| name | writing-stickiness |
| description | Applies the Heath brothers' SUCCESs model (Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, Stories) to make messages memorable and persuasive, with systematic analysis, targeted improvements, and scoring (0-18 stickiness scorecard). Use when making messages more memorable or compelling, preparing presentations, crafting pitches or campaigns, or when user mentions stickiness, making ideas stick, persuasion, SUCCESs framework, or Heath brothers. |
Writing Stickiness Enhancement
Table of Contents
Related skills: Use writing-structure-planner for planning structure, writing-revision for prose revision, writing-pre-publish-checklist for final quality checks.
Core Principles
- Six dimensions of stickiness: Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, Stories
- Diagnose before treating: Score current stickiness first, then improve weakest areas
- Not all principles are equal: Some matter more for certain contexts - prioritize accordingly
- Concrete beats abstract: Brains think in images, not abstractions
- Individuals beat statistics: One person's story moves people more than millions in data
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Stickiness Enhancement:
- [ ] Step 1: Analyze against SUCCESs framework
- [ ] Step 2: Improve weak principles
- [ ] Step 3: Score and refine
Before starting: Review resources/success-model.md for the complete SUCCESs framework with all 6 principles, stickiness scorecard, and before/after examples.
Analyze the entire document first and output findings to an analysis file in the current directory, then read that file to make improvements. This ensures complete coverage.
Step 1: Analyze against SUCCESs framework
Step 1.1: Read entire draft. Create analysis file writer-stickiness-analysis.md assessing the document against all 6 SUCCESs principles:
- Simple (0-3): Identify core message in 12 words or fewer. List competing messages. Rate clarity and focus.
- Unexpected (0-3): Identify surprise elements or curiosity gaps. Note where expectations could be violated. Rate attention-getting power.
- Concrete (0-3): List visualizable details. Identify abstract sections needing examples. Rate sensory specificity.
- Credible (0-3): Identify credibility sources (statistics, testability, authority, vivid details). Note unsupported claims. Rate believability.
- Emotional (0-3): Identify emotional connections and personal benefits. Note where motivation could be strengthened. Rate "care factor."
- Stories (0-3): Identify story or human elements. Note opportunities to add narrative. Rate mental simulation potential.
Step 1.2: Calculate total current stickiness score out of 18. Present findings to user.
See each principle's section in resources/success-model.md for detailed scoring guidance.
Step 2: Improve weak principles
Step 2.1: Read analysis file. Identify the 2-3 weakest principles (scored 0-1).
Step 2.2: Work through entire draft making targeted improvements for each weak principle:
- Simple: Refine core message to 12 words or fewer. Strip competing ideas.
- Unexpected: Add surprise or curiosity gaps. Violate reader expectations.
- Concrete: Add visualizable details and specific examples. Replace abstractions.
- Credible: Add statistics (human-scale), testability ("try it yourself"), authority, or vivid details.
- Emotional: Strengthen personal benefits and emotional connections. Focus on individuals, not masses.
- Stories: Add narrative or human elements. Use challenge, connection, or creativity plots.
Step 2.3: Present improved version to user with changes highlighted.
See resources/success-model.md for specific techniques and examples for each principle.
Step 3: Score and refine
Step 3.1: Score the revised message using the Stickiness Scorecard.
Step 3.2: Aim for 12+/18 for good stickiness, 15+/18 for excellent. If score is below 12, identify the weakest 2 principles and do another improvement pass focusing on those.
Step 3.3: Present final scored version with before/after comparison.
See resources/success-model.md - Complete Example for transformation patterns.
Validate using resources/evaluators/rubric_stickiness.json. Minimum standard: Average score >= 3.5.
SUCCESs Framework Overview
| Principle | Key Question | Technique |
|---|
| Simple | What's the ONE core idea? | Commander's intent in 12 words |
| Unexpected | What will surprise readers? | Schema violation + curiosity gaps |
| Concrete | Can readers visualize it? | Sensory details, specific examples |
| Credible | Why should readers believe it? | Human-scale stats, testability |
| Emotional | Why should readers care? | Individual focus, identity appeal |
| Stories | Can readers simulate the experience? | Challenge/connection/creativity plots |
Scoring: Each principle rated 0-3. Total out of 18. Target 12+ for good, 15+ for excellent.
Guardrails
Requirements:
- Score before improving: Always analyze and score the current state before making changes
- Target weakest first: Focus improvements on the lowest-scoring principles
- Preserve accuracy: Never sacrifice truthfulness for stickiness - credibility matters
- Context-appropriate: Not every piece needs maximum stickiness - match to purpose
- Re-score after improving: Always score the revised version to measure improvement
Common pitfalls:
- Improving already-strong principles while ignoring weak ones
- Adding surprise that's random rather than relevant to the core message
- Using statistics that are too large to grasp (billions, trillions)
- Focusing on masses instead of individuals for emotional appeal
- Telling instead of showing when adding stories
Quick Reference
Key resources:
Inputs required:
- Draft text or message to enhance
- Target audience (if known)
- Context (presentation, article, email, pitch, etc.)
Outputs produced:
- Stickiness analysis with per-principle scores
- Improved version targeting weak principles
- Before/after comparison with score improvement
