How do I know what users need, not just what they say?

A user tells you their trouble in the only words they have. Those words are not lies, but they are not the diagnosis either. They are a symptom wearing whatever language was closest at hand. You want to be helpful, so you take the words at face value. This feels like listening. It is often something weaker — relief that the conversation is over, dressed up as respect for what they said. The fix is not cleverness. It is discipline. Watch what a person does, not what they wish. Ask about their last attempt, not their next hope. The truth is in their history, not their phrasing.

◆ How this problem reads on the two dials

GuidanceKnowledge

More coaching

A little to learn

1:1 with AureliusWith others (a Pod)

Mostly you & the coach

A little with peers

The core idea — separate stated wants from acted-on needs — is simple to state but hard to hold onto under pressure, so this leans on practice and self-checking more than new theory.

How the two dials adapt to you →

What’s really going on

You cannot. Not from words alone. People describe symptoms in whatever language they have on hand — that is not the same as the cause. Stop asking what they want. Ask what they did, what it cost them, and what they tried before they came to you.

🔒 What you’ll build togetherUnlock by starting

A moveAsk what they did the last time this problem hit them — not what they'd like done now

A moveList every workaround they've already built. That list is the true size of their pain

A moveWrite their exact words. Beside them, write the need those words might be hiding

A moveAsk what this problem costs them — hours, money, or standing lost. A wish has no cost. A need does

A moveNotice when an answer makes you relieved. That relief is a signal to question harder, not less

What changes unlock by starting

You stop treating enthusiasm as proof
You keep a working list: words said, needs beneath them
You can tell a wish from a wound in a single conversation
Your next discovery call asks sharper, harder questions

One object, two jobs: a public answer to a real problem, and — the moment you start the chat — Aurelius’s live plan for your version of it.