A fake need is not the user lying to you. It is the user answering a hypothetical question — and people are always too optimistic about their hypothetical selves.
What you'll run into
调研时人人说好，上线后使用率个位数
为一个功能做了三周，最后发现只有提这个需求的人在用
功能越加越多，但核心指标一动不动
Where fake needs come from
来路
长什么样
用户表达不准
他说不清自己要什么，或者说出来的是他见过的某个方案
过度设计
沉进细节和功能里，忘了当初要解决的是什么
错误的假设
基于一份调研报告或者对手的动作，推出一个没验证过的结论
技术驱动
手上有个新技术，于是找场景硬套。这一轮 AI 功能里特别多
These four share a shape: the user is asking for "more options," when what would actually improve the experience is "better defaults." Giving options is easier than making decisions, so adding options is often laziness.
Four sieves
No user research needed — these four questions get you most of the way there on the spot.
These four share a shape: the user is asking for "more options," when what would actually improve the experience is "better defaults." Giving options is easier than making decisions, so adding options is often laziness.
A few typical cases
听起来的需求
实际情况
真正该做的
希望能自定义主题色
提的人是设计师，普通用户不会改
把默认配色做好看，别做设置面板
希望支持导出所有格式
九成用户只用其中一种
把最常用那种做到最好
希望有 AI 助手
他见别的产品有，说不清自己要它干嘛
找出他手工重复最多的那一步，只做那一步
希望页面能自由拖拽布局
调过一次之后再没动过
把默认布局排对，做两三个预设就够
These four share a shape: the user is asking for "more options," when what would actually improve the experience is "better defaults." Giving options is easier than making decisions, so adding options is often laziness.
