菜单
Deep-dive validation of top innovation ideas using Six Thinking Hats methodology. Systematically explore facts, emotions, benefits, risks, creative solutions, and decisions. Validates assumptions before committing resources. Use after idea-evaluation narrows to top 3-5 ideas.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
Discover uncontested market space using Blue Ocean Strategy tools. Map competitive factors with a Strategy Canvas, identify non-customers and understand why they don't buy, and apply the Four Actions Framework (Eliminate, Reduce, Raise, Create) to find value innovation opportunities. Use during customer discovery to see beyond existing competition. First phase of systematic innovation.
Generate innovative ideas using Systematic Inventive Thinking (SIT) within your Closed World. Applies the Closed World Principle and Function Follows Form to discover non-obvious innovations by manipulating existing components. Use after solution-definition as an alternative or complement to SCAMPER. Third phase of systematic innovation.
Generate innovative ideas by creating new dependencies between previously independent variables. Part of SIT (Systematic Inventive Thinking) ideation toolkit. Map internal variables (controlled) and external variables (uncontrolled), then link pairs that were never connected before to discover non-obvious innovations. Can be used standalone or as part of ideation-sit orchestration.
Deep customer understanding through Jobs-to-be-Done analysis, globally diverse persona creation, and evidence gathering from real-world sources. Use when starting innovation projects to understand customer needs, validate assumptions, and gather market intelligence before defining solutions. First phase of systematic innovation.
Systematically evaluate and rank innovation ideas using multi-criteria scoring. Rate ideas on customer value, feasibility, viability, desirability, and strategic fit. Apply weighted scoring to identify top 3-5 ideas for deeper validation. Use after SCAMPER ideation generates 20-50+ ideas.
Generate innovative ideas systematically using SCAMPER techniques within your Closed World. Guides you through all 7 creative thinking methods (Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to other uses, Eliminate, Reverse) to generate 30-50+ ideas from existing components. Use after solution-definition to explore innovation possibilities. Third phase of systematic innovation.
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | critical-validation |
| description | Deep-dive validation of top innovation ideas using Six Thinking Hats methodology. Systematically explore facts, emotions, benefits, risks, creative solutions, and decisions. Validates assumptions before committing resources. Use after idea-evaluation narrows to top 3-5 ideas. |
After evaluation scores identify your top 3-5 ideas, you need deep validation before committing resources to implementation. This skill uses Edward de Bono's Six Thinking Hats methodology to:
Use this skill when:
Before starting validation, you need:
Choose your preferred working mode:
Claude will guide you through each hat sequentially, pausing for your review before moving to the next hat.
Checkpoints:
Use when:
Claude will complete all 6 hats in sequence and present comprehensive validation summary.
Use when:
To activate:
Use critical-validation skill in interactive mode on [Idea Name].
Each hat represents a distinct thinking mode. By wearing one hat at a time, teams think in parallel rather than arguing from fixed positions.
Focus: Objective data, what we know and don't know
Output: Clear picture of known facts vs. assumptions
Focus: Gut feelings, emotions, intuition (NO JUSTIFICATION ALLOWED)
Output: Honest emotional landscape, not filtered by logic
CRITICAL: Red Hat responses must be PURE EMOTION with ZERO JUSTIFICATION.
❌ WRONG Examples (include "because"/rationale):
✅ RIGHT Examples (pure feeling only):
Facilitator script when someone adds "because":
"Thank you for the feeling. Let's save the 'why' for White Hat or Black Hat. Just the emotion for now - how do you FEEL?"
Why this matters:
Enforcement checklist:
Focus: Positive outcomes, best-case scenarios, value
Output: Comprehensive map of potential benefits
Focus: Problems, risks, reasons it might fail
Output: Thorough risk inventory, Devil's advocate perspective
Focus: New ideas, creative solutions, alternatives
Output: Creative solutions to problems, idea improvements
Focus: Meta-thinking, process control, synthesis
Output: Decision and action plan
Sequence: Red → White → Yellow → Black → Green → Blue → Red
Why this sequence:
Sequence: Red → Yellow → Black → Blue
When to use: Time-constrained, straightforward ideas, preliminary validation
Set up the session:
Assemble participants:
Set ground rules:
Prompt: "How do you feel about this idea right now? What's your gut reaction?"
