In entrepreneurial opportunity identification, how to use first principles to distinguish 'real needs' from 'false needs'? How to deconstruct a seemingly massive market to find unmet fundamental needs?

Good question. This is a hurdle almost everyone who wants to achieve something encounters. We often get carried away by our "great" ideas, but the market is ruthless. I'll share my thoughts, which may not be entirely correct, but hopefully offer some reference.

How to Distinguish "True" from "False" Needs Using First Principles?

Let's not overcomplicate "first principles." Simply put, it means stripping away all existing, taken-for-granted answers, digging deeper and deeper until you reach the most core, irreducible "fact."

Imagine you're not "inventing" a need, but "discovering" an already existing law of physics.

1. False needs are "solutions," true needs are "underlying desires."

• False Need: "I want an app that can generate beautiful PPTs with one click."
• True Need: "I need to finalize a presentation quickly to satisfy my boss/client, so I can get a promotion/raise or secure a deal, and I don't want to waste time on trivial formatting issues."

See the difference? "A PPT-making app" is just a solution, and potentially a poor one. "Saving time, gaining recognition, avoiding hassle" – these are the underlying desires, human nature itself.

How to dig deeper? Use the "Root-Cause Questioning Method":

Just pick a user and keep asking "why" like a three-year-old child.

"Why do you want a one-click PPT generation app?" "Because making PPTs takes too much time." "Why do you feel it takes too much time?" "Because I have to find templates, match images, align things, it's annoying." "Why do these things annoy you?" "Because I should be spending my time thinking about content and logic, not on this repetitive work." "Why is getting the content and logic right important to you?" "Because that's how the presentation will be approved, and I can get this project done."

You see, after digging to the root, it's not about "wanting an app" at all, but about "wanting to complete work efficiently, without being bothered by trivialities, and achieving good results." This is the true need. Your solution could be an app, a template library, or even a training service.

2. True needs come with a "cost," false needs are just "talk."

This is the most effective litmus test. For a true need, the user is definitely "paying" for it in some way. This "payment" isn't necessarily money; it could be:

• Time: Is he spending several hours using a clunky Excel spreadsheet to solve this problem?
• Effort: Is he opening multiple software applications and constantly switching between them to get this done, exhausting himself in the process?
• Tolerance: Is he enduring a difficult-to-use old system, complaining daily but unable to abandon it?
• Money: Has he already paid someone or bought a less-than-ideal tool to do this?

If you find that users are already employing some "crude method" (even if highly inefficient) to solve a problem, then congratulations, you've likely found a true need. Because they are already "paying" for it, your task is simply to provide a more "cost-effective" solution.

Conversely, if you ask around about a problem and everyone says, "Oh, it would be great to have something like that," but when you ask, "How are you solving it now?" they reply, "Oh, I just leave it, it's not that important," then it's highly likely a false need. These "itch points" rather than "pain points" are the traps where startups most often fail.

How to Deconstruct Large Markets and Find Fundamental Needs?

Statements like "I want to enter the catering market" or "I want to enter the education market" are essentially meaningless. The market isn't a monolithic block; it's composed of countless vivid "scenarios."

The application of first principles here is: forget existing "industry classifications" and return to "people + scenarios."

The formula is simple: What kind of person (Who), in what kind of scenario (When/Where), wants to accomplish what task (Job), but encounters what difficulty (Struggle)?

For example, let's deconstruct the super-large market of "eating":

Don't think about categories like "hotpot, BBQ, takeout"; these are all just "solutions." Let's start from "people + scenarios":

• Scenario 1: A young white-collar worker who just got off work, tired, alone at home.

  • Task: To quickly and simply fill their stomach, preferably with some nutrition, and not too expensive.
  • Difficulty: Cooking is too much hassle, ordering takeout takes a long time and might be unhealthy.
  • Opportunity: Pre-made meals? Convenient instant food? A community canteen specializing in "a healthy dinner in 15 minutes"?

• Scenario 2: A couple on a weekend evening, wanting to create some atmosphere.

  • Task: To have a ceremonial dinner and enjoy their time together.
  • Difficulty: Eating out means queuing and noisy environments; cooking themselves, from grocery shopping to washing dishes, offers no romance.
  • Opportunity: Offer a semi-finished gourmet steak meal kit, complete with wine and candles, delivered to their door? A service specializing in "Michelin experience at home"?

• Scenario 3: A mother with a 3-year-old child, at a shopping mall during lunchtime.

  • Task: To find a place to eat that's quick, healthy, has food for the child, and where the child can sit still.
  • Difficulty: Adult restaurants are too greasy and unsuitable for children; children's restaurants have long queues, and adults generally don't like the taste.
  • Opportunity: A family-friendly restaurant specifically designed for "parents with kids," offering healthy children's meals, a small play area, and delicious adult meals too?

See? We didn't even mention "market size" or "industry reports." We simply deconstructed the broad concept of "eating" into countless specific "Jobs-to-be-Done."

Every combination of "task + difficulty" represents a potential, unmet fundamental need. Your opportunity isn't to compete with Haidilao, but to better solve a specific difficulty in a particular scenario than Haidilao does.

To summarize my practical approach:

1. Distinguish true from false needs: Don't just listen to what users say; observe what they do. Use the "root-cause questioning method" to uncover their deepest desires, then see if they are already "paying" for this pain in some (even clumsy) way.
2. Deconstruct large markets: Forget industry classifications and focus on "people + scenarios." Use the "Jobs-to-be-Done" framework to break down a big problem into countless specific, actionable smaller problems.

Finding a sufficiently painful "difficulty" and providing the best current "solution" for it – that's the beginning of a good opportunity.