cs-onboard

name	cs-onboard
description	Structured C-suite onboarding via a founder interview that captures company context into a persistent file used by all advisory skills. Use when setting up advisory context, refreshing stale context, or onboarding a new executive.
license	MIT + Commons Clause
metadata	{"version":"1.0.0","author":"borghei","category":"c-level","domain":"orchestration","tier":"POWERFUL","updated":"2026-03-09T00:00:00.000Z","frameworks":"founder-interview, context-capture, quarterly-refresh"}

C-Suite Onboarding

Tier: POWERFUL Category: C-Level Advisory Tags: onboarding, company context, founder interview, advisor setup, context capture, executive onboarding

Overview

C-Suite Onboarding captures the company context that powers every C-level advisory skill. One structured conversation produces a persistent context file that transforms generic advice into specific, situationally-aware guidance. Without context, advisory skills give textbook answers. With context, they give your-company answers.

---

Commands

Command	Duration	Purpose
/cs:setup	45 minutes	Full onboarding interview across 7 dimensions
/cs:update	15 minutes	Quarterly refresh -- what changed since last capture
/cs:score	5 minutes	Assess context completeness and freshness

---

Interview Principles

This is a conversation, not a form. Follow these rules:

1. One question at a time. Never list multiple questions.
2. Follow threads. When something interesting surfaces, go deeper before moving on.
3. Reflect back. "So the real issue sounds like X -- is that right?"
4. Watch for what they skip. Avoidance signals the most important areas.
5. Never read from a list. Use the framework as a map, not a script.
6. Earn the hard questions. Start easy, build trust, then ask about weaknesses and fears.

Opening line:

"Tell me about the company in your own words -- what are you building and why does it matter?"

Then let the conversation flow naturally across the 7 dimensions.

---

The 7 Interview Dimensions

Dimension 1: Company Identity

What to capture: What they do, who it is for, the real founding "why," one-sentence pitch, non-negotiable values.

Key probes:

• "If you had to explain this to your grandmother in one sentence, what would you say?"
• "What is a value you would fire someone over violating?"
• "What do you refuse to compromise on, even if it costs you?"

Red flags:

• Values that sound like marketing copy ("we empower synergies")
• Cannot articulate the founding "why" beyond "I saw a market opportunity"
• Mission statement that could apply to any company in the industry

Dimension 2: Stage & Scale

What to capture: Headcount (FT vs contractors), revenue range, runway, stage label, what broke in the last 90 days.

Key probes:

• "If you had to label your stage -- still finding PMF, scaling what works, or optimizing -- which is it?"
• "What broke in the last 90 days that you did not expect?"
• "What is the one metric you check every morning?"

Stage Definitions:

Stage	Signal	Typical Challenges
Pre-PMF	<$500K ARR, pivoting, searching	Finding the right customer/problem/solution fit
Early PMF	$500K-$2M ARR, repeatable sales	Hiring, process, not breaking what works
Scaling	$2M-$10M ARR, growth machine building	Middle management, culture preservation, unit economics
Optimizing	$10M+ ARR, efficiency focus	Innovation stagnation, org complexity, market defense

Dimension 3: Founder Profile

What to capture: Self-identified superpower, acknowledged blind spots, archetype, what actually keeps them up at night.

Key probes:

• "What would your co-founder (or closest advisor) say you should stop doing?"
• "When things go wrong, what is your instinctive first reaction?"
• "What part of running this company do you secretly dislike?"

Founder Archetypes:

Archetype	Strength	Blind Spot	Advisory Focus
Product	Deep user empathy, product vision	Sales, go-to-market, delegation	Revenue strategy, hiring
Technical	Engineering excellence, technical moats	Business model, communication	GTM, storytelling, team
Sales	Revenue generation, relationships	Product depth, technical debt	Product strategy, engineering
Operator	Execution, processes, efficiency	Vision, innovation, risk-taking	Strategy, long-term planning

Red flags:

• No acknowledged blind spots
• Weakness framed as strength ("I'm too much of a perfectionist")
• Co-founder dynamics described as "fine" with no specifics

Dimension 4: Team & Culture

What to capture: Team described in 3 words, last real conflict and how it was resolved, which values are real vs aspirational, strongest and weakest leader.