Guidelines:
Output: Honest emotional baseline before analysis
✅ CORRECT Example:
❌ INCORRECT Example (includes justification):
If someone adds "because" or rationale: Facilitator says: "Thank you for sharing. Let's capture just the feeling for now - excited? worried? Save the 'why' for White Hat or Black Hat."
Prompt: "What do we know for certain? What information is missing?"
Four categories:
1. What we KNOW (facts, data, evidence):
2. What we THINK we know (assumptions):
3. What we DON'T know (gaps):
4. What we NEED to learn (research needed):
Output: Clear map of knowledge vs. assumptions vs. gaps
Example:
KNOW:
- 45% of users requested similar feature in surveys
- We have 3 engineers with required skills
THINK WE KNOW:
- Users will pay 20% premium for this
- Implementation will take 4 months
DON'T KNOW:
- How often would users actually use this?
- What edge cases will we encounter?
NEED TO LEARN:
- Prototype + user test (2 weeks)
- Technical spike on integration (1 week)
Prompt: "What's great about this idea? What value does it create? What's the best-case outcome?"
Explore four benefit dimensions:
1. Customer benefits:
2. Business benefits:
3. Strategic benefits:
4. Best-case scenarios:
Output: Comprehensive value map (helps prioritize what to preserve)
Example:
CUSTOMER BENEFITS:
- Saves traders 2 hours/day (massive JTBD impact)
- Reduces stress of tracking manually
BUSINESS BENEFITS:
- Could increase retention by 30%
- Differentiates us from all competitors
STRATEGIC BENEFITS:
- Platform play - can build other features on this data
- Could license technology to partners
BEST CASE:
- Becomes the killer feature customers choose us for
- Industry standard, others copy us (validates leadership)
Prompt: "What could go wrong? Why might this fail? What are we overlooking?"
Explore seven risk categories:
1. Customer risks:
2. Technical risks:
3. Operational risks:
4. Business risks:
5. Competitive risks:
6. Execution risks:
7. Assumption risks:
Output: Comprehensive risk inventory (most important hat for avoiding failure)
Example:
CUSTOMER RISKS:
- Adoption might be slow (behavioral change required)
- Power users may find it limiting vs. manual control
TECHNICAL RISKS:
- Real-time sync could fail at scale (100k+ users)
- Edge cases we haven't thought of
OPERATIONAL RISKS:
- Customer support needs training on new feature
- Maintenance burden on small team
BUSINESS RISKS:
- Might cannibalize revenue from premium tier
- Legal risk if data handling isn't perfect
COMPETITIVE RISKS:
- Competitors can copy in 6 months
- Market trend toward different solution
EXECUTION RISKS:
- Estimated 3 months, could be 6+
- Requires hiring specialist we don't have
Prompt: "How can we overcome the risks identified? What creative solutions exist? How can we modify this idea?"
Three approaches:
1. Risk mitigation (for each Black Hat risk):
Example:
BLACK HAT RISK: "Real-time sync might fail at scale"
GREEN HAT SOLUTIONS:
- Phase 1: Launch without real-time (async only)
- Technical spike to prove scalability before full build
- Partner with infrastructure expert
- Limit concurrent users initially
2. Idea modifications:
Example:
ORIGINAL IDEA: "AI-powered business insights dashboard"
GREEN HAT MODIFICATIONS:
- MVP: One insight, delivered weekly via SMS (not real-time dashboard)
- Test: Manually create insights for 20 users, see if valuable
- Modular: Start with spending analysis, add revenue insights later
3. Alternative approaches:
Output: Creative solutions to risks, idea improvements, alternatives
Prompt: "What have we learned? What's the conclusion? Do we go, no-go, or iterate?"
Synthesize the session:
1. Summary:
2. Critical assumptions identified:
3. Decision framework:
GO: Build this idea as planned
NO-GO: Don't pursue this idea
ITERATE: Modify and re-validate
4. Next steps (if GO or ITERATE):
Output: Clear go/no-go/iterate decision with rationale and next steps
Prompt: "After all this analysis, how do you feel now? Has your gut reaction changed?"
Guidelines (SAME AS INITIAL RED HAT):
Compare to initial Red Hat:
If gut feeling contradicts Blue Hat decision:
Output: Emotional validation of decision, surface any unease
✅ CORRECT Final Red Hat:
❌ INCORRECT Final Red Hat (includes justification):
See assets/validation-template.md for ready-to-use template.
