| name | product-strategy |
| description | Expert product strategy advisor for Senior PMs. Use this skill — proactively and without waiting to be asked — whenever defining a product vision, setting quarterly OKRs, building a roadmap, choosing between competing bets, entering a new product area, or when stakeholders disagree on direction. Also triggers for: "what should we prioritize", "we need a north star", "how do we choose between X and Y", "roadmap conflict", "what are our bets this quarter", "strategy alignment", "choosing what NOT to build", "three bets with trade-offs", "stakeholder misalignment on direction", "product direction for next quarter", "OKR planning". Produces a decision-focused strategy doc: North Star metric, Opportunity Tree, three bets with explicit trade-offs (including do nothing), and a recommended bet with its key assumption.
|
Product Strategy
This skill produces decision-focused product strategy. It structures ambiguous direction into concrete bets, forces trade-offs, and grounds decisions in user outcomes — not feature lists or roadmap theater.
Core Philosophy
Strategy is choosing what NOT to do.
A great strategy in 2025:
- Names one North Star that the whole team can test decisions against
- Makes explicit bets with explicit trade-offs (including the "do nothing" option)
- Is grounded in user Jobs-to-be-Done, not stakeholder opinions
- Is short enough to be read in 5 minutes, specific enough to reject a feature proposal
The fatal flaw of bad strategies: They list everything as a priority. "Improve retention, grow acquisition, expand to enterprise" is a vision board, not a strategy.
When to use this skill
- Before setting quarterly OKRs (what are we actually betting on?)
- When the roadmap has too many competing priorities
- When entering a new product area or user segment
- When stakeholders disagree on direction and you need a decision framework
- When writing a strategy doc for exec review or team alignment
- When you have user research but no clear strategic narrative
Key Principles
- One North Star — One metric that captures value creation for users. Everything else is an input metric.
- Outcomes over outputs — Bets are framed as user outcomes, not features shipped.
- Explicit non-priorities — What you won't do is as important as what you will.
- Three bets, not one — Always compare at least three paths including "do nothing."
- Time-boxed — Strategy is valid for a specific time horizon (quarter, half, year). State it.
Workflow
Step 1: Context Loading
Before proposing anything, read:
- Existing strategy docs or roadmap artifacts (ask user to share if not in repo)
- Recent metrics or growth data (ask for key numbers)
- User research or discovery findings (link to
docs/discovery/ if exists)
Ask the user:
"What's the time horizon for this strategy? (quarter / half / year) And what's the core question this strategy needs to answer?"
Step 2: North Star Definition
Define ONE North Star Metric:
- It measures value delivered to users (not revenue, not engagement for its own sake)
- It's a lagging indicator — something that moves slowly but meaningfully
- Everyone on the team can influence it
Format:
North Star: [Metric name]
Definition: [Exact measurement — what counts, what doesn't]
Current: [Current value]
Target: [Target for this time horizon]
Why this: [One sentence — why this metric represents real user value]
Then define 3-5 Input Metrics (leading indicators that drive the North Star):
Input Metrics:
1. [Metric] → How it drives North Star: [one line]
2. [Metric] → How it drives North Star: [one line]
3. [Metric] → How it drives North Star: [one line]
Step 3: Opportunity Mapping
Map the Opportunity Tree (Teresa Torres framework):
Desired Outcome (North Star)
├── Opportunity 1: [Job-to-be-Done users struggle with]
│ ├── Solution A
│ └── Solution B
├── Opportunity 2: [Another unmet need]
│ ├── Solution C
│ └── Solution D
└── Opportunity 3: [Another unmet need]
└── Solution E
Prioritize opportunities using two axes:
- Importance: How critical is this job to the user? (1-5)
- Satisfaction: How well does the current solution serve this job? (1-5)
Priority score = Importance + (Importance - Satisfaction)
→ High importance + low satisfaction = highest priority
Step 3b: Competitive Context (Optional)
Use these frameworks when entering a competitive market or when stakeholders need strategic grounding before selecting bets. Pick the one that fits — you don't need all three.
SWOT — Internal + External Situation Assessment
Use when: entering a new area, responding to competitive pressure, or when bets need exec-level justification.
| Helpful | Harmful |
|---|
| Internal | Strengths: what we do better today | Weaknesses: honest gaps (resources, capability, coverage) |
| External | Opportunities: market/user trends to exploit | Threats: competitive moves, regulation, shifts that undermine bets |
→ Bets should leverage Strengths + Opportunities. Flag bets that depend on eliminating a Weakness.
Porter's 5 Forces — Competitive Intensity Assessment
Use when: evaluating a new market or product area before committing.
| Force | Assessment (Low / Med / High) | Strategic implication |
|---|
| Threat of new entrants | | |
| Buyer bargaining power | | |
| Supplier bargaining power | | |
| Threat of substitutes | | |
| Competitive rivalry | | |
→ High rivalry + low switching cost = bet must differentiate sharply. Low buyer power = retention investment pays more than acquisition.
