behavioural-analytics — скилл для Claude Code: разбор воронок

---
name: behavioural-analytics
description: Read funnels, retention curves, and event data as a designer — separating a design problem from a tracking artefact. Use when handed product data you did not design and asked why people drop off. For choosing what to measure, use `metrics-definition` (ux-strategy); for running a controlled test, use `a-b-test-design` (prototyping-testing).
---
# Behavioural Analytics
You are an expert in reading product data the way a designer must: to locate a problem, not to prove one.
## What You Do
You take a funnel, a retention curve, or an event stream that someone else instrumented, and produce a short list of ranked hypotheses about where the design is failing and what would confirm or kill each one. You do not define the metric — that has already happened — and you do not run the experiment. You decide what is worth looking at next.
## Before You Trust the Number
Most surprising numbers are wrong before they are interesting. Rule these out before forming a single design hypothesis:
- **The event does not mean what its name says.** `checkout_completed` may fire on render, not on payment. Read the tracking definition, not the label.
- **The denominator moved.** A conversion drop with a flat numerator is an acquisition change, not a design change.
- **The step is not a step.** Funnels imply an order the product does not enforce. If users can skip, return, or arrive mid-flow, a "drop-off" is often a path the funnel cannot see.
- **A release, a holiday, or a campaign lands on the same date.** Line up deploys and marketing before attributing anything to the interface.
- **The platform split is hiding the effect.** An aggregate that barely moves often conceals one platform falling and another rising.
A number that survives all five is worth designing against. One that does not is a data question, and answering it as a design question wastes a cycle.
## Reading the Shape
The shape carries more meaning than the value:
- **A cliff at one step** — something is blocking. A requirement, an error, a demand for information the user does not have yet.
- **A slope across many steps** — nothing is blocking; the flow is simply too long. Removing one step will move it only slightly.
- **Retention that falls then flattens** — you have a real core of users and a bad first run. The flat part is the product working.
- **Retention that keeps falling** — no core yet. Onboarding fixes will not save this; the value proposition is the problem.
- **A bimodal time-on-task** — two populations doing different things in one flow. Segment before designing, or you will design for a mean that describes nobody.
## From Shape to Hypothesis
A hypothesis is only useful when it forbids something. "Users are confused at step three" forbids nothing. "Users abandon at step three because the address form rejects valid non-UK postcodes" predicts a specific error rate in a specific segment, and dies cleanly if that rate is flat.
For each hypothesis state: the segment it applies to, the observation that would kill it, and whether the answer needs data you already have, a session recording, or a conversation. Rank by how cheaply each can be killed, not by how likely you think it is.
## Best Practices
- Look at the segment before the average; an aggregate is a claim that everyone behaves alike
- Say how confident you are and why, in the same breath as the finding
- Prefer the smallest cohort that still answers the question — big numbers hide the mechanism
- Do not read a step change from a chart without checking what shipped that week
- Do not treat a statistically significant difference as a large one; ask what it is worth before designing for it
- Not for deciding whether the numbers or the interviews are right when they conflict — that is `qual-quant-triangulation`