ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2503.01870
45
0

Can Large Language Models Extract Customer Needs as well as Professional Analysts?

25 February 2025
Artem Timoshenko
Chengfeng Mao
J. Hauser
    ELM
ArXivPDFHTML
Abstract

Identifying customer needs (CNs) is important for product management, product development, and marketing. Applications rely on professional analysts interpreting textual data (e.g., interview transcripts, online reviews) to understand the nuances of customer experience and concisely formulate "jobs to be done." The task is cognitively complex and time-consuming. Current practice facilitates the process with keyword search and machine learning but relies on human judgment to formulate CNs. We examine whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can automatically extract CNs. Because evaluating CNs requires professional judgment, we partnered with a marketing consulting firm to conduct a blind study of CNs extracted by: (1) a foundational LLM with prompt engineering only (Base LLM), (2) an LLM fine-tuned with professionally identified CNs (SFT LLM), and (3) professional analysts. The SFT LLM performs as well as or better than professional analysts when extracting CNs. The extracted CNs are well-formulated, sufficiently specific to identify opportunities, and justified by source content (no hallucinations). The SFT LLM is efficient and provides more complete coverage of CNs. The Base LLM was not sufficiently accurate or specific. Organizations can rely on SFT LLMs to reduce manual effort, enhance the precision of CN articulation, and provide improved insight for innovation and marketing strategy.

View on arXiv
@article{timoshenko2025_2503.01870,
  title={ Can Large Language Models Extract Customer Needs as well as Professional Analysts? },
  author={ Artem Timoshenko and Chengfeng Mao and John R. Hauser },
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.01870},
  year={ 2025 }
}
Comments on this paper