Key probes:

• "Which of your stated values is most real? Which is a poster on the wall?"
• "Tell me about the last real disagreement in the leadership team."
• "Who is the one person you cannot afford to lose, and why?"

Red flags:

• "We have no conflict" -- every healthy team has conflict
• Cannot name a weak leader -- either lying or not paying attention
• Culture described only in positive terms with no self-awareness

Dimension 5: Market & Competition

What to capture: Who is winning and why (honest version), real unfair advantage, the competitive move that could hurt them.

Key probes:

• "What is your real unfair advantage -- not the investor pitch version?"
• "If your best competitor had unlimited funding, what would they do that scares you?"
• "What do your competitors do better than you? Be honest."

Red flags:

• "We have no real competition" -- you always have competition, even if it is the status quo
• Unfair advantage is a feature that can be copied in 6 months
• No awareness of competitor strategy

Dimension 6: Current Challenges

What to capture: Priority stack-rank across product/growth/people/money/operations, the decision they have been avoiding, the "one extra day" answer.

Key probes:

• "If you had one extra day per week, what would you spend it on?" (Reveals true priority)
• "What is the decision you have been putting off for weeks?"
• "Rank these: product, growth, people, money, operations. What is number 1 right now?"

The "avoided decision" is often the most valuable insight. Common avoided decisions:

• Firing an underperformer who is well-liked
• Pivoting away from a product that is not working
• Having an honest conversation with a co-founder
• Raising prices
• Cutting a feature or initiative

Dimension 7: Goals & Ambition

What to capture: 12-month target (specific and measurable), 36-month target (directional), exit vs build-forever orientation, personal success definition.

Key probes:

• "What does 12 months from now look like if everything goes right?"
• "What does success look like for you personally -- separate from the company?"
• "Are you building to sell, building forever, or haven't decided?"

Red flags:

• 12-month target that is vague ("grow a lot")
• Personal and company goals completely disconnected
• Exit orientation that conflicts with stated mission

---

Context Output Structure

After the interview, generate the context file at ~/.claude/company-context.md:

# Company Context
**Last updated:** [Date]
**Freshness:** Fresh (< 90 days)
**Completeness:** [X/7 dimensions captured]
**Interviewed:** [Founder name and role]

## 1. Company Identity
**What we do:** [One sentence]
**Who it's for:** [Target customer]
**Why it matters:** [Founding motivation -- the real version]
**One-line pitch:** [Elevator pitch]
**Non-negotiable values:** [Values they would fire over]

## 2. Stage & Scale
**Stage:** [Pre-PMF / Early PMF / Scaling / Optimizing]
**Headcount:** [X FT + Y contractors]
**Revenue:** [$X ARR / MRR]
**Runway:** [X months at current burn]
**Morning metric:** [What they check first]
**Recent break:** [What broke in last 90 days]

## 3. Founder Profile
**Archetype:** [Product / Technical / Sales / Operator]
**Superpower:** [Self-identified strength]
**Blind spot:** [Acknowledged weakness]
**Up-at-night:** [Current anxiety]
**Co-founder dynamic:** [Healthy / Strained / Solo]

## 4. Team & Culture
**Team in 3 words:** [Their words]
**Real values:** [Values that are actually lived]
**Aspirational values:** [Values that are work-in-progress]
**Key person risk:** [Who they cannot lose]
**Weakest link:** [Leadership gap]
**Last conflict:** [What happened and how resolved]

## 5. Market & Competition
**Winning competitor:** [Who and why]
**Real unfair advantage:** [Not the investor version]
**Kill-shot risk:** [Competitive move that could hurt them]
**Market position:** [Leader / Challenger / Niche / Emerging]


 [Top challenge area]
 [Rank of product/growth/people/money/ops]
 [What they have been putting off]
 [What they would spend time on]