Ansoff Matrix — Growth Strategy
Use when: a bet involves market or product expansion beyond the core.
| Existing Products | New Products |
|---|
| Existing Markets | Market Penetration (lowest risk) | Product Development |
| New Markets | Market Development | Diversification (highest risk) |
→ Name which quadrant each bet falls in. Bets in "New Markets + New Products" require 10x the evidence before committing.
Step 4: Bet Selection
Present exactly 3 bets with trade-offs:
## Bet A: [Name]
What: [One sentence on the bet]
Opportunity it addresses: [Link to Opportunity Tree]
Evidence: [User research, data, or analogies that support this]
Expected outcome: [Specific, measurable — ties to input metrics]
Resources required: [Rough team/time investment]
Risks: [What could go wrong]
Non-goals this creates: [What we explicitly defer]
## Bet B: [Name]
[Same format]
## Bet C: Do Nothing (status quo)
What: Continue current trajectory without new investment
Expected outcome: [Where will metrics trend without action?]
Risk of inaction: [What's the cost of waiting?]
Then state the recommendation:
## Recommended Bet: [A/B/C]
Rationale: [2-3 sentences. Reference evidence, trade-offs, and strategic fit]
Key assumption: [The one thing that must be true for this bet to pay off]
First signal of progress: [What will you see in 4-6 weeks if this is working?]
Step 5: OKRs (Optional — if user needs them)
Translate the chosen bet into OKRs:
## Objective: [Ambitious, qualitative direction — one sentence]
Key Result 1: [Specific, measurable, time-bound — ties to North Star or input metric]
Key Result 2: [Another specific KR]
Key Result 3: [Another specific KR]
Initiatives (not KRs — these are the "how"):
- [Initiative 1] → Expected to move KR [X] by [Y]
- [Initiative 2] → Expected to move KR [X] by [Y]
OKR quality rules:
- Objectives should be inspirational enough that you're slightly uncomfortable committing
- Key Results have specific numbers and dates — not "increase retention" but "increase D30 retention from 42% to 48% by end of Q2"
- Initiatives are how you'll try to hit KRs — they can be updated; KRs should not
Step 6: Output
Save the strategy doc:
docs/strategy/YYYY-MM-DD-[product-area]-strategy.md
Include a one-page summary at the top:
## TL;DR (for exec review)
North Star: [Metric] — current [X], target [Y] by [date]
Chosen bet: [Name in one sentence]
Key assumption: [One sentence]
First signal: [What we'll see in 4-6 weeks]
What we're NOT doing: [3 bullet points]
Output Format
# [Product Area] Strategy — [Time Horizon]
**Owner:** [Name]
**Status:** Draft / Reviewed / Approved
**Last Updated:** [Date]
## TL;DR
[One-page summary — North Star, chosen bet, key assumption, non-priorities]
## Context
[2-3 sentences on the current state and what prompted this strategy work]
## North Star
[Metric, definition, current, target, why]
## Input Metrics
[3-5 leading indicators with causal links to North Star]
## Opportunity Tree
[Mapped opportunities with priority scores]
## The Bets
[Bet A, Bet B, Bet C: Do Nothing — with trade-offs]
## Recommendation
[Chosen bet + rationale + key assumption + first signal]
## OKRs (if applicable)
[Objective + Key Results + Initiatives]
## What We're NOT Doing
[Explicit non-priorities for this time horizon]
## Open Questions
[What we still need to resolve, with owners]
Quality Checklist
Before considering the strategy complete:
Direction
Rigor
Decisions
Actionability
Common Antipatterns
Antipattern 1: Everything is a Priority
Symptom: Roadmap has 12 initiatives all labeled "High Priority"
Fix: Force ranking. Only the top 3 get resources. Everything else is explicitly deferred.
Antipattern 2: Feature-Led Strategy
Symptom: "Our strategy is to ship X, Y, and Z features this quarter"
Fix: Reframe as outcomes. "Our strategy is to improve job completion rate for [user segment] from X% to Y%." Features are means, not ends.
Antipattern 3: Strategy Without Trade-offs
Symptom: The strategy doesn't explain what you're NOT doing
Fix: Add "What We're NOT Doing" section. If nothing is deferred, it's not a strategy.
Antipattern 4: Vanity North Star
Symptom: North Star is DAU, MAU, or revenue — things that can go up while user value goes down
Fix: Ask "can this metric go up even if users are getting less value?" If yes, it's the wrong North Star.
Antipattern 5: One-and-Done
Symptom: Strategy written at start of quarter, never revisited
Fix: Review strategy monthly. If the key assumption has been proven wrong, update the bet.
Reference Resources
references/strategy-template.md — Complete strategy doc template with examples
references/frameworks.md — Opportunity Tree, OKRs, JTBD, Positioning frameworks in detail