diff --git a/kit.yaml b/kit.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d5e42c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/kit.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +# Kit Contract v1 — CEOS's conforming kit manifest (CEO-49). +# Normative schema: authoros contract/kit.schema.md; normative contract: +# authoros contract/KIT-CONTRACT.md (AOS-48). The contract is the INTERFACE — +# CEOS's standalone installer (setup.sh) and publish.sh public-export flow +# stay its own implementation. +contract_version: 1 +kit: + id: ceos + name: "CEOS" + version: 1.0.0 # first versioned release marker (kit predates the contract) + repo: https://github.com/bradfeld/ceos.git # canonical PUBLIC clone URL (publish.sh syncs from the private source repo) +commands: + invocation: "ceos-* skills (Claude-interpreted; see skills/ and README.md)" +installer: + entry: setup.sh + args: "run from the cloned repo root" +capabilities_required: [] # standalone-only today — no hosted-agent tier +# No tenant_manifest block: CEOS has no tenant model — a CEO clones the kit directly. +delivery: + notes: >- + Standalone-tier kit: a CEO clones kit.repo and runs setup.sh directly. If a + hosted CEOS agent ever ships, delivery follows the Kit Contract v1 mechanism + (authoros contract/KIT-CONTRACT.md, "Delivery (v1 mechanism)"). diff --git a/skills/ceos-assistance/SKILL.md b/skills/ceos-assistance/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..442c28a --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/ceos-assistance/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,382 @@ +--- +name: ceos-assistance +description: Use when managing daily operational delegation through The Stack and structured leader-assistant standups +file-access: [data/assistance/, templates/assistance-stack.md, templates/assistance-daily.md, data/accountability.md, data/delegate/] +tools-used: [Read, Write, Glob] +--- + +# ceos-assistance + +Manage the daily operational delegation workflow between a leader and their assistant using "The Stack" — a batch delegation queue. This skill implements the 5 disciplines of The Assistance Track: batching, The Stack, the daily meeting, the assistant's judgment, and a weekly review. It complements `ceos-delegate`, which handles *strategic* delegation (what SHOULD be delegated), by managing *operational* delegation (HOW items are delegated day-to-day). + +**Not for:** Strategic delegation decisions (use `ceos-delegate`), task tracking without a leader-assistant relationship (use `ceos-todos`), or meeting facilitation (use `ceos-l10`). The Assistance Track is specifically about the daily delegation workflow between a leader and their dedicated assistant. + +## When to Use + +- "Add to the stack" or "stack this for my assistant" +- "Run the daily meeting" or "daily standup with my assistant" +- "Review the stack" or "what's on the stack?" +- "Weekly assistance review" or "how's delegation going this week?" +- "Show stuck items" or "what's been on the stack too long?" +- "Hand off [item] to [assistant]" or "mark [item] as done" +- Any discussion about daily delegation queues, assistant standups, or The Assistance Track + +## Context + +### Finding the CEOS Repository + +Search upward from the current directory for the `.ceos` marker file. This file marks the root of the CEOS repository. + +If `.ceos` is not found, stop and tell the user: "Not in a CEOS repository. Clone your CEOS repo and run setup.sh first." + +**Sync before use:** Once you find the CEOS root, run `git -C pull --ff-only --quiet 2>/dev/null` to get the latest data from teammates. If it fails (conflict or offline), continue silently with local data. + +### Key Files + +| File | Purpose | +|------|---------| +| `data/assistance/stack/` | Stack items — one file per delegation item | +| `data/assistance/daily/` | Daily meeting logs — one file per meeting | +| `templates/assistance-stack.md` | Template for new stack items | +| `templates/assistance-daily.md` | Template for daily meeting logs | +| `data/accountability.md` | Source of leader-assistant relationships (read-only — use ceos-accountability to modify) | +| `data/delegate/` | Delegate and Elevate audits (read-only — reference for delegation context) | + +### Stack Item Format + +Each stack item is a markdown file at `data/assistance/stack/stack-NNN-slug.md` with YAML frontmatter: + +```yaml +id: "stack-001" +title: "Schedule board meeting" +from: "Brad Feld" +to: "Sarah Chen" +urgency: this_week # today | this_week | whenever +status: pending # pending | handed_off | done +created: "2026-02-16" +handed_off: null # Date when handed to assistant +completed: null # Date when marked done +``` + +**File naming:** `stack-NNN-slug.md` — zero-padded numeric ID, title slugified. + +### Daily Meeting Log Format + +Each daily meeting is a markdown file at `data/assistance/daily/YYYY-MM-DD.md` with YAML frontmatter: + +```yaml +date: "2026-02-16" +leader: "Brad Feld" +assistant: "Sarah Chen" +items_reviewed: 5 +items_handed_off: 3 +items_completed: 1 +duration_minutes: 15 +``` + +### Urgency Values + +| Value | Meaning | Expected Turnaround | +|-------|---------|-------------------| +| `today` | Needs attention today | Same day | +| `this_week` | Should be completed this week | Within the week | +| `whenever` | No time pressure, do when convenient | Best effort | + +### Status Values + +| Value | Meaning | When Set | +|-------|---------|----------| +| `pending` | On the stack, not yet handed off | Item creation | +| `handed_off` | Discussed in daily meeting, assistant is working on it | During Daily mode | +| `done` | Completed | During Daily or Stack mode | + +### The 5 Disciplines + +The Assistance Track is built on 5 disciplines that make delegation work: + +1. **Batching** — Don't interrupt your assistant throughout the day. Collect items on The Stack. +2. **The Stack** — A single queue of everything you need to delegate. Items wait here until the daily meeting. +3. **The Daily Meeting** — A structured 5-15 minute standup to review The Stack, hand off items, and check on progress. +4. **The Assistant's Judgment** — Once handed off, trust the assistant to handle it. Don't micromanage. +5. **The Weekly Review** — A weekly check on stuck items, completion rates, and delegation health. + +### Leader-Assistant Relationship + +The leader-assistant relationship is derived from `data/accountability.md`. Look for reporting relationships where one person's seat includes assistant-type responsibilities (Executive Assistant, Office Manager, etc.). + +If no clear assistant relationship is found in the accountability chart, ask the user: "Who is your assistant? (I couldn't find a clear assistant relationship in the accountability chart.)" + +## Process + +### Mode: Stack + +Use when adding new items to The Stack. This is the primary way a leader batches delegation throughout the day. + +#### Step 1: Identify the Relationship + +Determine the leader and assistant. If only one leader-assistant pair exists in `data/accountability.md`, use it automatically. If multiple exist or none is clear, ask the user. + +Check for existing stack items to determine the next ID: + +1. Scan `data/assistance/stack/` for all `stack-NNN-*.md` files +2. Also check `data/assistance/daily/` meeting logs for any referenced IDs +3. Find the highest numeric ID +4. Increment by 1 + +#### Step 2: Capture the Item + +Ask for the item details: + +1. **Title:** Short description of the task ("Schedule board meeting", "Order new monitors") +2. **Urgency:** today, this_week, or whenever +3. **Details:** Any additional context or instructions (optional) + +For quick stacking, accept a one-liner: "Stack: Schedule board meeting - this_week" and parse it. + +#### Step 3: Create the Stack Item + +Create a new file from `templates/assistance-stack.md`: + +- Generate the next sequential ID (`stack-NNN`) +- Slugify the title for the filename +- Fill in the frontmatter fields +- Add any details to the body + +Show the file before writing. Ask: "Add this to the stack?" + +#### Step 4: Confirm + +After writing, display a brief confirmation: + +``` +Added to stack: stack-003 "Schedule board meeting" (this_week) +Stack total: 5 pending items +``` + +--- + +### Mode: Daily + +Use when running the structured daily standup between a leader and their assistant. This is the 5-15 minute meeting where The Stack is reviewed and items are handed off. + +#### Step 1: Load the Stack + +Read all files from `data/assistance/stack/` via `Glob("data/assistance/stack/stack-*.md")`. Parse YAML frontmatter. + +If no items exist: "The stack is empty. Nothing to review today. Add items with Stack mode throughout the day." + +Separate items by status: +- **Pending** — needs to be discussed and handed off +- **Handed off** — check on