Please don't build for a "user"

My heart sinks whenever a product spec or a startup pitch refers to a generic "user" or a category like "student" because it's a telltale sign that the PM or founder doesn't know whom they are building for and therefore, what the real problem and context is, if there is one at all. And that means the venture is almost certain to fail.

I made the same mistake when I built a product for "people who need therapy". Eventually, I distilled it down to "people with subclinical mental health issues who can't afford therapy", then to "college students who need help", and finally to "college counseling centers who were struggling to support their students". Only then, I was able to identify specific people I could interview, learn their problems more deeply, ideate on solutions, and identify some conferences where I could recruit early customers.

Many PMs and founders worry that by defining a user very specifically ("parent of a kid with peanut allergy in Manhattan" vs "parents"), their market becomes narrow. But the success as an early product or feature isn't driven by a large target audience that barely cares about it. No, it is driven by a product that some people truly love and can't stop raving about. And you can only get there if you spend your limited calories on a narrow, specific customer and problem so you can understand deeply and solve it significantly better than the current way.

So keep asking who is the customer (or ICP) until you get to a very, very specific answer. It's fantastic if you can even name a few actual people who fit the bill. Once you get a PMF foothold, you can always expand to adjacent problems or customer segments.