Customer Problems (CP)

Customer Problems (CP)

Step 1 of the Problem-Based SRS methodology
Domain: WHY — Explains why the solution is needed

Purpose

Guide AI coding agents through identifying, documenting, and validating Customer Problems from business context. Customer Problems represent the WHY domain — they provide the business justification for why a software solution is needed. All subsequent artifacts (Software Glance, Customer Needs, Software Vision, Requirements) derive from CPs.

Scope

Two Modes of Operation

Mode 1: CP Generation

Use when starting from business context to discover and document problems.

Mode 2: CP Review & Normalization

Use when you have draft CP statements that need quality review and formatting.

Mode 1: CP Generation

Your Task

Analyze the provided business context and generate Customer Problem statements.

Input Required

• Business Context: Description of the business domain, current situation, and scope
• Stakeholder Information: Who experiences the problems (optional but helpful)

Discovery Questions

Ask these questions to elicit problems:

1. Obligations:

   • What legal or contractual requirements must be met?
   • What regulations apply to this business?
   • What happens if compliance fails?

2. Expectations:

   • What do customers/users expect that isn't being delivered?
   • What business goals are not being met?
   • What standards should be achieved but aren't?

3. Hopes:

   • What improvements would stakeholders like to see?
   • What optimizations are desired?
   • What new capabilities are wished for?

4. Consequences:

   • What happens if these issues aren't addressed?
   • What is the cost of the current situation?
   • Who is impacted and how severely?

Mode 2: CP Review & Normalization

Your Task

For each draft problem:

1. Normalize into the CP syntax: [Subject] [Verb] [Object] [Penalty]
2. Classify as Obligation, Expectation, or Hope
3. Flag missing elements (subject, object, penalty, or severity verb)
4. Ask clarifying questions only when required data is missing

CP Structured Notation

Each Customer Problem MUST follow this syntax:

[Subject] [Verb] [Object] [Penalty/Consequence]

Components:

• Subject: Who suffers the problem (company, manager, customer, department)
• Verb: Indicates severity class (must/expects/hopes)
• Object: The difficulty or requirement
• Penalty: Consequence if problem persists

Problem Classification

Classify each CP by severity:

Output Format

For Mode 1 (Generation)

For each identified problem, produce:

### CP-[ID]: [Brief Title]

**Statement:** [Subject] [Verb] [Object] [Penalty]

**Classification:** [Obligation | Expectation | Hope]

**Subject:** [Who has this problem]

**Consequence if Unsolved:**
- [Negative impact 1]
- [Negative impact 2]

**Benefit if Solved:**
- [Positive outcome 1]
- [Positive outcome 2]

For Mode 2 (Review)

## Normalized Customer Problems

| CP ID | Normalized Statement | Class | Missing Info |
|-------|----------------------|-------|--------------|
| CP.1 | [Subject] [Verb] [Object] [Penalty] | [Obligation/Expectation/Hope] | [None or list] |

## Clarification Questions (if any)
- [Question 1]
- [Question 2]

Examples

Example 1: Obligation

### CP-001: Regulatory Compliance

**Statement:** The company must submit emission compliance reports within 30 days of each quarter end otherwise faces fines up to 5% of revenue.

**Classification:** Obligation

**Subject:** The company (compliance department)

**Consequence if Unsolved:**
- Financial penalties (5% revenue)
- Regulatory sanctions
- Public reputation damage

**Benefit if Solved:**
- Regulatory compliance maintained
- Avoid financial penalties
- Maintain operating license

Example 2: Expectation

### CP-002: Customer Response Time

**Statement:** Customers expect responses to support inquiries within 24 hours otherwise they become dissatisfied and may switch to competitors.

**Classification:** Expectation

**Subject:** Customers (end users)

**Consequence if Unsolved:**
- Customer dissatisfaction
- Increased churn rate
- Negative reviews

**Benefit if Solved:**
- Improved customer satisfaction
- Higher retention rates
- Positive word-of-mouth

Example 3: Hope

### CP-003: Sales Forecasting

**Statement:** Management hopes to predict quarterly sales with 85% accuracy otherwise strategic planning remains reactive rather than proactive.

**Classification:** Hope

**Subject:** Management (sales leadership)

**Consequence if Unsolved:**
- Suboptimal resource allocation
- Missed market opportunities
- Reactive decision making

**Benefit if Solved:**
- Better resource planning
- Proactive market positioning
- Improved profitability

Quality Criteria

Ensure each CP:

• ✅ Uses the structured notation (Subject + Verb + Object + Penalty)
• ✅ Has a clear classification (Obligation/Expectation/Hope)
• ✅ Identifies the subject who experiences the problem
• ✅ Specifies consequences if unsolved
• ✅ Specifies benefits if solved
• ✅ Is problem-focused, NOT solution-focused
• ✅ Uses natural language (no technical jargon)

Problem Decomposition

When to Decompose

Decompose a CP into sub-CPs when:

Numbering Convention

CP.1        → Main problem
CP.1.1      → First sub-problem of CP.1
CP.1.2      → Second sub-problem of CP.1
CP.1.2.1    → Sub-sub-problem (rarely needed)

Decomposition Example

Before decomposition:

CP.1: The company must ensure effective communication with customers, 
      otherwise it loses customers affecting marketing and sales.

After decomposition:

CP.1: The company must ensure effective communication with customers, 
      otherwise it loses customers affecting marketing and sales.

CP.1.1: The company must ensure it can contact all customers 
        (having valid contact information).

CP.1.2: The company must ensure each customer is contacted regularly 
        (frequency of communication).

Why decompose? CP.1 has two distinct facets:

• Ability to contact (CP.1.1) — solved by contact database
• Regularity of contact (CP.1.2) — solved by scheduling/reminders

When NOT to Decompose

• Problem is already atomic (single concern)
• Sub-problems would be trivial or obvious
• Decomposition creates artificial complexity
• All aspects share the same solution

Decomposition Checklist

• Parent CP captures the overall problem
• Each sub-CP addresses a distinct facet
• Sub-CPs together fully cover the parent
• Sub-CPs use consistent numbering (CP.n.m)
• Sub-CPs have their own classifications (may differ from parent)

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Validation Checklist

Before proceeding to Step 2 (Software Glance), verify:

• All identified problems are documented as CPs
• Each CP uses structured notation
• Every CP includes Subject, Verb, Object, Penalty
• Verb matches correct severity class
• Classifications assigned to all CPs
• Consequences and benefits documented
• Stakeholders agree these represent real business problems
• No solutions are embedded in problem statements

Handoff to Next Step

When CPs are complete, provide:

✅ Step 1 Complete: Customer Problems Specified

Summary:
- [N] Obligations identified
- [N] Expectations identified  
- [N] Hopes identified

Artifacts:
[List CP-IDs with brief titles]

→ Next Step: 2 - Software Glance
→ Input: The CPs documented above

Usage

GitHub Copilot

/cp

Business Context:
[paste description]

Claude Code

Apply CP generation

Project: [name]
Business Context: [description]

References

• Problem-Based SRS Paper (Gorski & Stadzisz) - docs/Problem-Based-SRS-Paper.md

Version: 1.0
Step: 1 of 5
Next: Software Glance