progress +- **Today urgency** — highlight these first regardless of status + +#### Step 2: Display the Agenda + +``` +Daily Standup — [Date] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ +Leader: [Name] | Assistant: [Name] + +🔴 TODAY (needs attention now): + stack-005: "Call insurance broker" (pending) + stack-003: "Send revised proposal" (handed_off — 2 days ago) + +📋 PENDING (hand off today): + stack-007: "Order office supplies" (this_week) + stack-008: "Research conference venues" (whenever) + +🔄 IN PROGRESS (check status): + stack-001: "Schedule board meeting" (handed_off — 1 day ago) + stack-004: "Book travel for March" (handed_off — 3 days ago) +``` + +#### Step 3: Walk Through Each Item + +For each item in the agenda, ask the leader: + +**For pending items:** +- "Hand off to [assistant]?" → Update status to `handed_off`, set `handed_off` date +- "Defer?" → Keep as pending, optionally update urgency +- "Cancel?" → Remove from stack (delete file) + +**For handed-off items:** +- "Done?" → Update status to `done`, set `completed` date +- "Still in progress?" → No change, note in meeting log +- "Stuck?" → Note the blocker, optionally escalate urgency + +**For today-urgency items:** +- Highlight with extra emphasis. These should be resolved or actively worked on by end of day. + +#### Step 4: Capture New Items + +After reviewing existing items: "Any new items to add to the stack?" + +If yes, follow Stack mode Steps 2-3 for each new item. + +#### Step 5: Save the Meeting Log + +Create a daily meeting log from `templates/assistance-daily.md`: + +- File: `data/assistance/daily/YYYY-MM-DD.md` +- Fill in frontmatter: date, leader, assistant, counts +- Populate the Stack Review table with decisions from Step 3 +- Populate the New Items table from Step 4 +- Record any action items discussed + +Show the complete meeting log before writing. Ask: "Save this daily meeting log?" + +#### Step 6: Update Stack Items + +After the meeting log is saved, update all stack item files based on the decisions: + +- Set `handed_off` date on newly handed-off items +- Set `completed` date and status on done items +- Update urgency if changed +- Delete cancelled items + +Display a brief summary: + +``` +Daily standup complete: + Handed off: 2 items + Completed: 1 item + Still pending: 3 items + New items added: 1 + Duration: ~10 minutes +``` + +--- + +### Mode: Review + +Use when running the weekly review of The Assistance Track. This checks delegation health, identifies stuck items, and surfaces patterns. + +#### Step 1: Load All Data + +Read all stack items from `data/assistance/stack/` and all daily meeting logs from `data/assistance/daily/`. Parse YAML frontmatter for both. + +If no data exists: "No Assistance Track data found. Start by adding items with Stack mode and running Daily meetings." + +#### Step 2: Stack Health Summary + +``` +Assistance Track — Weekly Review +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +Stack Status: + Pending: 4 items + Handed off: 3 items + Completed this week: 5 items + Total active: 7 items + +Urgency breakdown: + Today: 1 item ⚠️ + This week: 3 items + Whenever: 3 items +``` + +#### Step 3: Flag Stuck Items + +Items that have been on the stack for more than 3 days without progress are flagged: + +``` +⚠️ Stuck Items (3+ days without progress): + stack-004: "Book travel for March" — handed_off 5 days ago + → Consider: Follow up with [assistant], escalate urgency, or reassign + stack-006: "Update CRM contacts" — pending 4 days ago + → Consider: Has this been discussed in a daily meeting? +``` + +For each stuck item, offer options: +- Escalate urgency (e.g., `whenever` → `this_week`) +- Add a note about the blocker +- Reassign to someone else +- Close as no longer needed + +#### Step 4: Meeting Cadence Check + +Review daily meeting logs for the past week: + +``` +Daily Meeting Cadence: + Meetings this week: 4 / 5 expected + Missing: Wednesday (2026-02-12) + Avg items per meeting: 3.5 + Avg duration: 12 minutes +``` + +If fewer than 3 meetings in a week: "⚠️ Only [N] daily meetings this week. The daily standup is the core discipline — consistency matters more than perfection." + +#### Step 5: Delegation Trends + +If enough data exists (2+ weeks of daily meetings): + +``` +Delegation Trends (last 2 weeks): + Items added: 12 + Items completed: 8 + Completion rate: 67% + Avg time to completion: 2.3 days + Most common urgency: