Start from a real problem — pick one WORTH solving
🎯 Goal: Learn to SCORE a problem on a 3-axis framework to decide whether it is worth a startup, instead of falling in love with an idea emotionally.
Most startups die not from a bad product but from solving a problem that isn’t big enough. This lesson gives you a quantitative framework to separate a problem worth solving from a nice-sounding idea: a strong problem is PAINFUL (solving it clearly relieves suffering), FREQUENT (recurs often) and WIDESPREAD (many people face it). You’ll leave with a scoring matrix usable on any idea.
Lesson content
🎯
The problem matters more than the idea. The idea is how you solve it; the problem is why customers pay. You can change ideas ten times, but if the problem is big enough you still have a path. That’s why great founders love the problem, not their solution — they’ll drop a solution that doesn’t relieve real pain.
🧭
The 3-axis framework — score each 1–5: • Pain: how much relief once solved? (1 = mildly convenient; 5 = miserable without it). • Frequency: how often do they face it? (1 = every few years; 5 = daily). • Reach: how many face it? (1 = tiny niche; 5 = millions). Multiply the three (max 125) to compare ideas objectively instead of arguing by gut feel.
🧰
TOOL — Problem-scoring matrix (fill it, then multiply):
Problem
Pain
Frequency
Reach
Total (×)
Topping up / transferring money is a hassle
3
5
5
75
A “cool” pet-name generator app
1
1
2
2
Higher = stronger. Below ~20 is usually a vitamin (nice to have); above ~60 is a painkiller (miserable without it).
🌏
Case study — MoMo (step by step): 1) Problem: transferring/topping up money and paying bills in Vietnam used to be painful (queues, cash). 2) Score: pain 3 · frequency 5 · reach 5 → very strong. 3) Why it won: very high frequency & reach built a daily app-opening habit, enabling cross-selling many services. Contrast — Coolmate: the problem “buying basic menswear is slow and annoying” — moderate pain but recurring (everyday clothing) and wide; they won by nailing that repeated hassle.
⚠️
4 traps when picking a problem: • Loving a “cool” idea nobody actually finds painful. • Confusing vitamin with painkiller: “nice to have” doesn’t open wallets. • Market too narrow: real pain but too few people. • Imagining demand: scoring by your own feelings instead of asking real people.
✅
Checklist before committing to a problem: ① Do I face this problem myself? ② Who is “suffering” it and how do they cope today? ③ Have they already spent money/time trying to solve it? ④ Does it recur often enough? ⑤ If it vanished tomorrow, would anyone miss it?
Practice exercise
🔬 APPLIED EXERCISE (1 week): (1) Log 5 problems you observe in daily life. (2) Score each on the 3-axis matrix and multiply. (3) Pick the highest and interview 3 real people in the spirit of The Mom Test (Rob Fitzpatrick): ask about the LAST TIME they hit the problem and what they DID — never “do you like my idea?”.
Worked template: FILLED EXAMPLE: “Students struggle to track spending” → pain 3, frequency 5, reach 4 = 60 (mild painkiller). Interviewing 3 students: 2/3 say they run out of money monthly and tried a notebook but quit → real behaviour shows the pain is real and the old fix wasn’t good enough.
Quick quiz
1. Problem A (pain 5, freq 1, reach 2) vs B (pain 3, freq 4, reach 5). For a product used REPEATEDLY, which is stronger?
→ B, because high frequency and reach mean many uses and a large market
A strong problem must be high on BOTH frequency and reach for a repeatedly-used product; deep pain that’s rare means a small, weak market.
2. What is the core difference between a “painkiller” and a “vitamin”?
→ Without a painkiller people truly suffer and will pay
A painkiller = miserable without it, people pay; a vitamin is only “nice to have” and hard to sell.
3. Why “love the problem, not the solution”?
→ Because you can change solutions many times; if the problem is big you still have a path
Loving the problem lets you switch solutions freely; a big enough problem is what keeps the company alive.
4. Which question fits the Mom Test spirit when validating a problem?
→ “When did you last hit this problem and what did you do?”
The Mom Test asks about PAST behaviour (last time, what they did), avoiding leading questions that fish for praise.
5. A problem scored “pain 5, frequency 1, reach 1” is usually weak because?
→ Its total is low due to being rare and a tiny market
Deep pain but frequency & reach both 1 gives a low total — a market too small to sustain a company.
6. The best signal that a problem is worth solving is?
→ People already spend money/time hacking a fix themselves
People who already spent money/time hacking a fix are the strongest behavioural proof the problem is worth solving.
Advanced
A deeper framework
At an advanced level, distinguish problem–solution fit (a real problem + a solution that truly addresses it) from product–market fit (the market pulling the product). This lesson handles the first layer.
A quantitative trick: estimate “pain-events/year × number of people” to picture total market “pain volume” — this caps potential revenue.
Estimating a market’s “pain volume”
Problem X: 2M people × 12/year
24M pain-events/year
Capture 2,000₫ value each
Ceiling ~48B/year
Problem Y: 5,000 people × 1/year
5,000 events — tiny ceiling
Deep pain isn’t enough if it’s rare: total “pain volume” sets the market ceiling.
Common trap: The “imaginary market” (fake TAM): summing everyone who “could in theory use it” instead of people who truly hurt and will pay. Always estimate from real behaviour, not wishes.
Advanced questions
1. Problem X: 2M people × 12 pain-events/year. Problem Y: 5,000 people × 1/year, deeper pain. On market CEILING, which is stronger and why?
→ X, because total “pain volume/year” is far larger (24M vs 5,000)
Revenue ceiling scales with total pain volume (events × people). X dominates in aggregate even though each Y event is deeper.
2. What error is a “fake TAM”?
→ Summing people who “could theoretically use it”, not those who truly hurt and pay
A fake TAM inflates the market with non-payers; estimates must rest on real behaviour and willingness to pay.
3. How does problem–solution fit differ from product–market fit?
→ PS-fit: the solution truly addresses a real problem; PM-fit: the market pulls the product (growth & retention)
PS-fit is the prerequisite: before the market “pulls” (PM-fit), the solution must genuinely solve the pain.
🎯 Real-life mission
REAL-LIFE MISSION: Pick one problem you observe, score it on the 3-axis matrix, then interview 5 people using the Mom Test — NEVER ask “do you like my idea?”. Ask about the LAST TIME they hit it and what they DID (did they spend money/time?). Write up: your matrix score + 3 quotes of real behaviour (not praise).