Probe-to-Saturation Interview
Ask one focused follow-up at a time until the current topic stops producing new information.
These examples and illustrative results are independently authored teaching materials, not measured model results.
Use case
A founder says we care about quality without an incident, then teaching context adds a customer launch delayed by missing deployment steps. Elicit grounded positioning rather than turn a vague phrase into a settled value proposition.
Mechanism
Ask one useful probe on the current topic, briefly paraphrase then seek incident/consequence/reason. Separate statements/interpretation. Close repeated no-new-information threads with evidence and open items; respect topic changes/stops. Counts/5-Whys are heuristics, not exhaustive knowledge.
Bad example
Send twenty abstract questions, derive complete positioning from quality and continue until the user agrees despite no new evidence.
Good example
Ask for one customer incident. Paraphrase the deployment-story consequence and ask why it matters. Offer predictable delivery as a candidate interpretation, not a quote. Close under agreed saturation conditions when probes add no information, retaining evidence/inferences/open items. Respect topic changes without treating fatigue/silence as confirmation.
Why the change matters
Focused probes deepen actual answers into inspectable events/reasons. Candidate interpretation preserves attribution, and stopping rules bound ineffective interrogation.
Observable expectation
An illustrative note records delayed launch, provenance, predictable-delivery candidate and probes adding no information. Keep consensus/acceptance unclaimed.
Generic quality positioning or two unanswered prompts treated as saturation fails.
Limits
Saturation is contextual to a topic/interview, not market/user completeness. Respect privacy/storage/willingness. No real interview occurs here.