| name | growth-move-selector |
| description | Chooses a coherent growth direction by routing a growth goal through whichever lens fits — Ansoff, the BCG matrix, or Blue Ocean — landing on a recommendation through elimination rather than stapling frameworks together. Use this skill whenever the user wants to grow and isn't sure how, says "how should we grow", "we've plateaued", "should we launch a new product or enter a new market", "which growth bet should we make", or is treating several growth options as equally viable. Trigger it whenever the question is which growth move to make, even if no framework is named. Its discipline is elimination before selection.
|
Growth-Move Selector
When a business wants to grow, the failure mode is treating every option as equally viable: run
promotions, open a location, launch a product, maybe franchise. All are growth. They are also
completely different bets with different risk profiles, and treating them as interchangeable means
never really committing to any.
The discipline this skill enforces is elimination before selection. The right answer is never "we
should do product development." It is "penetration is capped at 80% saturation, diversification is too
risky given our cash, therefore product development is the highest-conviction play." The elimination
is the thinking. The choice is just the conclusion.
The method
Pick the lens that fits the question. Don't run all three by reflex. The selection rule: a single
business choosing its next direction is an Ansoff question; a multi-product portfolio deciding
where to allocate capital is a BCG question; a commoditised market where competing on the
existing factors is a dead end is a Blue Ocean question.
Ansoff clarifies the bet type and its risk. Two questions produce four quadrants:
- Market penetration — more of what you have to who already buys it (lowest risk).
- Market development — existing product, new geography or segment.
- Product development — new product, existing customers.
- Diversification — new product and new market at once (highest risk; no existing advantage to
lean on).
BCG Growth-Share handles portfolio and capital allocation when growth is about where to invest:
Cash Cows fund Stars; Question Marks are a binary invest-to-win or exit; Dogs get assessed for
strategic value and usually exited.
Blue Ocean applies when changing the game is genuinely on the table. Use the ERRC grid —
Eliminate, Reduce, Raise, Create — which forces trade-offs: you must give things up, not just add
features across the board.
Elimination needs facts. If the call depends on numbers the user hasn't given (market saturation,
cash position, execution capacity), ask for them or state the assumption you're making out loud.
Elimination on invented numbers is just selection with extra steps.
Output format
- The bet types considered, via the fitting lens.
- Elimination: which options are ruled out and the specific reason for each.
- Recommendation: the highest-conviction growth move, stated as the conclusion of the
elimination, with the risk profile named.
How to run it
Default to producing the recommendation: the elimination logic and the conclusion, always showing
what you ruled out and why. Switch to coaching when the user signals they want to reason it out:
have them lay the options on the fitting matrix and argue which to eliminate; the elimination is the
rep worth practising.
Where this breaks
Ansoff assumes options are cleanly separable, but real growth strategies often blend quadrants, and
risk depends on execution capability the matrix doesn't capture. BCG assumes market share drives
profitability, which is weaker in fragmented or fast-changing markets. Blue Ocean is inspiring but
survivorship-biased; for every game-changer there are quiet failures who eliminated the wrong things.
Name these limits rather than presenting the matrix output as destiny.
Style
Plain language, define each quadrant on first use, no em dashes, short paragraphs. Never present all
four Ansoff quadrants as equally attractive.
