strategy-memo

name	strategy-memo
description	Use when creating formal strategy memo from session or standalone - systematic extraction, framework-driven analysis, evidence-based recommendations with citation rigor

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:

1. Ask user for decision question and context
2. Invoke: research-gathering skill for evidence base
3. Invoke: meeting-synthesis skill for customer signals
4. 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:

---
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]

:
 [Disadvantage with evidence or risk]
 [Disadvantage with evidence or risk]

: [Quantitative where available]
 [Metric 1]: [Expected change from session analysis]
 [Metric 2]: [Expected change from session analysis]

: [Low|Medium|High - from session assessment]

[Repeat for each option]

: [Systematic comparison if session included]





 (from session recommendations.md):
 [Reason backed by research/framework]
 [Reason backed by customer signals]
 [Reason backed by risk analysis]

 (from session):
 [Outcome 1 with metric if available]
 [Outcome 2 with metric if available]

 (from session):
 [How we'll measure success - specific, measurable]
 [Timeline for evaluation]



[Strategic guidance from session - NOT project plan]

: [From session analysis]

: [Gates or thresholds identified in session]

 (high-level only): [Strategic phases if session identified]

:

[For each risk identified in session:]


 : [Low|Medium|High]
 : [Low|Medium|High]
 : [Strategy from session]
  (if specified): [When to escalate or pivot]



[Full reference list following citation standards]

:
[]: 
[]: 

:
 [Meeting references with dates and key points]
 [Product roadmap references if relevant]

:
 Generated from: [Session folder path]
 Session date: [Date]
 Framework applied: [Framework name]
 Participants: [If documented]

---



[Include only if session had detailed supporting analysis]

 (if session included concrete scenarios)
 (if session included cost/revenue projections)
 (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:

1. Session Archive: Move session folder to /datasets/strategy/archive/{YYYY}/
2. Link Preservation: Memo includes link back to archived session
3. 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:

📝 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