Lean Ux CanvasSAFE

Product Management skills framework built on battle-tested methods for Claude Code, Cowork, Codex, and AI agents.

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: lean-ux-canvas
argument-hint: "[business problem]"
description: Guide teams through Lean UX Canvas v2. Use when framing a business problem, surfacing assumptions, and defining what to learn next.
intent: >-
  Guide product managers through creating **Jeff Gothelf's Lean UX Canvas (v2)**—a one-page facilitation tool that frames work around a **business problem to solve**, not a **solution to implement**. Use this to align cross-functional teams around core assumptions, craft testable hypotheses, and ensure learning happens every sprint by exposing gaps in understanding (problem, users, value, and why the solution should work).
type: interactive
best_for:
  - "Framing a business problem before solutioning"
  - "Surfacing assumptions in a cross-functional workshop"
  - "Turning a vague initiative into hypotheses and learning goals"
scenarios:
  - "Help me run a Lean UX Canvas workshop for onboarding drop-off"
  - "Use Lean UX Canvas to frame a new AI product idea"
  - "We have a business problem but too many assumptions. Run a Lean UX Canvas session."
theme: validation-experiments
estimated_time: "30-45 min"
---

## Purpose

Guide product managers through creating **Jeff Gothelf's Lean UX Canvas (v2)**—a one-page facilitation tool that frames work around a **business problem to solve**, not a **solution to implement**. Use this to align cross-functional teams around core assumptions, craft testable hypotheses, and ensure learning happens every sprint by exposing gaps in understanding (problem, users, value, and why the solution should work).

This is not a roadmap or feature list—it's an **"insurance policy"** that turns assumptions into experiments before committing to full development. The canvas shifts conversations from **outputs** to **outcomes** and ensures teams build the right thing, not just build things right.

## Input

**Works best with:** The business problem you're framing — or the solution idea you're being handed, which the canvas will reframe as a problem.
**Also useful:** Known users, evidence so far, and what the team already believes (assumptions to surface).

Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended `ARGUMENTS:` line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.

**Arriving empty-handed? That works too.** The skill opens with Box 1: what business problem are you trying to solve?

**Example invocation:** `Fill a Lean UX canvas: leadership wants 'an AI chatbot' — underlying problem seems to be support ticket volume growing 3x faster than the team.`

## Key Concepts

### What is the Lean UX Canvas?

The **Lean UX Canvas (v2)** is a structured, one-page template designed to help teams frame their work around a business problem, not a solution. It aligns cross-functional teams on:
- What problem exists (and why it matters now)
- What measurable outcomes indicate success
- Who we're solving for
- What assumptions we're making
- What we need to learn first
- What experiments will test those assumptions

**Origin:** Created by Jeff Gothelf, author of *Lean UX* (O'Reilly, 2013). Version 2 was released to improve clarity around business vs. user outcomes.

**Key Insight:** The canvas acts like an **insurance policy**—it exposes gaps in understanding before you build, ensuring you don't waste sprints on the wrong thing.

---

### Canvas Structure (8 Boxes)

**Layout (3 columns × 3 rows):**

```
┌─────────────────────┬──────────────┬───────────────────────┐
│ 1. Business Problem │              │ 2. Business Outcomes  │
│                     │              │                       │
├─────────────────────┤ 5. Solutions ├───────────────────────┤
│ 3. Users            │  (tall box   │ 4. User Outcomes      │
│                     │   spanning   │    & Benefits         │
├─────────────────────┤   rows 1-2)  ├───────────────────────┤
│ 6. Hypotheses       │──────────────┤ 8. Least Work /       │
│                     │ 7. Learn     │    Experiments        │
│                     │    First     │                       │
└─────────────────────┴──────────────┴───────────────────────┘
```

**The 8 Boxes (fill in this order):**

1. **Business Problem** — What changed in the world that created a problem worth solving?
2. **Business Outcomes** — What measurable behavior change indicates success?
3. **Users** — Which persona(s) should you focus on first?
4. **User Outcomes & Benefits** — Why would users seek this? What benefit do they gain?
5. **Solutions** — What features/initiatives might solve the problem and meet user needs?
6. **Hypotheses** — Testable assumptions combining boxes 2-5 (If/Then format)
7. **What's Most Important to Learn First?** — The single riskiest assumption right now
8. **What's the Least Work to Learn Next?** — Smallest experiment to validate/invalidate that assumption

---

### Why This Works

**Problem-First, Not Solution-First:**
Starts with "what changed in the world?" not "we should build X." This prevents solution-driven thinking.

**Assumption-Driven:**
Makes hypotheses explicit before building. Every discipline surfaces their risks (technical feasibility, user value, business viability).

**Experiment-Focused:**
Tests assumptions before committing resources. Small experiments beat big bets.

**Cross-Functional Alignment:**
Shared canvas creates common language. Everyone sees the same gaps in understanding.

---

### Key Distinctions (Avoid Confusion)

**Box 2 (Business Outcomes) vs. Box 4 (User Outcomes):**
- **Box 2:** Measurable **behavior change** (retention rate, time on site, average order value)
- **Box 4:** **Goals, benefits, emotions, empathy** (save money, get promoted, spend time with family)

Box 2 is metrics. Box 4 is human.

**Solutions (Box 5) Are Hypotheses, Not Commitments:**
List candidate solutions (features, policies, even business model shifts). You're not committing to build all of them—you're exploring the solution space.

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

What the source does

Filesystem

none-observed

Network

none-observed

Shell

none-observed

Dependencies

pinned

Secrets in source

none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.