Strategy Memo
Purpose
Generate formal strategic decision memo with:
- •Systematic content extraction from session artifacts
- •Framework-based analysis and stakeholder mapping
- •Evidence-based recommendations with quantitative grounding
- •MECE structure (Problem→Evidence→Options→Recommendation)
- •Full citation compliance with verbatim source quotes
When to Use
Activate when:
- •User invokes
/strategy:memo - •After strategy-session completion
- •Standalone strategic decision documentation needed
Input Requirements
From Completed Session (Preferred)
Required Session Artifacts:
- •
context.md- Research context and sources assembled - •
framework.md- Framework applied and analysis - •
session-log.md- Decision-making process record - •
recommendations.md- Final recommendations and rationale
Validation:
- •Session must be "completed" (has clear recommendation)
- •All required files exist with substantive content
- •Decision rationale documented with evidence
Standalone Memo (Alternative)
If no session exists:
- •Ask user for decision question and context
- •Invoke:
research-gatheringskill for evidence base - •Invoke:
meeting-synthesisskill for customer signals - •Build memo directly from assembled context
Memo Generation Process
Step 1: Content Extraction
From Session Artifacts:
Extract systematically (don't construct narrative):
- •Decision Question: From session-log.md header
- •Problem Context: From context.md situation analysis
- •Research Evidence: Key insights from assembled sources (with citations)
- •Framework Analysis: From framework.md with specific findings
- •Stakeholder Analysis: If framework included stakeholder mapping
- •Options Analysis: From session-log.md with pros/cons/evidence
- •Recommendation: From recommendations.md with rationale
- •Success Metrics: From recommendations.md measurement criteria
- •Risk Analysis: From session discussion and framework application
Quality Check:
- •Do NOT add content not present in session
- •Do NOT generalize specific findings into abstractions
- •Preserve quantitative data (percentages, targets, metrics)
- •Keep concrete examples and scenarios from session
Step 2: Framework Application
If framework was used in session:
- •Include framework name and key components analyzed
- •Reference specific framework findings (e.g., "Porter's Five Forces: Buyer power HIGH due to...")
- •Map framework insights to recommendation rationale
If stakeholder framework was applied:
- •Include explicit stakeholder mapping table
- •Document stakeholder interests and decision impact
- •Reference in options analysis
If no framework in session:
- •Recommend appropriate framework for decision type
- •Note limitation in memo ("Framework recommendation: [X] for future similar decisions")
Step 3: MECE Structure Assembly
Required Structure:
markdown
--- title: "[Decision Title from Session]" date: "[YYYY-MM-DD]" author: "[Author Name]" decision_type: "[strategic|tactical|operational]" topic: "[Topic from Session]" status: "[draft|final]" stakeholders: ["[From Session]"] context_session: "[Path to Session Folder]" --- # [Decision Title] ## Problem Statement [Clear, 1-2 sentence statement of decision requirement. Extract from session, don't editorialize.] ## Key Evidence & Analysis [Decision-relevant insights from research context with citations] ### Research Findings [Synthesize key research insights that inform decision. Include citations with verbatim quotes.] **Example:** "Competitor X's pricing change resulted in 30% customer churn within 60 days."[^1] [^1]: Competitive Analysis Report (path/to/source.md): "The forced migration to new pricing tiers resulted in 30% of enterprise customers churning within the first 60 days of implementation." ### Customer/Market Signals [From meeting synthesis if relevant. Include specific customer quotes or patterns.] ### Framework Applied [Framework name and key findings] **Example (Porter's Five Forces):** - **Supplier Power**: LOW - Multiple vendor alternatives available - **Buyer Power**: HIGH - Customers can switch with minimal cost - **Competitive Rivalry**: HIGH - 5 direct competitors with similar offerings - **Threat of Substitution**: MEDIUM - DIY solutions viable for some segments - **New Entrants**: LOW - High technical barrier to entry [Map framework findings to decision implications] ### Stakeholder Analysis (If Applicable) [If session included stakeholder mapping] | Stakeholder | Interest | Impact | Mitigation | |-------------|----------|--------|------------| | [Name] | [Interest] | [High/Med/Low] | [Strategy] | ### Options Considered [For each option analyzed in session:] **Option 1: [Name]** **Description**: [What this option entails - from session] **Pros**: - [Advantage with evidence source] - [Advantage with evidence source] **Cons**: - [Disadvantage with evidence or risk] - [Disadvantage with evidence or risk] **Expected Impact**: [Quantitative where available] - [Metric 1]: [Expected change from session analysis] - [Metric 2]: [Expected change from session analysis] **Risk Level**: [Low|Medium|High - from session assessment] [Repeat for each option] **Trade-off Analysis**: [Systematic comparison if session included] ## Recommendation **We recommend: Option [N] - [Name]** **Rationale** (from session recommendations.md): 1. [Reason backed by research/framework] 2. [Reason backed by customer signals] 3. [Reason backed