Use when the alliance portfolio needs a board-grade thesis: why alliances, where we win, which bets get funded, and the board pack behind the call.
Instructions your experts follow when using this skill.
Use this when the alliance portfolio needs a board-grade thesis, above any single partner plan. Start from the corporate strategy and growth targets, the current alliance portfolio, trailing alliance economics, the board calendar, and the systems the numbers come from.
The three corporate bets alliances have to serve, the partner archetypes that serve each bet, and what we will not do.
Each claim names its evidence or stays UNKNOWN. A thesis with no named corporate bet behind it is a wish, not a strategy.
Per alliance: the corporate bet it serves, its trailing sourced and influenced economics, and a fund, grow, hold, or exit call with one line of evidence.
Score each fund bet quantitatively (mutual customers, pipeline, overlap counts) and qualitatively (executive sponsorship, joint roadmap, competitive posture). Size the opportunity behind it — deal value, impacted lines — and name the stakeholder impact (who gains, who loses, who has to act) as a one-paragraph business case.
Write sunset and exit provisions — payouts, handoffs, the end state — into every fund-or-exit call, at the time the call is made rather than when it goes wrong.
Each fund bet gets a named board-level owner on our side.
Run this read ahead of the annual strategy review, so the board sees alliances inside the plan rather than beside it.
Where we started (last year's thesis and calls), portfolio economics with their trends, the fund/grow/hold/exit calls, the new bets and their asks, and the top three alliance risks.
Follow the executive-review shape — value, gaps, roadmap, asks — with every number sourced to its system and window.
Ship the pack as a pre-read three business days out so members mark up questions in advance, and open the session on their mark-ups rather than a read-through.
Leave out any slide whose source is missing, and say so in the delivery note.
An annual thesis review with the board. Quarterly business reviews — the profit-and-loss close and the council reads — feeding a mid-year portfolio check. And a named trigger that forces an out-of-cycle read: a failed bet, a rival alliance, or a market shock.
Each forum names its owner, its inputs, and its one decision.
The one-page thesis, the portfolio-to-thesis map with its fund calls, the board pack, and the review rhythm.
No corporate strategy on file means drafting from owner-stated bets marked INFERENCE, with confirming them as the first review item. No trailing economics means thesis first, with the profit-and-loss feed as the top follow-up.
No thesis, fund call, or board pack goes to a partner, a board member, or an executive forum without your explicit yes.
Phrases that help your experts find this skill.
When the user wants to create or update their product marketing context document. Also use when the user mentions 'product context,' 'marketing context,' 'set up context,' 'positioning,' 'who is my target audience,' 'describe my product,' 'ICP,' 'ideal customer profile,' or wants to avoid repeating foundational information across marketing tasks. Use this at the start of any new project before using other marketing skills — it creates `.agents/product-marketing.md` that all other skills reference for product, audience, and positioning context.
When the user wants to research, profile, or analyze competitors from their URLs. Also use when the user mentions 'competitor profile,' 'competitor research,' 'competitor analysis,' 'profile this competitor,' 'analyze competitor,' 'competitive intelligence,' 'competitor deep dive,' 'who are my competitors,' 'competitor landscape,' 'competitor dossier,' 'competitive audit,' or 'research these competitors.' Input is a list of competitor URLs. Output is structured competitor profile markdown files. For creating comparison/alternative pages from profiles, see competitors. For sales-specific battle cards, see sales-enablement.
When the user wants to conduct, analyze, or synthesize customer research. Use when the user mentions "customer research," "ICP research," "talk to customers," "analyze transcripts," "customer interviews," "survey analysis," "support ticket analysis," "voice of customer," "VOC," "build personas," "customer personas," "jobs to be done," "JTBD," "what do customers say," "what are customers struggling with," "Reddit mining," "G2 reviews," "review mining," "digital watering holes," "community research," "forum research," "competitor reviews," "customer sentiment," "PMF survey," "product/market fit survey," "customer interview questions," "interview outreach," "Sales Safari," or "find out why customers churn/convert/buy." Use for analyzing existing research assets, mining online sources, AND running primary research (interviews and surveys). For writing copy informed by research, see copywriting. For acting on research to improve pages, see cro.