| name | focus |
| description | Use this skill when the user suspects an activity isn't worth their time, feels stuck on something, or wants to know if they should keep doing X or try something else. Also use when the user mentions '80/20,' 'Pareto,' 'is this worth my time,' 'should I keep doing X,' 'not getting results from X,' 'spending too much time on X,' or 'what should I focus on instead.' Delivers a kill/refine/pivot verdict with a concrete weekly action plan. |
80/20 Focus
You suspect something you're doing isn't worth your time. This skill helps you decide: kill it, refine it, or pivot to something with more leverage.
This skill is for evaluating whether an activity is worth your time — time allocation, not product decisions. For deciding which features to build next, use prioritize. For finding your best acquisition channel without a specific activity to evaluate, use growth.
How This Works
- You describe the activity and what's (not) happening
- I diagnose: wrong activity or wrong execution?
- I compare it against higher-leverage alternatives at your stage
- You get a verdict and a concrete plan for this week
Step 1: Understand
Before diagnosing, establish the basics. Ask the founder:
- What exactly are you doing? (Be specific — not "marketing" but "sending 50 cold emails per week to SaaS founders")
- How much time per week?
- What results so far? (Replies, demos, signups, revenue — whatever the activity is supposed to produce)
2-3 questions. Not an interrogation.
Step 2: Diagnose
Apply two filters:
Ceiling Test
Even if you executed this perfectly, would it move the needle at your stage?
Signs of a low ceiling:
- Cold outreach to enterprise when you have no case studies or social proof
- SEO content strategy when you have 0 customers and no product-market fit signal
- Building integrations when your core product doesn't retain users
- Paid ads when you don't know your conversion rate or LTV
- Perfecting onboarding when you don't have enough signups to measure
A low ceiling means the activity can't work yet — not at this stage, not with these prerequisites missing.
Execution Test
Are you doing the high-leverage 20% of this activity, or spreading effort across the full 100%?
Signs of a 100% spread:
- Sending 100 generic emails instead of 10 deeply researched ones
- Writing 4 blog posts per week instead of 1 exceptional one
- Building 5 features at once instead of finishing 1
- Posting on 4 social platforms instead of dominating 1
- Attending 3 networking events per week instead of deeply following up with 5 warm contacts
The 80/20 version is almost always: do less, but do it with more depth and intention.
If both tests fail — low ceiling AND spread execution — the verdict is Kill. Wrong activity done the wrong way cannot be refined into something that works.
Step 3: Leverage Comparison
Regardless of the diagnosis, compare the current activity against 2-3 alternatives in the same category. The founder needs to see: even if this activity is fine, is it the BEST use of these hours?
Category: Customer Acquisition
| Tactic | Early Stage (<$1k MRR) | Growth ($1k-$10k MRR) | Scaling ($10k+ MRR) |
|---|
| Direct outreach | High leverage (if targeted) | Medium — shifts to partnerships | Low — doesn't scale |
| Content/SEO | Low — too slow, no domain authority | Medium — start building | High — compounds over time |
| Paid ads | Low — don't know LTV yet | Medium — test with small budget | High — scale what converts |
| Community/social | High — build relationships that convert | High — establishes authority | Medium — diminishing personal returns |
| Referrals | Low — not enough users | High — program pays for itself | High — lowest CAC channel |
| Partnerships | Low — nothing to offer yet | High — mutual amplification | High — channel partnerships |
Common trap: Founders at early stage invest in SEO or paid ads because they feel scalable. But without product-market fit signal, you're scaling something that doesn't work.
Category: Product
| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling |
|---|
| New features | Medium — only if validating PMF | Low — focus on what exists | Medium — expand for new segments |
| Bug fixes | High — broken product kills trust | High — reliability matters | High — always |
| Onboarding polish | High — activation is everything | High — biggest ROI per hour | Medium — diminishing returns |
| Technical debt | Low — premature optimization | Medium — only if blocking you | High — invest systematically |
| Design polish | Low — function over form | Medium — builds trust | High — competitive differentiator |
Common trap: Building features before fixing activation. New features don't help if users never experience the existing ones.
Category: Retention
| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling |
|---|
| Manual check-ins | High — learn why people stay/leave | Medium — can't scale | Low — automate |
| Email sequences | Medium — worth a basic welcome | High — lifecycle program | High — sophisticated segmentation |
| Feedback collection | High — talk to every user | High — systematize | Medium — diminishing signal-to-noise |
| Usage monitoring | Low — not enough data | High — catch churn signals | High — predictive models |
Common trap: Building retention mechanics before you have enough users to retain. At early stage, just talk to people.
Category: Revenue
| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling |
|---|
| Pricing changes | High — most founders underprice | High — test annually | Medium — optimize |
| Upsells/expansion | Low — get the first sale right | High — existing customers are cheapest | High — major growth lever |
| Payment optimization | Low — not enough volume | Medium — reduce failed payments | High — dunning is money |
| Annual plans | Medium — if anyone will commit | High — improves cash flow | High — reduces churn |
Common trap: Offering discounts instead of raising prices. Most early-stage SaaS is underpriced, not overpriced.
Category: Operations
| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling |
|---|
| Legal/compliance | Low — do the minimum | Medium — as revenue grows | High — real liability |
| Automation/tooling | Low — manual is fine | Medium — automate repetitive | High — systems thinking |
| Hiring/contracting | Low — do it yourself | Medium — first hire | High — build the team |
| Financial tracking | Low — spreadsheet | Medium — proper books | High — forecasting matters |
Common trap: Automating things you do once a week. Your time is better spent on customers until the manual work takes hours per day.
Step 4: Recommend
Deliver one of three verdicts:
Kill
The activity has a low ceiling at the founder's stage, or alternatives are dramatically higher leverage. Stop entirely. Redirect the freed-up hours to a specific alternative.
Refine
The activity is right, but execution is spread too thin. Cut to the 20% version — specific instructions on what to stop doing within this activity, and what to double down on.
Pivot
The category is right (e.g., customer acquisition) but the tactic is wrong for this stage. Switch to a specific alternative tactic with instructions for the 80/20 version.
Output Format
Every recommendation must follow this format:
Verdict: Kill / Refine / Pivot
Why: 2-3 sentences. What's the effort-to-result ratio? What's the ceiling? How does it compare to alternatives?
This week:
- Stop doing [specific thing]
- Start doing [specific thing] — here's the 20% version: [concrete instructions]
- Expected time shift: [X hrs/week freed up → redirected to Y]
The 80/20 version of [recommended activity]:
A specific description of the minimum effective dose. Not "do content marketing" but "write one LinkedIn post per day sharing a lesson from building your product. No blog, no SEO, no content calendar. Just the post."
Trap to avoid: One common mistake founders make when switching to this activity.
Related Skills
- prioritize — RICE scoring for which features to build (product decisions, not time allocation)
- growth — PLG strategy and activation funnels
- validate — Test whether an idea has demand before investing time
- launch — Channel strategy for getting a product to market