 [Specific, measurable]
 [Directional]
 [Build to sell / Build forever / Undecided]
 [What success means for the founder personally]


[Observations, inferred patterns, things to watch]
[CONTEXT UPDATE entries from subsequent sessions]

Rules:

• Write [not captured] for unknowns -- never leave blank
• Use their actual words when possible, not corporate paraphrasing
• Note confidence level for inferred information
• Never silently modify -- always confirm before updating

---

Context Quality Scoring

Completeness Score

Dimensions Captured	Score	Label
7/7	100%	Complete
5-6/7	70-85%	Good (identify gaps)
3-4/7	40-55%	Partial (schedule follow-up)
1-2/7	15-25%	Minimal (re-interview needed)

Freshness Score

Age	Score	Label	Action
< 30 days	Fresh	High confidence	Use directly
30-90 days	Aging	Medium confidence	Use, flag what may have changed
90-180 days	Stale	Low confidence	Prompt for /cs:update
> 180 days	Expired	Very low confidence	Re-interview recommended

Quality Signals

Signal	Confidence Impact
Full interview completed	+High
Update done within 90 days	+Medium
Key fields populated with specifics	+High
Fields contain vague/generic answers	-Medium
Financial fields missing	-High (for CFO/CEO skills)
"Not captured" in 3+ fields	-High

---

Quarterly Refresh Protocol (/cs:update)

Trigger: Every 90 days or after a major event (fundraise, reorg, pivot, key hire/departure).

Opening: "It has been [X time] since we captured your company context. Let's do a quick refresh. What has changed?"

Walk each dimension with a single "what changed?" question:

Dimension	Refresh Question
Identity	"Still the same mission, or has it shifted?"
Stage & Scale	"Team size, revenue, and runway now?"
Founder	"Has your role changed? What is stretching you?"
Team	"Any leadership changes? New key players?"
Market	"Any competitive surprises? Market shifts?"
Challenges	"What is the #1 problem now vs 90 days ago?"
Goals	"Still on track for the 12-month target?"

After refresh:

• Update relevant sections in context file
• Update Last updated timestamp
• Reset freshness to Fresh
• Note what changed in the Notes section

---

Context Enrichment During Sessions

During advisory conversations, new information surfaces. Capture it without disrupting flow.

Triggers for enrichment:

• New metric or number shared
• Key person mentioned for the first time
• Priority shift expressed
• New constraint or risk surfaces
• Timeline or deadline revealed

Protocol:

1. Note internally during conversation
2. At session end: "I picked up a few things that would be useful to add to your context. Want me to update the file?"
3. If yes: append to relevant section, update timestamp
4. If no: respect the decision

Never silently modify the context file. Always confirm before changes.

---

Privacy Rules

Never Send Externally

• Specific revenue or burn rate figures
• Customer names (unless publicly known)
• Employee names (unless publicly known)
• Investor names (unless publicly announced)
• Specific runway months
• Watch list contents
• Avoided decisions

Safe to Use Externally (Anonymized)

• Stage label (seed, Series A, etc.)
• Team size ranges (1-10, 10-50, 50-200+)
• Industry vertical
• Challenge category (not specifics)
• Market position descriptor

Before Any External API Call

• Numbers become ranges or stage-relative descriptors
• Names become roles ("the CTO" not "Sarah")
• Revenue becomes stage labels ("early revenue" not "$800K ARR")
• Customers become "Customer A, B, C"

---

Missing Context Handling

Handle gracefully -- never block the conversation.

Missing	Approach
Stage	"Just to calibrate -- are you still finding PMF or scaling what works?"
Financials	Use stage + team size to infer. Note the inference.
Founder profile	Infer from conversation style. Mark as inferred.
Multiple founders	Context reflects interviewee. Note co-founder perspective may differ.
Recent context	"It's been a while since your last update. Should I assume things are roughly the same, or has something big changed?"