this_week (58%) +``` + +#### Step 6: Cross-Reference with Delegate and Elevate + +Optionally read `data/delegate/` to check if any Quadrant 3 or 4 tasks from the D&E audit are showing up as stuck stack items. This connects strategic delegation decisions to daily execution: + +"Note: stack-004 'Book travel for March' relates to the Q3 task 'Travel logistics' from [person]'s D&E audit. Consider permanent delegation of this category." + +#### Step 7: Suggest Actions + +Based on the review, suggest 1-3 specific actions: + +``` +Suggested Actions: + 1. Follow up on 2 stuck items (stack-004, stack-006) + 2. Schedule the missed Wednesday daily meeting + 3. Consider delegating 'travel logistics' permanently (shows up repeatedly) + +Would you like to take action on any of these? +``` + +## Output Format + +**Stack:** Brief confirmation with item ID, title, urgency, and current stack count. + +**Daily:** Structured agenda sorted by urgency (today first), followed by pending, then in-progress. Interactive walkthrough with decisions recorded. Summary showing handoffs, completions, and new items. + +**Review:** Dashboard-style summary with stack health, stuck items, meeting cadence, and delegation trends. Actionable suggestions based on patterns. Complete data shown before any file modifications. + +## Guardrails + +- **Always show the complete file before writing.** Never create or modify a stack item or meeting log without showing the content and getting approval. +- **Don't auto-invoke other skills.** When review results suggest creating To-Dos or running D&E, mention the option but let the user decide. Say "Would you like to create a To-Do for this?" rather than doing it automatically. +- **Sensitive data warning.** On first use in a session, remind the user: "Assistance Track data includes delegation details and daily meeting notes. This repo should be private." +- **Respect the batch discipline.** Don't encourage adding items AND immediately handing them off. The point of The Stack is to batch — items should generally wait for the next daily meeting to be handed off. Exception: `today` urgency items may warrant immediate handoff. +- **Don't micromanage the assistant.** Once an item is `handed_off`, trust the assistant. The Review mode flags stuck items, but the daily meeting is for status checks, not detailed oversight. +- **One leader-assistant pair per session.** If the organization has multiple leaders with assistants, each session should focus on one relationship. Ask which pair at the start if ambiguous. +- **Stack IDs are permanent.** Once a `stack-NNN` ID is assigned, it's never reused, even if the item is completed or deleted. This ensures meeting logs always reference valid IDs. + +## Integration Notes + +### Accountability Chart (ceos-accountability) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/accountability.md` — seat names, owners, reporting relationships +- **Purpose:** Identifies the leader-assistant relationship. The assistant is typically the person in a seat with assistant-type responsibilities (Executive Assistant, Office Manager) who reports to the leader. If the accountability chart doesn't define this clearly, the user specifies the relationship. + +### Delegate and Elevate (ceos-delegate) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/delegate/firstname-lastname.md` — quadrant assignments, delegation progress +- **Purpose:** Review mode cross-references stuck stack items with Q3/Q4 tasks from D&E audits. Recurring stack items in the same category may indicate a task that should be permanently delegated rather than repeatedly stacked. This connects strategic delegation decisions to daily operational execution. + +### To-Dos (ceos-todos) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** `data/todos/` — actions from the daily meeting can be promoted to tracked To-Dos via `ceos-todos` +- **Purpose:** Some items from the daily standup may need formal tracking with due dates and completion rates beyond the stack's simpler lifecycle. Currently stored as action items in the meeting log. + +### Write Principle + +**Only `ceos-assistance` writes to `data/assistance/`.