# Six Thinking Hats Validation: [Idea Name]
**Date:** [Date]
**Participants:** [Names and roles]
**Idea score:** X.XX (from evaluation)
**Session duration:** XX minutes
---
## Initial Red Hat - Gut Feelings
[Capture each person's initial reaction]
**Overall sentiment:** Positive / Mixed / Negative
---
## White Hat - Facts & Information
### What We KNOW:
- [Fact 1]
- [Fact 2]
### What We THINK We Know (Assumptions):
- [Assumption 1]
- [Assumption 2]
### What We DON'T Know:
- [Gap 1]
- [Gap 2]
### What We NEED to Learn:
- [Research need 1]
- [Research need 2]
---
## Yellow Hat - Benefits & Optimism
### Customer Benefits:
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
### Business Benefits:
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
### Strategic Benefits:
- [Benefit 1]
- [Benefit 2]
### Best-Case Scenario:
[Describe best possible outcome]
---
## Black Hat - Risks & Caution
### Customer Risks:
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
### Technical Risks:
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
### Operational Risks:
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
### Business Risks:
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]
### Competitive Risks:
- [Risk 1]
### Execution Risks:
- [Risk 1]
### Critical Risk Assumptions:
- [Most dangerous assumption if wrong]
---
## Green Hat - Creative Solutions
### Risk Mitigation:
[For each critical Black Hat risk, propose solution]
### Idea Modifications:
[How could we improve/simplify this idea?]
### Alternative Approaches:
[Different ways to achieve same goal]
---
## Blue Hat - Decision & Next Steps
### Summary:
- **Key facts:** [from White Hat]
- **Biggest benefits:** [from Yellow Hat]
- **Critical risks:** [from Black Hat]
- **Best solutions:** [from Green Hat]
### Critical Assumptions:
1. [Assumption that must be true]
2. [Assumption that must be true]
### DECISION: [ GO / NO-GO / ITERATE ]
**Rationale:** [Why this decision?]
### Next Steps (if GO or ITERATE):
1. [Action 1] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
2. [Action 2] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
### Success Criteria:
[How will we know this is working?]
### Review Checkpoint:
[When will we review progress?]
---
## Final Red Hat - Gut Check
[How do people feel after analysis?]
**Confidence level:** High / Medium / Low
**Any lingering concerns:** [Yes/No and what]
---
## Sign-off
**Facilitator:** [Name]
**Decision owners:** [Names]
**Date:** [Date]
See references/example-outputs.md for complete Six Thinking Hats validations:
Do:
Don't:
1. Skipping to decision Starting with Blue Hat (decision) without working through other hats. Leads to poor decisions based on incomplete thinking.
2. Black Hat becomes argument Black Hat degenerates into people attacking each other's positions rather than identifying risks objectively. Solution: Frame as "What risks exist?" not "Why is your idea bad?"
3. Yellow Hat blindness Skipping or rushing Yellow Hat because "we already know the benefits." Yellow reveals non-obvious value. Solution: Force 20 minutes on Yellow - stretch to find all benefits.
4. Green Hat avoids problems Green Hat generates new ideas instead of solving Black Hat risks. Solution: Explicitly map Green solutions to Black risks.
5. White Hat becomes debate Arguing about whether something is a fact or assumption. Solution: If debatable, it's an assumption. Move on.
6. Red Hat gets justified "I feel nervous because..." - stop at "I feel nervous." Solution: No "because" allowed in Red Hat.
Use only: Red → Yellow → Black → Blue
Good for: Straightforward ideas, time pressure, preliminary validation
Add second round: After Blue Hat decision, do another Yellow/Black/Green cycle on the MVP version.
Good for: Major strategic bets, high-uncertainty ideas
Good for: Distributed teams, busy stakeholders
Use Six Hats to revisit evaluation scores:
Good for: When evaluation scores feel uncertain
Input from idea-evaluation:
Input from solution-definition:
Output to implementation:
Trigger re-validation if:
Re-validation process:
Good validation session produces:
Warning signs of poor validation:
After completing critical validation:
assets/validation-template.mdIf Black Hat reveals hard technical challenges, consider using the technical-breakthrough skill (TRIZ) to solve contradictions creatively.
Six Thinking Hats is not about consensus - it's about exploring an idea thoroughly from all angles before deciding. Good validation might reveal an idea isn't worth pursuing - that's success, not failure. Better to learn in 90 minutes than after 6 months of building.
Evaluation narrowed options. Validation tests assumptions. Don't confuse the two.