kill-go

## The 5 Questions Ask each question. Score 1-5. Push back on optimistic answers with "What evidence do you have for that?" Unverified optimism scores lower. ### 1. Problem Severity (1-5) How painful is this problem for the people who have it? | Score | Severity | Signal | |-------|----------|--------| | 5 | Hair on fire | People are actively spending money or significant time on workarounds | | 4 | Significant pain | Regular complaints, dedicated manual processes, measurable cost | | 3 | Moderate annoyance | People notice it, work around it, don't prioritize fixing it | | 2 | Mild inconvenience | Shrug and move on, rarely mentioned unprompted | | 1 | Solution looking for a problem | You think it's a problem; they don't | Ask: "Who has this problem? How do you know? What are they doing about it today?" If the user can't name specific people or specific workarounds, score 1-2. ### 2. Market Reality (1-5) Can you reach enough people who have this problem and will pay to solve it? | Score | Reality | Signal | |-------|---------|--------| | 5 | Known buyers | You've talked to 10+ people who said "I'd pay for that" | | 4 | Strong signals | Active communities discussing this problem, competitor revenue visible | | 3 | Plausible market | Logical argument for demand, some anecdotal evidence | | 2 | Assumed market | "Everyone needs this" with no validation | | 1 | Imagined market | No evidence anyone wants this beyond the builder | Ask: "How many people have you talked to about this? What did they say, unprompted?" ### 3. Differentiation (1-5) Why would someone choose this over what exists? | Score | Edge | Signal | |-------|------|--------| | 5 | Category creator | Nothing like this exists; you're defining the space | | 4 | 10x better on one axis | Dramatically faster, cheaper, simpler, or more specific | | 3 | Meaningfully different | Clear differentiation, but alternatives exist | | 2 | Slightly better | Incremental improvement, easy to ignore | | 1 | Me-too | Another version of something that already works fine | Ask: "What do people use today? Why would they switch? What's the switching cost?" ### 4. Founder-Market Fit (1-5) Are YOU the right person to build this? | Score | Fit | Signal | |-------|-----|--------| | 5 | Deep domain + lived problem | You've spent years in this space AND have this problem yourself | | 4 | Deep domain OR lived problem | Strong on one dimension | | 3 | Adjacent experience | Related domain, transferable skills | | 2 | Interested outsider | Researched but no direct experience | | 1 | No connection | Chasing a trend, no domain knowledge | Ask: "How long have you been in this space? Do you have this problem yourself? Who do you already know in this market?" ### 5. Execution Reality (1-5) Can you actually build and ship this? | Score | Reality | Signal | |-------|---------|--------| | 5 | Buildable this week | Clear technical path, tools in hand, scope is tight | | 4 | Buildable this month | Known unknowns, but path exists | | 3 | Buildable this quarter | Significant technical work, dependencies to resolve | | 2 | Research required | Unsure if the technical approach even works | | 1 | Moonshot | Requires breakthroughs or resources you don't have | Ask: "What's the smallest version you could ship? How long would it take? What would you need that you don't have?" ## Scoring Multiply all five scores. Maximum: 3,125. | Composite | Verdict | What to do | |-----------|---------|-----------| | 500+ | **Proceed** | Build the smallest version. Ship it. Measure. | | 200-499 | **Pivot** | The idea has signal, but something's off. Fix the weakest dimension or reframe. | | <200 | **Kill** | Walk away. Document why. Revisit only if new evidence surfaces. | CRITICAL: A score of 1 on any dimension kills the idea regardless of composite score. You can't overcome zero evidence of demand, no differentiation, or no ability to execute. ## Anti-Sycophancy Protocol Do NOT soften the kill recommendation. If the scores say kill, say kill. Explain why clearly. Offer what would need to change for a re-evaluation. The user came here for truth, not comfort. A good kill saves months of wasted effort. ## Output ```markdown # Kill/Go Assessment: [Idea Name] Date: [date] ## Scores | Dimension | Score | Evidence | |-----------|-------|----------| | Problem Severity | X/5 | [key evidence] | | Market Reality | X/5 | [key evidence] | | Differentiation | X/5 | [key evidence] | | Founder-Market Fit | X/5 | [key evidence] | | Execution Reality | X/5 | [key evidence] | **Composite: [X] / 3,125** ## Verdict: [PROCEED / PIVOT / KILL] [2-3 sentence rationale] ## Weakest Dimension [Which scored lowest and what would change it] ## Recommended Next Step [One specific action] ``` ## Next step Proceed or pivot → run **decision-brief** to write it up. Kill → run **codify** to record why, so the lesson survives. --- Part of the [ThinkHaven Method Kit](https://github.com/hollandkevint/thinkhaven-method-kit) by Kevin Holland. Full Board of Directors experience: [ThinkHaven](https://thinkhaven.co/try)