by risk analysis] **Expected Outcomes** (from session): - [Outcome 1 with metric if available] - [Outcome 2 with metric if available] **Success Metrics** (from session): - [How we'll measure success - specific, measurable] - [Timeline for evaluation] ## Implementation Considerations [Strategic guidance from session - NOT project plan] **Key Dependencies**: [From session analysis] **Critical Decision Points**: [Gates or thresholds identified in session] **Timeline** (high-level only): [Strategic phases if session identified] **Risk Management**: [For each risk identified in session:] **Risk [N]: [Description]** - **Likelihood**: [Low|Medium|High] - **Impact**: [Low|Medium|High] - **Mitigation**: [Strategy from session] - **Trigger/Threshold** (if specified): [When to escalate or pivot] ## Sources & Citations [Full reference list following citation standards] **Research Sources**: [^1]: [Source path/title]: "[5-25 word verbatim quote]" [^2]: [Source path/title]: "[5-25 word verbatim quote]" **Internal Context**: - [Meeting references with dates and key points] - [Product roadmap references if relevant] **Session Documentation**: - Generated from: [Session folder path] - Session date: [Date] - Framework applied: [Framework name] - Participants: [If documented] --- ## Appendix (Optional) [Include only if session had detailed supporting analysis] **Scenario Analysis** (if session included concrete scenarios) **Economic Model** (if session included cost/revenue projections) **Technical Details** (if session included architecture/implementation specifics)
Step 4: Citation Compliance Validation
Invoke: citation-compliance skill
Requirements:
- •All factual claims must have sources
- •Research sources require verbatim quotes (5-25 words)
- •All citations must be accessible (verify paths)
- •Internal meeting references must include dates and context
Validation:
- •Read each cited source file
- •Confirm verbatim quote exists in source
- •No "(source needed)" markers allowed
- •Flag any unsupported claims
If citation validation fails:
- •STOP memo generation
- •Report missing/invalid citations
- •User must update session artifacts or provide sources
Step 5: Quality Gates
Structure Validation:
- • Problem statement clear and concise (1-2 sentences)
- • Evidence section includes research with citations
- • Framework applied (or absence noted with recommendation)
- • All options from session included with pros/cons
- • Recommendation clear and actionable
- • Success metrics specific and measurable
- • Risk analysis includes likelihood/impact
- • Citations complete with verbatim quotes
Content Validation:
- • Quantitative data preserved from session (no vague abstractions)
- • Concrete examples/scenarios from session included
- • MECE structure maintained (no overlap between sections)
- • No unsupported projections or speculation
- • Appropriate detail level for decision type
- • Strategic focus (no implementation project planning)
Completeness Check:
- • All session recommendations reflected in memo
- • Framework findings integrated into rationale
- • Stakeholder analysis included (if session had it)
- • Risk mitigation strategies documented
- • Success criteria measurable
Flag for revision if:
- •Missing economic analysis for pricing/investment decisions
- •Missing customer impact for user-facing decisions
- •Missing competitive analysis for positioning decisions
- •Vague recommendations without clear action
- •Implementation details mixed with strategy
- •Excessive background relative to decision content
File Management
Naming Convention
- •Pattern:
{YYYY}-{MM-DD}_{decision-slug}.md - •Location:
/datasets/strategy/memos/{YYYY}/
Archive Management (If from session)
After memo generation:
- •Session Archive: Move session folder to
/datasets/strategy/archive/{YYYY}/ - •Link Preservation: Memo includes link back to archived session
- •Version Control: If memo needs updates, create
{slug}_v2.md
Integration Points
- •Future Sessions: Memo becomes context for related decisions
- •Research System: Memo insights can seed new research sources
- •Product Planning: Link strategic decisions to roadmap
- •Meeting References: Include memo in future strategic discussions
Output
Write to: datasets/strategy/memos/{YYYY}/{MM-DD}_{decision-slug}.md
Announce:
code
📝 Strategy Memo Generated **Decision**: [Title] **Framework**: [Framework used] **Sources**: [N research sources, M meetings cited] **Path**: [File path] **Recommendation**: [One sentence summary] **Next**: Review memo, share with stakeholders, or invoke `/strategy:session` for related decision
Success Criteria
- •Memo extracted systematically from session (not narrative construction)
- •MECE structure maintained (Problem→Evidence→Options→Recommendation)
- •Framework analysis integrated with clear findings
- •Options include concrete examples/scenarios from session
- •Quantitative data preserved (percentages, targets, metrics)
- •Citations validated with verbatim quotes
- •Risk analysis includes likelihood/impact
- •Success metrics specific and measurable
- •Quality gates passed before file write
Related Skills
- •
strategy-session: Generates input session for memo - •
citation-compliance: Validates source backing - •
research-gathering: Provides research context - •
meeting-synthesis: Provides customer evidence - •
source-integrity: Checks research source validity