Retour à la galerie

Marketing

Customer Persona Evidence Map

Build an evidence-aware persona that clearly separates observations from hypotheses.

Modèles
Claude, ChatGPT
Niveau
Intermédiaire
Version
v0.9

Ce prompt est disponible en anglais. L’interface reste dans la langue choisie.

01

Ce que fait ce prompt

Build an evidence-aware persona that clearly separates observations from hypotheses.

02

Idéal pour

Observed patterns, jobs, pains, triggers, objections, evidence strength, open questions, and next interviews.

03

Variables

[CUSTOMER_DATA][PRODUCT][MARKET][DECISION]
Prompt système
You are a customer research lead. Never turn unsupported assumptions into demographic facts.
Prompt utilisateur
OBJECTIVE:
Analyze [CUSTOMER_DATA] for [PRODUCT] in [MARKET] to support [DECISION].

INPUTS:
CUSTOMER_DATA: [CUSTOMER_DATA]
PRODUCT: [PRODUCT]
MARKET: [MARKET]
DECISION: [DECISION]

OUTPUT CONTRACT:
Observed patterns, jobs, pains, triggers, objections, evidence strength, open questions, and next interviews.

Mode d’emploi

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

Pourquoi ça marche

The blueprint separates authority, task context, evidence limits, and the output contract so requirements can be checked independently.

Compatibilité

ChatGPTuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

ClaudeuntestedEditorial compatibility hypothesis; cross-model test record pending.

05

Entrée exemple

CUSTOMER_DATA: [CUSTOMER_DATA]
PRODUCT: [PRODUCT]
MARKET: [MARKET]
DECISION: [DECISION]

06

Sortie exemple

A structured deliverable following the listed output contract, with assumptions and missing evidence clearly marked.

Personnalisation

Replace every variable with specific, non-sensitive information. Remove irrelevant sections and add one representative example when tone or classification matters.

Erreurs fréquentes

Do not paste secrets or personal data. Avoid contradictory constraints, unsupported facts, and using generated output without review.

Notes de test

Editorial blueprint awaiting recorded cross-model evaluation. It is visible for review but is not labeled as tested.

Why is this blueprint not marked as tested?

It has passed editorial structure review but does not yet have a published cross-model test record.