#77 — What is (and isn't) Jobs to be Done? | Field Notes

The "Jobs to be Done" framework has exploded in popularity among startups, but there's a critical confusion that's costing founders a lot of time and money.

Why it matters: Most founders don't realize they're unknowingly applying one of two incompatible theories about why humans buy products - leading to fundamentally misaligned strategies that compete in entirely different universes.

The Hidden Theoretical War

This isn't about choosing different tactics. These are contradictory beliefs about human motivation masquerading as the same framework:

Jobs-As-Activities (championed by Anthony Ulwick):

Core belief: Customers want to "do work" with your product
Theory: People buy products to execute tasks more effectively
Focus: Optimize how users complete existing activities
Essentially repackaged task analysis and user experience design with JTBD branding

Jobs-As-Progress (promoted by Clayton Christensen and Bob Moesta):

Core belief: Customers want progress without work
Theory: People buy products to achieve life transformations while avoiding tasks
Focus: Eliminate the need for activities entirely
Based on William Powers' goal hierarchy and discrepancy resolution

The incompatibility: You cannot believe both that customers want to do work AND that they want to avoid work. These predict opposite customer behaviors and lead to completely different product strategies.

Why Most Founders Are Unknowingly Confused

The market reality: Most content labeled "JTBD" doesn't specify which interpretation it's using. Founders read Christensen, then apply Ulwick's methods, or vice versa - creating Frankenstein strategies that satisfy neither approach.

The telltale signs you're confused:

You think you're "doing JTBD" but can't explain which theoretical foundation you're using
Your competitive analysis mixes functional substitutes with completely different solution categories
You're optimizing task completion while also trying to eliminate tasks
Your customer interviews focus on workflow improvements rather than life transformations

The Hierarchy That Changes Everything

The Jobs-As-Progress model relies on William Powers' goal hierarchy - a psychological principle most Activities proponents ignore:

"Be" goals: How you want to see yourself (highest priority, stable)
"Do" goals: Activities you perform to achieve "Be" goals (temporary, technology-dependent)
Motor control goals: Physical actions (lowest priority)

The critical insight: Higher-level goals don't depend on lower-level goals, but lower-level goals exist only to serve higher-level goals.

What this means: Customers will abandon any "Do" goal if they can achieve the same "Be" goal differently. This is why:

Uber eliminated "calling taxis" instead of improving taxi apps
IKEA bought TaskRabbit because customers don't want to "assemble furniture"
Netflix killed "going to video stores" rather than making better video stores

Real-World Examples

Activities-Focused Success Stories:

Slack (Team Communication):

Job: Help teams "communicate and collaborate" more effectively within existing workflows
Customers value improved team coordination, not its elimination
Competition: Other messaging platforms, email systems, project management tools
Success metric: Making workplace communication faster, more organized, and searchable
Why it works: Teams genuinely want to communicate - they just want better tools for it

Bosch Power Tools:

Job: Help contractors "complete construction tasks" with greater precision and efficiency
Customers take pride in craftsmanship and building skills
Competition: Other power tool brands optimizing the same construction activities
Success metric: More precise cuts, longer battery life, reduced fatigue during work
Why it works: Construction work is core to professional identity - elimination isn't desired

Adobe Creative Suite:

Job: Help designers "create visual content" with professional-grade capabilities
Customers want mastery over creative processes, not automation of creativity
Competition: Other design software that improves creative workflows
Success metric: More design control, better creative output, faster iteration
Why it works: Creative work provides intrinsic satisfaction - designers want better tools, not creative elimination

Progress-Focused Success Stories:

Clarity.fm's Real Discovery:

Original assumption: Customers wanted "video chat with experts"
Actual job discovered: "Eliminate anxiety about big decisions by getting assurance from someone who's been in a similar position"
Competition: Conferences, advisory shares, LinkedIn networking, books - anything providing entrepreneurial confidence
Success came from understanding customers wanted decision confidence, not consulting conversations
Why it works: Entrepreneurs don't want more meetings - they want certainty without effort

Tesla's Category Creation:

Job: "Travel sustainably and efficiently while feeling environmentally responsible"
Eliminated: Gas station visits, oil changes, emissions guilt, maintenance complexity
Competition: Public transit, bicycles, remote work, carbon offsets - any solution to environmental transportation anxiety
Success metric: Environmental peace of mind plus reliable transportation
Why it works: Customers want sustainable mobility outcomes, not driving experiences

Uber's True Innovation:

Job: "Get from point A to point B reliably without transportation hassles"
Eliminated: Calling dispatchers, carrying cash, waiting uncertainty, availability anxiety
Competition: Car ownership, public transit, walking, moving closer to destinations
Success metric: Frictionless mobility on demand
Why it works: People want transportation outcomes, not transportation processes

The Strategic Implications Are Massive

Activities-Focused Strategy:

Innovation scope: Incremental improvements within existing categories
Competitive landscape: Functionally similar products and services
Customer research: Task analysis, workflow optimization, feature preferences
Success metrics: Task completion rates, efficiency gains, user satisfaction with processes
Risk profile: Lower risk, predictable outcomes, limited disruption potential

Progress-Focused Strategy:

Innovation scope: Category-creating solutions that eliminate entire problem sets
Competitive landscape: Any solution achieving the same life transformation
Customer research: Life circumstances, emotional transformations, "Be" goal discrepancies
Success metrics: Life outcome achievement, behavior change, category adoption
Risk profile: Higher risk, transformative potential, massive disruption opportunity

The "Nothing New" Problem

Critical reality check: The Activities approach has been heavily criticized as repackaging existing methodologies without innovation:

Task analysis (1960s industrial engineering)
Human-Computer Interaction principles
Goal-Directed Design
Traditional market research workflow optimization

Why this matters: If you're applying Activities thinking, you're competing in well-established methodological territory where differentiation is incremental and competitive advantages are temporary.

When Each Approach Actually Works

Choose Activities-Focused When:

Customers derive intrinsic satisfaction from the work itself
Professional identity is tied to skill mastery in the domain
Regulatory or safety requirements mandate human involvement
The market rewards craftsmanship and process expertise
You're entering established categories with clear workflow standards

Choose Progress-Focused When:

Customers view current processes as necessary evils
Technology can automate or eliminate human effort entirely
Emotional outcomes matter significantly more than functional execution
You're willing to create new market categories from scratch
Customer behavior patterns suggest they'd gladly abandon current workflows

The Bottom Line

This isn't about strategic preference - it's about theoretical accuracy. Most founders are unconsciously mixing incompatible frameworks, creating products that excel at neither task optimization nor task elimination.

Activities-focused founders build incrementally better tools for people who want to engage in work. Progress-focused founders eliminate work entirely for people seeking life transformations.

What's next: Audit your current product strategy against these frameworks. If you can't clearly articulate which theoretical foundation you're using, you're probably confused - and so are your customers.