innovation-audit

name	innovation-audit
description	Run a full Innovation Operating System audit across all 7 layers — strategy, governance, discovery, validation, value capture, operating environment, outcomes — with prioritized fix plan. Read-only orchestrator that sequences across every innovation-* skill. Use quarterly or annually, when an innovation effort feels stuck, or before a major restructure. Produces a prioritized remediation plan; doesn't fix issues directly.
type	skill
project	skills-library
plugin	innovation
aliases	["innovation-audit"]
tags	["type/skill","plugin/innovation","topic/innovation","topic/audit","scope/orchestrator"]
status	active

Innovation OS audit (orchestrator)

Run the periodic Innovation OS health audit. Read-only — produces a prioritized remediation plan; doesn't fix issues directly. Use this skill quarterly or annually, when an innovation effort feels stuck, or before a major restructure.

Reference: [[2026-05_Innovation-Operating-System]] for the seven-layer model.

Steps:

1. Confirm scope.

   • Internal practice (Composable DXP at Slalom) or client situation?
   • Time window for evidence (past 6, 12, or 18 months).
   • Active bets / programs in scope.
   • Audit owner + sponsor.

2. Run the seven-layer diagnostic. For each layer, score healthy / warning / critical.

   Layer 1 — Strategy ([[innovation-strategist]]):

   • Is the mandate declared and ratified? (six types: defend the core, find next-S-curve, build new business, out-compete, reposition brand, theater)
   • Is the ambition mix (H1/H2/H3 capital) explicit and matching the mandate?
   • Is the operating model decision (line / lab / hybrid) made?
   • Is the cadence calendar real (weekly / monthly / quarterly / annual)?

   Layer 2 — Governance ([[innovation-portfolio-architect]]):

   • Are gates binary, observable, and written before testing?
   • Is kill rate in the healthy 30–50% range?
   • Are there zombie bets (>1.5x median time in stage)?
   • Is there pilot purgatory (Gate 3 failure)?
   • Is the dashboard refreshed weekly with learning + outcome metrics by horizon?

   Layer 3 — Discovery ([[innovation-discovery-coach]]):

   • Are JTBD interviews using switch-interview structure (not opinion surveys)?
   • Is observation budget ≥30% of discovery effort?
   • Are job stories validated with 10+ customers per archetype?
   • Are Gate 1 briefs producing 1-page synthesis (not 70-page report dumps)?

   Layer 4 — Validation ([[innovation-method-validator]]):

   • Are bets running stages in order (Insight → Problem → Solution → Business Model)?
   • Stage 2 (Problem) skipped or shallow?
   • Stage 4 (Business Model) treated as postscript?
   • Build-Measure-Learn cycle ≤14 days?

   Layer 5 — Value Capture ([[innovation-typologist]], [[innovation-monetization-strategist]], [[innovation-value-engineer]]):

   • Doblin Type investment — Configuration depth or Product-Performance-only?
   • WTP studies before product, or pricing-as-postscript?
   • Horizon-appropriate value math (NPV for H1, EV for H2, real options for H3)?
   • Kill economics documented per gate?

   Layer 6 — Operating Environment ([[innovation-lab-architect]], [[innovation-leadership-coach]]):

   • Lab charter complete (8 sections incl. sunset criteria)?
   • Year-1 KPIs are capability metrics, not revenue?
   • Sponsor backed multi-year, with named successor?
   • ≥2 named operating-BU absorbers?
   • Brain Trust mechanism running with candor norms?
   • Innovation capital deficits across the team?

   Layer 7 — Outcomes:

   • Are the right metrics reported per horizon?
   • Anti-metrics (revenue on H3 in year 1) absent?
   • Capability built, optionality secured, market presence quantified?

   Cross-layer specialists:

   • Is the situation actually disruption (run [[innovation-disruption-analyst]] test)?
   • Is the work framed as DT and would benefit from portfolio reframe ([[innovation-digital-transformation-advisor]])?

3. Categorize findings by severity:

   • CRITICAL — block continued investment. Mandate-confused portfolio, all-H1 dressed as transformation, KPI mismatch killing labs, revenue metrics on H3.
   • HIGH — fix this quarter. Toothless gates, pilot purgatory, Stage 2 skipping, pricing-as-postscript, capital-deficit leadership.
   • MEDIUM — fix this year. Type-investment imbalance, Brain Trust absent, missing absorber relationships, Storyteller deficit.
   • LOW — track. Minor template gaps, cadence drift, partial Ten Faces coverage.

4. Produce prioritized fix plan — top 12–15 items maximum, ordered by leverage. Don't surface 87 items; the audit's value is the prioritization.

5. Layer routing. For each finding, name the skill that resolves it:

   • Mandate / strategy gaps → [[innovation-strategist]]
   • Governance gaps → [[innovation-portfolio-architect]]
   • Discovery thin → [[innovation-discovery-coach]]
   • Validation skipping → [[innovation-method-validator]]
   • Pricing-as-postscript → [[innovation-monetization-strategist]]
   • Value math wrong-horizon → [[innovation-value-engineer]]
   • Lab structural issues → [[innovation-lab-architect]]
   • Disruption diagnosis required → [[innovation-disruption-analyst]]
   • Capital / culture gaps → [[innovation-leadership-coach]]

6. Save the audit. Output to 30_Engagements/Active/{client}/Innovation_Audit_{date}.md (client work) or 10_Practice/Initiatives/Innovation_Audit_{date}.md (internal practice). Append a row to the practice's audit log MOC if one exists.

7. Wait for user approval per fix-plan item. Don't execute fixes during audit; route per-item afterward.

Output format:

# Innovation OS audit: {Org / Practice} — {Date}

## Scope
- Mandate type: {if known} | Confirmed by: {sponsor}
- Time window: {past N months}
- Bets in scope: {count, list}

## Summary
- Overall innovation health: {A/B/C/D/F}
- Critical: {N} | High: {N} | Medium: {N} | Low: {N}
- Layer-by-layer:
  - Layer 1 Strategy:              {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 2 Governance:            {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 3 Discovery:             {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 4 Validation:            {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 5 Value Capture:         {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 6 Operating Environment: {healthy/warning/critical}
  - Layer 7 Outcomes:              {healthy/warning/critical}

## CRITICAL (block continued investment)
[Each: layer, what, why critical, fix path → which skill resolves it]

## HIGH (fix this quarter)
[...]

## MEDIUM (fix this year)
[...]

## LOW (track)
[...]

## Cross-layer findings
- Disruption test result: {pass/fail/N-A}
- DT framing accuracy: {modernization-mislabeled / transformation-mislabeled / accurate / N-A}

## Recommendations
- {Structural changes — governance, sponsorship, talent}
- {Cultural mechanisms missing}
- {Capital / sponsor work needed}

## Next audit
- Recommended date: {YYYY-MM-DD} (typically quarterly for active programs, annual for steady state)
- Recommended owner: {role}

Don't apply the audit's findings during the audit itself — produce the plan, then route per-item to the right skill.