When providing AI services, the easiest thing to keep is the transaction record, and the easiest thing to throw away are those consultations that stopped halfway. If you only remember "Customer is considering" every time, you will still not know whether you should change the service, change the group of people, or improve communication after a few months. The following is the business review method proposed by ChinaOPC. It is not a completed user survey, nor does it provide a transaction rate commitment.
First record how the customer originally completed this matter
Y Combinator’s public course introduction emphasizes understanding needs from users’ real experiences and specific problems. By applying this idea to unfinished review, you can first save the latest task, current practices and difficulties mentioned by the customer, instead of writing about the advantages of your own product first.
For example, when asked about "AI sorting after-sales information", one store may only encounter a few searches per month, while another company may have new people asking repeatedly every day. It sounds like they are buying the same tools, but the frequency of problems and the people responsible for them are different. Without this background, it is difficult to judge whether the market needs this service simply by looking at whether the offer is accepted.
Do not write speculation as reason for rejection
It is recommended to divide the record into three columns: what the customer clearly said, what can be observed so far, and what you don’t know yet. "The budget will not be approved until next year" is the other party's expression, "No reply has been given after sending out the sample draft" is observation, and "I think the price is high" may just be a guess. AI can help organize existing records, but the original basis should be retained and allowed to be classified as unknown.
Don't let the tool supplement the income, purchasing power or personality based on the customer's identity, and don't automatically ask questions continuously just because the other party is silent. Existing communication data should be handled according to the original authorization and purpose. Anonymous numbers can be used for internal review within the team. There is no need to distribute complete chat and contact information to all collaborators.
Only answer one question per adjustment
If several clear feedbacks point to the delivery scope being too broad, you can try to reduce the service to a checkable result; if the customer already has a reliable method, you should confirm which step is omitted by the new solution; if the task itself rarely occurs, continuous subscription may not be the appropriate form. The above are all judgments that need to be verified, and cannot be inferred from a small number of consultations to the conclusion of the entire industry.
The review table retains a "next verification action" and date at the end, such as showing a shorter sample, supplementing handover instructions, or stopping promoting a feature that no one uses. Connect the action with the original feedback to know whether the original problem has been solved after the modification. Extended reading: Who to look for in the first round of trials.