---

Integration with C-Suite Skills

The context file is loaded by every C-level advisory skill:

Skill	Uses Context For
ceo-advisor	Strategic recommendations calibrated to stage and challenges
cfo-advisor	Financial guidance calibrated to runway and revenue
cto-advisor	Technical strategy calibrated to team and architecture
coo-advisor	Operations advice calibrated to scale and processes
cmo-advisor	Marketing strategy calibrated to stage and market position
internal-narrative	Narrative construction based on company truth
scenario-war-room	Risk variables calibrated to actual threats

---

Related Skills

Skill	Use When
ceo-advisor	Using context for strategic decisions
internal-narrative	Building narratives from the captured context
scenario-war-room	Modeling risks based on company context
context-engine	Technical implementation of context management for AI agents

---

Troubleshooting

Problem	Likely Cause	Resolution
Founder gives vague, marketing-speak answers	Interview not building trust; questions too formal	Reset with a personal question; follow a thread they care about; use reflection ("So what you're really saying is...")
Key dimensions left as "[not captured]" after interview	Founder avoided topic or interview ran out of time	Note which dimensions were skipped (avoidance signals importance); schedule targeted follow-up for missing areas
Context file feels generic, could apply to any company	Interviewer used the framework as a script, not a map	Re-interview with focus on specifics: names, numbers, stories; capture their actual words, not paraphrases
Advisory skills still giving textbook answers despite context	Context file too sparse or stale (>90 days)	Run /cs:score to assess completeness and freshness; schedule /cs:update if freshness is Stale or Expired
Quarterly refresh takes too long or feels redundant	Refresh covering all 7 dimensions instead of focusing on changes	Lead with "What changed?" per dimension; skip unchanged areas quickly; target 15 minutes total
Multiple founders give conflicting context	Different perspectives on stage, challenges, or priorities	Note the conflict explicitly in context file; mark which founder provided which data; flag for resolution
Context file modified without founder approval	AI agent or team member updated context silently	Enforce "never silently modify" rule; require explicit founder confirmation before any context update

---

Success Criteria

• Context completeness score reaches 7/7 dimensions within first session or first follow-up
• Context freshness maintained at "Fresh" (< 90 days old) through quarterly refresh protocol
• Advisory skills produce company-specific (not generic) recommendations when context is loaded
• Founder reports that AI advisory conversations feel "like talking to someone who knows my business"
• Time to complete full onboarding interview under 45 minutes
• Time to complete quarterly refresh under 15 minutes
• Zero instances of context file modified without founder approval

---

Scope & Limitations

In scope: Structured founder interview across 7 dimensions (identity, stage, founder profile, team/culture, market/competition, challenges, goals), context file generation and maintenance, quarterly refresh protocol, context quality scoring (completeness and freshness), context enrichment during advisory sessions, privacy rules for external data handling, and missing context graceful handling.

Out of scope: Company financial modeling (use cfo-advisor), competitive intelligence gathering (use competitive-intel), team assessment or 360 reviews (use hr-operations/), product analytics (use cpo-advisor), and automated context capture from external data sources. This skill captures context through conversation, not data integration.

Limitations: Context quality depends entirely on founder candor; evasive or aspirational answers reduce advisory effectiveness. Single-founder interviews may miss co-founder perspectives. Context is a point-in-time snapshot; rapid company changes (pivot, reorg, fundraise) can make context stale before the 90-day refresh. Privacy rules prevent sharing specific context externally, which limits integration with external tools.

---

Integration Points

• ceo-advisor -- Strategic recommendations calibrated to company stage, challenges, and founder archetype
• cfo-advisor -- Financial guidance calibrated to runway, revenue range, and growth stage
• cto-advisor -- Technical strategy calibrated to team size, architecture maturity, and founder technical depth
• coo-advisor -- Operations advice calibrated to scale, process maturity, and headcount
• cmo-advisor -- Marketing strategy calibrated to stage, market position, and competitive landscape
• internal-narrative -- Narrative construction uses company identity, values, and founder voice from context
• scenario-war-room -- Risk variables calibrated to actual competitive threats and company vulnerabilities