Customer Segmenting
Generate strategic customer segment definitions for strategy/canvas/04.segments.md .
Prerequisites
Before proceeding, verify:
- strategy/canvas/03.opportunity.md exists (TAM/SAM/SOM data required)
If missing, inform user:
Canvas 03.opportunity.md required before defining segments. Use fnd-researcher agent to establish market sizing first.
Optional context (read if exists):
-
strategy/canvas/01.context.md — KBOS framework
-
strategy/canvas/05.problem.md — Problem severity data
Core Principle
Segments must be observable and strategic:
Criterion Test
Observable Can identify via searchable database query
Sizeable Market size estimable from public data
Accessible Reachable through known channels
Differentiable Distinct needs from other segments
Process
- Load Context
Read available canvas files:
strategy/canvas/03.opportunity.md # Required: TAM/SAM/SOM strategy/canvas/01.context.md # Optional: strategic context strategy/canvas/05.problem.md # Optional: pain data
Extract: market size, trends, existing customer hypotheses.
- List Segment Hypotheses
From market research, identify 3-5 potential customer groups.
For each, capture:
-
Who they are (role, company type)
-
Why they might buy (problem fit)
-
How big the group is (rough estimate)
- Define Observable Filters
For each segment, identify 2-4 searchable criteria.
Valid filters (can query in databases):
-
Company size: "50-200 employees"
-
Industry: "E-commerce, NAICS 454110"
-
Technology: "Uses Shopify Plus"
-
Geography: "US-based, tier-1 cities"
-
Behavior: "Monthly GMV >$100K"
Invalid filters (not searchable):
-
"Innovative companies"
-
"Growth-minded founders"
-
"Customer-centric organizations"
See references/filters.md for comprehensive examples.
- Score Pain Intensity
Rate each segment's pain 1-5:
Score Signal
5 Hair-on-fire, actively buying solutions
4 Significant pain, budget exists
3 Recognized problem, no urgency
2 Mild inconvenience
1 Unaware of problem
Require evidence for each score — job postings, market reports, interview quotes.
See references/scoring.md for detailed rubric.
- Estimate Segment Size
For each segment, calculate:
-
Total matching filters (from industry data)
-
Portion within SAM (addressable)
-
Derivation source (cite report or calculation)
Use 03.opportunity.md TAM/SAM as ceiling.
- Prioritize Segments
Rank by: Pain Intensity × Willingness to Pay × Accessibility
Select:
-
1 Primary (P0) — Immediate focus, highest score
-
1-2 Secondary (P1) — Expansion path
Document rationale for prioritization.
- Write Output
Format per references/template.md.
Write to: strategy/canvas/04.segments.md
Quality Checklist
Before writing output, verify:
-
Each segment has 2+ observable, searchable filters
-
No psychographic traits in filters
-
Segment sizes quantified with sources
-
Pain scores have evidence justification
-
1-3 segments total (not 5+)
-
Clear prioritization rationale
-
Cross-references 05.problem.md if exists
Common Mistakes
Mistake Example Fix
Too many segments 5+ with blurry boundaries Consolidate to 1-3 focused segments
Vague sizing "Large market" "~12,000 US companies matching filters"
Missing pain evidence "Pain: 4" "Pain: 4 — 340 job postings for this role"
Psychographic filters "Forward-thinking retailers" "Retailers >$1M GMV on modern platforms"
No prioritization logic "Both equally important" "Primary: highest pain (5) + proven WTP"
Output Location
strategy/canvas/04.segments.md
Boundaries
-
Does NOT validate segment existence (requires outreach)
-
Does NOT guarantee segment accessibility
-
Does NOT interview customers (provides framework)
-
Segment sizes are estimates from available data
-
Pain scores require evidence — flag when assumed
-
Does NOT handle persona creation (behavior, not demographics)
-
Observable filters must be searchable in databases
-
Psychographic traits are NOT valid filters
Resources
-
Output template: references/template.md
-
Filter examples: references/filters.md
-
Scoring rubric: references/scoring.md