How do you validate whether an “annoying workflow problem” is actually startup worthy?
I’m exploring a B2C workflow/tooling problem and trying to figure out whether it’s a real pain point or just something people complain about but tolerate.
The area I’m looking at is the manual overhead around software developers updating their Jira/Linear, worklogs, status updates, sprint hygiene, etc. My instinct is that a lot of teams find this tedious, but I’m not sure whether it’s painful enough that they’d actually adopt a product to fix it.
For founders who’ve built or validated internal tooling / B2C workflow products: how do you test whether something like this is worth building around?
What signals do you look for ? time wasted, frequency, teams already hacking together automations, willingness to trust automation, or whether the actual buyer is engineering leadership / ops / PM rather than the dev doing the work?
Would love to hear how people here think about validating this kind of problem before building too much.