Target Profile
Who should we build for first? The pain score tells you HOW MUCH someone hurts — but not HOW. At extreme pain (both dimensions ≤ 2), direction is noise — everyone is drowning. At moderate-high pain (4–5), direction matters: a 4/2 person needs QoL relief while a 2/4 person needs execution help. This page answers: which archetype matches what we're building?
The Landscape
Every respondent on the productivity × QoL grid, colored by archetype. Pain ≥ 6 is all "Drowning" (red) — direction only appears at pain 4–5 where it's meaningful.
Archetype Distribution
Head-to-Head: Metric Profiles
How do the target archetypes differ on the key dimensions? Lines connect each archetype's normalized mean scores (0–1) — where lines cross or diverge, that's a product opportunity. Overextended and Blocked should mirror on Productivity vs QoL. Note: sliders use 0–5 scale, frequencies use 1–5 — normalization makes them comparable.
Buying Signals
The question isn't just "who hurts?" — it's "who hurts AND wants what we're building?" Five buying signals compared head-to-head.
Convergence Index
Composite targeting score: addressable fix (25%) + PMF signal (25%) + high drive (20%) + integration pain (15%) + frustrated achiever rate (15%). Higher = better product-market fit for our offering.
What Each Archetype Wants
Fix type distribution reveals product fit. If your target archetype leans toward tool/system fixes — your product thesis is valid for them. If they lean behavioral/mindset — coaching, not software.
Thesis Areas by Archetype
Blocker Landscape maps 35 blocker themes → 6 thesis areas. Which thesis areas dominate each archetype?
Archetype × Work Situation
Same archetypes, different roles. If your target archetype concentrates in specific work situations — that's your beachhead within the beachhead.
Archetype × Role Complexity
Do multi-hat wearers concentrate in specific archetypes? If "Execution Gap" people wear significantly more hats — the product must handle multi-context switching. If "Productive but Paying" are single-focus grinders — they need depth tools, not breadth management.
Hat Count → Archetype
Do more hats push people toward specific pain patterns? Bars show archetype distribution within each hat bucket.
Which Roles Land Where?
Functional role composition per target archetype. If Engineering clusters in "Productive but Paying" while Leadership clusters in "Execution Gap" — these archetypes need different product surfaces.
In Their Words
What would each archetype fix if they could change one thing? (Q15)
Respondent Browser
Browse individual respondents by archetype. Click a row to see their full profile and verbatim responses.
Respondent Profile
How This Page Works
Archetype assignment uses severity-first logic on the same pain score grid as Market Map:
| Pain Level | Balance | Archetype | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| ≥ 6 (sum ≤ 4) | any | Drowning | Both dimensions deeply impaired — direction is noise |
| 4–5 (sum 5–6) | bal ≥ 1 | Overextended | QoL deficit > output deficit — stretching beyond sustainable |
| 4–5 | bal ≤ −1 | Blocked | Output deficit > QoL deficit — something prevents execution |
| 4–5 | |bal| < 1 | Stagnant | Both mediocre and balanced — stuck, not crisis |
| 2–3 (sum 7–8) | any | Mixed | Moderate pain |
| 0–1 (sum 9–10) | any | Comfortable | Low pain |
Why severity-first? At pain ≥ 6, both dimensions are ≤ 2. Calling someone with prod=2/QoL=1 "productive" is misleading — they're just slightly less terrible at output than at life quality. Direction only becomes meaningful at pain 4–5, where at least one dimension reaches 3+.
The convergence index weights five buying signals: addressable fix type (25%), Q25 product signal (25%), high drive rate (20%), integration pain (15%), and frustrated achiever concentration (15%). These weights reflect that wanting what we build and showing PMF signal matter most, while motivation to change and tool frustration are secondary validators.