Signals don’t exist in isolation.
A strong decision depends on understanding how an idea holds up across the full experience. Looking at one signal in one moment can be misleading. Something may perform well in one area and fail in another.
Signal types help organize where to look. They show how an idea connects to users, how it works in practice, and whether it holds up over time.
The Four Signal Types
Signals are grouped into four types. Each one highlights a different way an idea can succeed or fail.
Need
Does this connect to a real user need?
<table xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="min-width: 75px;"><colgroup><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p>This signal checks if the idea matters in the first place.</p><ul><li><p>What the user is trying to accomplish</p></li><li><p>Whether the problem is real</p></li><li><p>Whether the direction fits that need</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What to look for:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Users recognize the problem</p></li><li><p>The direction feels relevant</p></li><li><p>The value is clear</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What breaks:</strong></p><ul><li><p>The idea solves the wrong problem</p></li><li><p>Users don’t see the value</p></li><li><p>The work feels disconnected</p></li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>
Use
Does this make sense to users?
<table xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="min-width: 75px;"><colgroup><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p>This signal focuses on clarity and usability.</p><ul><li><p>Can users understand what to do</p></li><li><p>Can they complete the task</p></li><li><p>Does the flow make sense</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What to look for:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Clear actions</p></li><li><p>Smooth task completion</p></li><li><p>Low confusion</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What breaks:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Users hesitate or get stuck</p></li><li><p>Steps are unclear</p></li><li><p>The experience feels harder than it should</p></li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>
Prefer
Do users want this direction?
<table xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="min-width: 75px;"><colgroup><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p>This signal looks at perception and appeal.</p><ul><li><p>Does the direction feel right</p></li><li><p>Do users trust it</p></li><li><p>Would they choose it over alternatives</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What to look for:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Positive reactions</p></li><li><p>Confidence in the experience</p></li><li><p>Clear preference between options</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What breaks:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Users feel uncertain</p></li><li><p>The experience lacks appeal</p></li><li><p>Differences between options are unclear</p></li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>
**
Adopt**
Does this work in real behavior?
<table xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="min-width: 75px;"><colgroup><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p>This signal focuses on what users actually do over time.</p><ul><li><p>Do they follow through</p></li><li><p>Do they return</p></li><li><p>Does the change hold</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What to look for:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Completion and follow-through</p></li><li><p>Continued use</p></li><li><p>Measurable behavior change</p></li></ul></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><p><strong>What breaks:</strong></p><ul><li><p>Drop-off after initial interaction</p></li><li><p>Low follow-through</p></li><li><p>No real change in behavior</p></li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>
How to use signal types
Signal types are not steps. They are a way to check coverage. They help answer:
-
Are we solving the right problem
-
Does the experience make sense
-
Do users actually want this
-
Does it work in practice
Looking at all four creates a more complete view.
<table xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" style="min-width: 50px;"><colgroup><col style="min-width: 25px;"><col style="min-width: 25px;"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><h3><strong>What this unlocks</strong></h3><p>When signals cover all four types:</p><ul><li><p>Gaps become easier to spot</p></li><li><p>Tradeoffs become clearer</p></li><li><p>Decisions feel more grounded</p></li><li><p>Weak ideas surface earlier</p></li></ul><p>The team can see where an idea holds up and where it breaks.</p></td><td colspan="1" rowspan="1"><h3><strong>Where it breaks</strong></h3><p>When signal types are not considered:</p><ul><li><p>Teams rely on one metric</p></li><li><p>Decisions are based on partial input</p></li><li><p>Issues show up later in the process</p></li><li><p>Work needs to be revisited</p></li></ul><p>The direction may look strong at first, but doesn’t hold up over time.</p></td></tr></tbody></table>
Quick use
When evaluating a direction, ask:
-
Does this connect to a real need
-
Does it make sense to users
-
Do users actually prefer it
-
Does it hold up in behavior
If one of these is weak, that’s where to focus next.
How this fits
This page shows where signals apply.
-
Components show how signals are built
-
Signal Quality shows if they can be trusted
-
Capturing Signals shows how they are created
Together, they help the team move from partial input to complete decisions.
