Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Transforming the Voice of the Customer: Large Language Models for Identifying Customer Needs

Artem Timoshenko, Chengfeng Mao, John R. Hauser · Feb 25, 2025 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy. Yet for over thirty years, Voice-of-the-Customer (VOC) applications have relied on professional analysts to manually interpret qualitative data and formulate "jobs to be done." This task is cognitively demanding, time-consuming, and difficult to scale. While current practice uses machine learning to screen content, the critical final step of precisely formulating CNs relies on expert human judgment. We conduct a series of studies with market research professionals to evaluate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can automate CN abstraction. Across various product and service categories, we demonstrate that supervised fine-tuned (SFT) LLMs perform at least as well as professional analysts and substantially better than foundational LLMs. These results generalize to alternative foundational LLMs and require relatively "small" models. The abstracted CNs are well-formulated, sufficiently specific to guide innovation, and grounded in source content without hallucination. Our analysis suggests that SFT training enables LLMs to learn the underlying syntactic and semantic conventions of professional CN formulation rather than relying on memorized CNs. Automation of tedious tasks transforms the VOC approach by enabling the discovery of high-leverage insights at scale and by refocusing analysts on higher-value-added tasks.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
  • The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy."

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy."

Rater Population

partial

Domain Experts

Helpful for staffing comparability.

"While current practice uses machine learning to screen content, the critical final step of precisely formulating CNs relies on expert human judgment."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Domain Experts
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Identifying customer needs (CNs) is fundamental to product innovation and marketing strategy.
  • Yet for over thirty years, Voice-of-the-Customer (VOC) applications have relied on professional analysts to manually interpret qualitative data and formulate "jobs to be done." This task is cognitively demanding, time-consuming, and difficult to scale.
  • While current practice uses machine learning to screen content, the critical final step of precisely formulating CNs relies on expert human judgment.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • While current practice uses machine learning to screen content, the critical final step of precisely formulating CNs relies on expert human judgment.
  • Across various product and service categories, we demonstrate that supervised fine-tuned (SFT) LLMs perform at least as well as professional analysts and substantially better than foundational LLMs.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • While current practice uses machine learning to screen content, the critical final step of precisely formulating CNs relies on expert human judgment.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.