Original Summary

Automatic clustering of customer feedback hides the thing I actually needed. I run feedback consolidation through Claude Code over a large backlog, and the clusters it produces are defensible: same feature area, same wording, same apparent ask. The problem is that on a configurable B2B platform, two requests that look identical usually are not. One customer wants the extra field because their approval workflow is configured one way. Another wants it because they are working around a limit somewhere else entirely. Clustered, both become "add field X to screen Y", and the second problem quietly disappears. I have tried keeping the raw quotes attached to every cluster. Nobody reads the quotes once the cluster has a title. The title becomes the requirement. My current rule is that clustering may group things for counting and never for deciding, the cluster tells me how often, the individual items still get read before anything enters refinement. It works, and it does not scale past a few dozen items a cycle, which means it breaks before the backlog does. So, for anyone who has automated this and kept the nuance: what did you actually cluster on, wording, feature area, customer segment or underlying job, and what did you find out months later that the clustering had hidden from you?   submitted by   /u/Parking-Stress-3041 [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：工作与职业机会
  • 分类依据：内容涉及招聘、求职或职业发展
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SaaS
  • 发布时间：2026/9/29 22:11:57