I don’t understand when the author said this. I believe she talked about segmenting by behavior.
I wish we’d break out Jobs Theory (theory) from ODI (application) and Switch Interview (application).
I think we all agree we need
a) a way to identify a Job
b) a way to segment people who have that Job. If you prefer, call them Job Executors.
Starting with observing customers doing something and backing into using that to uncover a Job is maybe not the way the ODI folks do it, but I don’t know why we say it’s directly in conflict with the core Theory.
If we go over to the Five Tenets article, I think we all are ok with: A “job” is not a description of what the customer is doing, the solution they are using, or the steps they are taking to get a job done. Rather, the “job” statement embodies what the customer is ultimately trying to accomplish.
It’s interesting to me that ODI advocates pick on ‘interview people who are currently using a given solution to get a Job Done” as a way to at least start gathering info on the Job. How *do* you identify Job Executors, by the way, if not by behavior?