Most solo founder discussion guides fail for the same reason. The founder writes ten questions on a Friday night, runs the first interview on Monday, and realizes by minute twenty that the respondent has wandered into a topic the guide never anticipated. There is no branching logic, no probing sequence, and no structure for returning to the plan. The interview ends at fifty minutes with a handful of anecdotes and no framework for turning them into decisions.
This template fixes that by giving you a battle-tested structure you can run in your next interview today. It covers six sections across 60-90 minutes, with exact questions, probing prompts, and branching notes for when the respondent goes off-script. If you would rather run the interviews through AI moderation, User Intuition’s AI-moderated platform handles the fieldwork at $20 per interview on the Pro plan with 48-72 hour turnaround through a 4M+ respondent panel, and the Starter plan gives you 3 free interviews on signup with no credit card required.
For the broader context on why customer interviews matter for solo founders and how to structure your first ten, start with the companion guide on customer interview questions for solo founders.
How to Use This Discussion Guide Template
Copy the guide into a document, customize the bracketed sections for your specific product and ICP, and read through it once before your first interview. Do not read it during the interview. The goal is to internalize the structure so you can follow the conversation naturally while staying on track.
Read every question as written during the first three interviews. After three runs the questions will feel natural and you can improvise within the structure. Resist the temptation to skip sections when you think you already know the answer. The branching notes tell you when skipping is safe and when it is not.
Keep a single-page tracker next to the guide with three columns: what surprised me, what pattern is forming, and what I need to change. Fill it in the ten minutes after each interview. The tracker is where insight actually lives; the guide is just the structure that lets the insight surface.
Schedule interviews 90 minutes apart on your calendar even though the interview is 60 minutes. The extra 30 minutes is for notes, not for running long. Interviews that run over 75 minutes produce diminishing insight and exhaust the respondent for the critical pricing and closing sections.
Section 1: Opening and Context (5-10 min)
This section establishes rapport, confirms the respondent is the right fit, and sets expectations for the conversation. Do not skip it even when the respondent is clearly engaged from the start. The opening is where you earn the right to ask hard questions later.
Opening script (verbatim):
“Thanks so much for making time today. I wanted to give you a quick heads up on what this will look like before we dive in. I am [name], and I am working on [one-sentence product description, no jargon]. I am not going to pitch you anything today. I am trying to understand how people like you currently handle [problem area], what works, what does not, and what you wish existed. The conversation will run about 60 minutes. Is it okay if I record so I can focus on what you are saying instead of taking notes?”
[Wait for consent. If no, switch to note-taking and say: That is totally fine, I will take notes instead.]
“Before we get into the details, can you walk me through your role and what a typical week looks like for you?”
Probing prompts:
- What part of your week takes the most time?
- Which parts of the job do you enjoy, and which parts feel like a grind?
- Who do you work with most closely, and who do you report to?
[Branching logic: If the respondent’s role does not match your ICP, wrap the interview at the 15-minute mark. Thank them, send the incentive, and move on. Do not force-fit the rest of the guide on the wrong respondent.]
Section 2: Problem Exploration (15-20 min)
This is the most important section of the interview. The goal is to understand the respondent’s current workflow in enough detail that you could describe it to a colleague. Do not ask about your problem area directly in the first few questions. Let them describe their workflow and identify the pain themselves.
Core questions (ask all five):
“Walk me through the last time you [specific activity related to your problem area]. Start from the beginning and talk me through exactly what happened.”
[Probing prompts: What did you do first? Who else was involved? How long did the whole thing take? What tools did you use? What did you do when you got stuck?]
“What about that process works well for you?”
[Probing prompts: What part feels smooth? What would you keep exactly the same? Which tools do you actively like using?]
“What about that process frustrates you or takes longer than it should?”
[Probing prompts: Where do you lose the most time? What causes the most rework? What do you put off doing because it is painful? When was the last time you complained to a coworker about this?]
“If you had a magic wand and could change one thing about how this works today, what would it be?”
[Probing prompts: Why that and not something else? What would change for you if that happened? How often do you wish that was true?]
“How often does this come up in a typical week or month?”
[Branching logic: If the respondent says the problem happens less than once a month or has no real cost, the problem may not be painful enough to support a product. Make a note and continue, but weight their responses accordingly in your synthesis.]
Section 3: Current Workarounds and Alternatives (10 min)
This section uncovers what the respondent is already doing to solve the problem. Current workarounds are the most reliable signal of willingness to pay. If someone has duct-taped together three tools and a spreadsheet to solve a problem, they will pay for a real solution. If they have done nothing, they will not.
Core questions (ask all four):
“What tools or processes do you use today to handle this?”
[Probing prompts: Which one do you use most? Why did you choose that one? What made you stop using previous tools? What does your current setup cost you per month or per year?]
“What have you tried in the past that did not work?”
[Probing prompts: What specifically failed? What did you expect that it did not deliver? How did you discover the gap? How long did you use it before giving up?]
“If your current setup disappeared tomorrow, what would you do?”
[Probing prompts: Who would you ask for recommendations? What would you try first? How long could you operate without it? What would the cost of replacement look like?]
“Have you ever built your own workaround for this, like a spreadsheet, a Zapier flow, or a script?”
[Probing prompts: Walk me through how it works. Who maintains it? What breaks most often? Why did you build it yourself instead of buying something?]
[Branching logic: If the respondent has built significant workarounds, spend extra time here. Workaround architects are your best early adopters and the richest source of feature priority signal. If the respondent has tried nothing, ask why, because the answer tells you whether they lack awareness, lack budget, or do not actually have the problem.]