** Other skills may reference assistance data for delegation context, but do not modify stack items or daily meeting logs. diff --git a/skills/ceos-cashflow/SKILL.md b/skills/ceos-cashflow/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a78387f --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/ceos-cashflow/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,303 @@ +--- +name: ceos-cashflow +description: Use when assessing and optimizing the 8 financial levers that drive cash flow and profitability +file-access: [data/cashflow/, templates/cashflow-assessment.md, data/accountability.md, data/scorecard/] +tools-used: [Read, Write, Glob] +--- + +# ceos-cashflow + +The 8 Cash Flow Drivers (EOS Toolbox tool #10). A facilitated workshop for leadership teams to identify and optimize the eight key financial levers that impact cash flow and profitability: Price, Volume, COGS/Margin, A/R Days, A/P Days, Inventory/WIP, Operating Expenses, and Debt Structure. + +**Not for:** Weekly scorecard tracking (use `ceos-scorecard`), general issue resolution (use `ceos-ids`), or Rock setting (use `ceos-rocks`). This skill is for the structured cash flow driver assessment — a strategic conversation about financial levers. + +## When to Use + +- "Assess our cash flow" or "8 cash flow drivers" +- "Cash flow drivers" or "financial optimization" +- "Review our financial levers" or "profitability drivers" +- "Where can we improve margins?" +- "Cash flow driver review" or "quarterly cash flow check-in" +- "Show cash flow history" or "how have our drivers changed?" + +## Context + +### Finding the CEOS Repository + +Before doing anything: + +1. Search upward from the current directory for a `.ceos` marker file +2. If not found, tell the user: "I can't find a CEOS repository. Clone it with `git clone https://github.com/bradfeld/ceos.git` and run `./setup.sh init`." +3. If found, set `CEOS_ROOT` to that directory +4. Run `git -C "$CEOS_ROOT" pull --ff-only` to sync latest data (skip if offline or if pull fails — work with local data) + +### Key Files + +| File | Purpose | +|------|---------| +| `data/cashflow/` | Cash flow driver assessments (one per session) | +| `data/accountability.md` | Team members for suggesting driver owners | +| `data/scorecard/metrics.md` | Existing metrics that may overlap with cash flow drivers | +| `templates/cashflow-assessment.md` | Template for new assessment files | + +### The 8 Cash Flow Drivers + +| # | Driver | Key Question | Typical Metric | +|---|--------|-------------|----------------| +| 1 | **Price** | Can you increase prices? | Average selling price, price per unit | +| 2 | **Volume** | Can you sell more? | Units sold, transactions, customers | +| 3 | **COGS / Margin** | Can you reduce cost of goods? | Gross margin %, COGS as % of revenue | +| 4 | **A/R Days** | Can you collect faster? | Days sales outstanding (DSO) | +| 5 | **A/P Days** | Can you negotiate better terms? | Days payable outstanding (DPO) | +| 6 | **Inventory / WIP** | Can you reduce inventory? | Inventory turnover, WIP backlog | +| 7 | **Operating Expenses** | Where can you cut overhead? | OpEx as % of revenue, specific line items | +| 8 | **Debt Structure** | Is debt optimized? | Debt-to-equity, interest rate, term mix | + +**Note:** Not all 8 drivers apply equally to every business. A software company may have minimal inventory. A services firm may have no COGS. The skill handles this — drivers can be marked as "none" potential when they don't apply. + +### Driver Improvement Potential + +| Value | Meaning | +|-------|---------| +| `high` | Significant upside — this driver should be a top priority | +| `medium` | Moderate improvement possible with focused effort | +| `low` | Minor gains available — not a priority this quarter | +| `none` | Already optimized or not applicable to this business | + +### Assessment Status + +| Value | Meaning | +|-------|---------| +| `in_progress` | Assessment started but not all drivers evaluated | +| `complete` | All drivers assessed and priorities set | + +## Process + +### Mode: Assess + +**Trigger:** User wants to evaluate all 8 cash flow drivers from scratch. + +**Step 1: Gather context** + +Read `data/accountability.md` to identify potential driver owners. If the file doesn't exist, skip owner suggestions — ask the user for each driver's owner directly. + +Read `data/scorecard/metrics.md` (if it exists) to identify metrics already being tracked that relate to cash flow drivers. Note any overlaps — don't duplicate existing scorecard measurables. + +**Step 2: Walk through the 8 drivers** + +For each driver (1 through 8): + +1. Display the driver name, key question, and