State the person/context and the decision the map should support.Empathy-map scope.
Collect evidenceQuotes, observed behavior, meeting notes, interview notes, usage data.Separate direct evidence from interpretation before filling quadrants.Evidence list.
Fill quadrantsEvidence list.Map Says, Thinks, Does, and Feels; optionally add pains, gains, pressures, and trust signals.Empathy map.
Identify patternsCompleted map.Find contradictions, repeated concerns, hidden anxieties, and unmet needs.Need and concern diagnosis.
Translate to actionDiagnosis, message goal, product/service/action options.Define message, question, offer, service change, or validation step.Action implications.

Output Template

### 1. Actor And Evidence
Actor / segment:
Situation:
Decision to inform:
Evidence sources:

### 2. Observed And Inferred Map
| Dimension | Observation | Fact / inference | Evidence | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |  |

### 3. Needs And Tensions
| Need / fear | Supporting evidence | Implication |
|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |

### 4. Actionable Test
| Hypothesis | Conversation / observation | Owner | Signal |
|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |

### Evidence And Next Decision
- Confirmed facts:
- Assumptions:
- Missing evidence:
- Next action, owner, and timing:
- Expected signal and decision threshold:

Quality Gate

  • Produce the method-specific outputs for Actor And Evidence, Observed And Inferred Map, Needs And Tensions; do not substitute a generic framework summary.
  • Tie every material score, causal claim, or stakeholder judgment to evidence or label it as an assumption.
  • Include at least one disconfirming check, sensitivity, alternative explanation, or failure condition appropriate to the method.
  • Convert the result into a named action or decision with an owner or stakeholder, timing, and observable signal.
  • State missing inputs and the smallest validation action instead of inventing precision.
  • Keep wording professional and plain enough that a smart non-specialist can use the output directly.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.