Section 4: Concept Reaction and Solution Fit (15-20 min)
This is the first section where you describe your product. Do it in three sentences, not thirty. The longer you talk, the less they talk, and their reactions are the data you came for.
Concept intro (verbatim template):
“I want to show you what I am building and get your honest reaction. The short version is: [one-sentence product description]. It works by [one-sentence mechanism]. The outcome we are aiming for is [one-sentence benefit]. What is your immediate reaction?”
[Let them talk for at least 60 seconds before responding. Resist the urge to clarify or defend. Silence is data.]
Core questions (ask all five):
“What questions does that raise for you?”
[Probing prompts: What seems unclear? What would you need to know before trying it? What assumptions am I making that might not hold for you?]
“How does this compare to what you are using today?”
[Probing prompts: What would this replace? What would this add? What would you still need to use alongside it? What is missing that you would expect?]
“Walk me through when and how you would actually use this, if it existed today.”
[Probing prompts: What would trigger you to open it? Who else would need to be involved? How often would you use it? What would the first session look like?]
“What is the single biggest thing that would make you NOT use this?”
[Probing prompts: What would be a dealbreaker? What would your team object to? What would your boss or procurement ask? What security or compliance concerns come up?]
“Who else on your team would care about this, and who would push back?”
[Probing prompts: Who benefits most? Who would see this as a threat to their existing work? Who signs off on tools like this? Who pays for it?]
[Branching logic: If the reaction is flat or skeptical, do not fight it. Ask one follow-up: What would need to be true for this to be interesting to you? Then move on to pricing. If the reaction is enthusiastic, ask: What specifically resonates? You need to know whether the enthusiasm is about the problem or the solution, because they are different signals.]
Section 5: Pricing and Willingness to Pay (10 min)
Pricing questions fail when they ask for a forced commitment. Respondents overstate intent in interviews because they want to be helpful. The three-question pricing framework below gives you a price corridor that reflects reference class and perceived value without asking for a fake yes.
Core questions (ask all four, in order):
“Before I tell you what I am thinking on pricing, what would you expect something like this to cost?”
[Probing prompts: What are you comparing it to mentally? What tools are in a similar price range for you? What would make the price feel fair?]
“At what price would this start to feel too expensive to even try?”
[Probing prompts: What is the threshold where you would need to get approval? What is the threshold where you would not even bring it up internally? What does your current tooling budget look like for this category?]
“At what price would it feel too cheap, like something must be missing or it cannot be a real product?”
[Probing prompts: What does too cheap signal to you? What would you assume about the company behind it? What would you want to verify before trusting it?]
“If I told you the price was [your actual target price], what would your reaction be?”
[Probing prompts: Compared to what? Who would need to approve that? What would you need to see to feel confident at that price? What would change your mind?]
[Branching logic: If the respondent’s stated ceiling is below your target price, do not argue. Ask: What would need to be true for the price to feel fair? The answer is almost always a feature gap, a credibility gap, or a use case mismatch. Write down which one. If the ceiling is above your target price, you may be underpriced. Probe with: What else would you expect at that price point?]
Section 6: Closing and Next Steps (5 min)
The close is the single highest-leverage part of the interview. Most founders rush it, thank the respondent, and end the call. The three asks below convert interviews into a referral pipeline, a design partner list, and a follow-up cadence that compounds over months.
Closing script (verbatim):
“We are almost at time. Before we wrap, I have three quick asks. First, I will probably be making changes to what I showed you over the next couple of weeks. Would it be okay if I came back to you with an updated version and got your reaction? [Wait for yes.] Great, I will send something in 2-4 weeks.”
“Second, when we have an early version ready to try, would you be open to a 15-minute session to walk through it and give me feedback? No obligation to use it, I just want to see how it holds up against your real workflow. [Wait for yes.]”
“Third, who else do you know who deals with [problem area]? I am trying to talk to 10-15 people this month and referrals have been way more useful than cold outreach. Even one name would help. [Wait for a name or names. If they hesitate, say: No pressure, if someone comes to mind later feel free to email me.]”
“Last thing. Is there anything I should have asked about that I missed?”
[Probing prompts: What would have been the most useful question? What surprised you about this conversation? What do you wish more founders understood about your work?]
“Thank you so much. I will send the incentive within 24 hours and follow up in 2-4 weeks with the updated concept. Really appreciate your time.”
[Branching logic: If the respondent was enthusiastic and gave strong workarounds signal, make a note to invite them into a design partner program within the next two weeks. If the respondent was lukewarm, send the incentive, add them to a quarterly update list, and move on. Do not over-invest in respondents who did not show strong problem fit. For solo founders who want to run this template at scale, User Intuition’s user research platform applies the exact same six-section structure across 50-200 respondents in 48-72 hours, which is how most solo founders move from the learning phase into the quantifying phase.]
The discussion guide is a tool, not a script. Use it to stay on track, but let the conversation breathe. The best insights come from the follow-up question you did not plan, asked because the respondent said something you did not expect. That only happens if you are actually listening, which only happens if the structure of the interview is internalized enough that you are not reading from the page.
Ten interviews using this template will teach you more about your ICP than fifty interviews without one. If you want to move faster, Starter plan signup gives you 3 free AI-moderated interviews to pressure-test the guide before you run it yourself, and the solo founder hub has the companion playbooks for synthesis, pattern recognition, and turning interview quotes into pitch deck copy.