typical metric from the reference table +2. If a related scorecard metric exists, note it: "Your Scorecard already tracks [metric] — you may want to reference that as your baseline." +3. Ask the user: + - **Current state:** What's the current situation for this driver? + - **Improvement potential:** High, medium, low, or none? + - **Baseline metric:** What's the current value? (Store as a string — can be "\$52K/month", "Net 30", "45 days", etc.) + - **Target metric:** Where do you want this to be? + - **Owner:** Who is accountable for this driver? (Suggest from accountability chart if available) + - **Notes:** Any additional context? + +If the user wants to skip a driver (e.g., "Inventory doesn't apply to us"), set potential to `none` and note "Not applicable" in current_state. Move to the next driver. + +**Step 3: Prioritize** + +After all 8 drivers are assessed, display a summary table: + +| # | Driver | Potential | Owner | Baseline | Target | +|---|--------|-----------|-------|----------|--------| +| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | + +Ask the user to rank their top 3-5 focus drivers. Assign `priority_rank` values (1 = highest priority). Drivers not in the top 3-5 get `null` for priority_rank. + +**Step 4: Create assessment file** + +Generate the complete file from `templates/cashflow-assessment.md`. Populate all frontmatter fields and body sections. + +**Show the complete file** to the user before writing. Ask: "Save this assessment?" + +Write to `data/cashflow/YYYY-MM-DD.md` (using today's date). If a file already exists for today, use suffix: `YYYY-MM-DD-2.md`. + +Set frontmatter `status: complete`. + +**Step 5: Next steps** + +After saving, mention (but don't auto-invoke): +- "Driver improvements with high potential could become Rocks for next quarter (use `ceos-rocks`)" +- "Driver problems that need investigation could become Issues (use `ceos-ids`)" +- "Consider adding key driver metrics to your Scorecard (use `ceos-scorecard`)" + +### Mode: Review + +**Trigger:** User wants a quarterly check-in on their prioritized cash flow drivers. + +**Step 1: Load assessments** + +Read all files from `data/cashflow/` via Glob. Parse YAML frontmatter. Sort by date (newest first). + +If no assessments exist: "No cash flow assessments found. Run an assessment first to establish your baseline." + +**Step 2: Find the latest assessment** + +Display the most recent completed assessment's prioritized drivers (those with `priority_rank` set): + +| Priority | Driver | Baseline | Target | Owner | +|----------|--------|----------|--------|-------| +| 1 | [driver] | [baseline] | [target] | [owner] | +| 2 | [driver] | [baseline] | [target] | [owner] | +| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | + +**Step 3: Collect current values** + +For each prioritized driver, ask: "What's the current value for [Driver]? (Baseline was [baseline], target is [target])" + +**Step 4: Display progress** + +| Priority | Driver | Baseline | Current | Target | Direction | +|----------|--------|----------|---------|--------|-----------| +| 1 | Price | \$45/unit | \$48/unit | \$55/unit | Improving | +| 2 | A/R Days | 45 days | 42 days | 30 days | Improving | +| 3 | OpEx | 35% of rev | 36% of rev | 30% of rev | Stalling | + +**Direction** values: +- **Improving** — Moving toward target +- **Stalling** — No change or very minor movement +- **Regressing** — Moving away from target +- **Target hit** — Current meets or exceeds target + +**Step 5: Flag and suggest** + +For stalling or regressing drivers, suggest: +- "Consider creating an Issue to investigate why [Driver] is stalling (use `ceos-ids`)" +- "A focused Rock on [Driver] improvement could help (use `ceos-rocks`)" + +**Step 6: Save review (optional)** + +Ask if the user wants to save this review as a new assessment. If yes, create a new file capturing the current state as the new baseline. This becomes the comparison point for the next review. + +### Mode: History + +**Trigger:** User wants to see cash flow driver trends over time. + +**Step 1: Load all assessments** + +Read all files from `data/cashflow/` via Glob. Parse YAML frontmatter. Sort by date (oldest first). + +If no assessments exist: "No cash flow assessments found yet." + +If only one assessment: Display it, noting "Only one assessment on record. Run another assessment later to see trends." + +**Step 2: Assessment timeline** + +| Date | Drivers Assessed | High | Medium | Low | None | Top Priorities | +|------|-----------------|------|--------|-----|------|---------------| +| 2026-02-15 | 8 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | Price, A/R Days, OpEx | +| 2026-05-10 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | A/R Days, Volume, OpEx | + +**Step 3: Per-driver trends** + +For each driver that has been prioritized in at least one assessment: + +``` +Price: high → medium → low (improving — was a top priority, now optimized) +A/R Days: high → high → medium (improving slowly — still needs attention) +OpEx: medium → high → high (worsening — consider escalating to an Issue) +``` + +**Step 4: Insights** + +- Which drivers have been consistently prioritized (may need a Rock) +- Which drivers improved and were deprioritized (success stories) +- Which drivers have worsened (may need an IDS investigation) + +**Step 5: Drill-down** + +Offer: "Would you like to see the full details of any specific assessment?" + +If yes, display the complete assessment file. + +## Output Format + +### Assess Mode Summary + +After completing the assessment, display: + +``` +Cash Flow Assessment — YYYY-MM-DD + +8 Drivers Assessed: + High potential: [N] drivers + Medium potential: [N] drivers + Low potential: [N] drivers + Not applicable: [N] drivers + +Top Priorities: + 1. [Driver] — [Baseline] → [Target] (Owner: [Name]) + 2. [Driver] — [Baseline] → [Target] (Owner: [Name]) + 3. [Driver] — [Baseline] → [Target] (Owner: [Name]) + +Saved to: data/cashflow/YYYY-MM-DD.md +``` + +### Review Mode Summary + +``` +Cash Flow Review — YYYY-MM-DD + +Comparing to assessment from [prior date]: + + Improving: [N] drivers + Stalling: [N] drivers + Regressing: [N] drivers + Target hit: [N] drivers + +[Table of prioritized drivers with progress] +``` + +### History Mode Summary + +``` +Cash Flow History — [N] assessments + +First assessment: YYYY-MM-DD +Latest assessment: YYYY-MM-DD + +[Assessment timeline table] +[Per-driver trend arrows] +``` + +## Guardrails + +- **Always show the complete file before writing.** Never save an assessment without the user seeing and approving the full content. +- **Don't auto-invoke skills.** When assessment results suggest creating Rocks, Issues, or Scorecard metrics, mention the option but let the user decide. Say "Would you like to create a Rock for this?" rather than doing it automatically. +- **Sensitive data warning.** On first use in a session, remind the user: "Cash flow assessments contain sensitive financial information (revenue targets, cost structures, debt details). Ensure this repository is private." +- **Don't prescribe financial strategies.** This is a facilitation guide, not financial advice. Present the framework and record the team's decisions. Don't suggest specific pricing strategies, cost-cutting measures, or debt restructuring approaches. +- **One full assessment per session.** Walking through all 8 drivers is a substantial conversation. Don't rush — each driver deserves focused discussion. +- **Metrics are strings, not numbers.** Financial values come in many formats (\$52K, 45 days, Net 30, 35% of revenue). Store them as human-readable strings. The skill facilitates comparison through display, not computation. + +## Integration Notes + +### Accountability Chart (Read) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/accountability.md` +- **Purpose:** Suggest driver owners from the leadership team's seat assignments. Each driver should be owned by the person whose seat most closely relates to that financial lever. + +### Scorecard (Read) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/scorecard/metrics.md` +- **Purpose:** Cross-reference existing scorecard metrics with the 8 drivers. If a team already tracks "Weekly Revenue" on the scorecard, that overlaps with the Volume and Price drivers. Avoid duplicating metrics — reference existing ones. + +### Rocks (Related) + +- **Direction:** Related (suggest, don't write) +- **What data:** N/A +- **Purpose:** High-potential driver improvements can become quarterly Rocks. After assessment, suggest the user create Rocks for their top priorities via `ceos-rocks`. + +### IDS (Related) + +- **Direction:** Related (suggest, don't write) +- **What data:** N/A +- **Purpose:** Stalling or regressing drivers may need root-cause investigation. Suggest creating Issues via `ceos-ids` for drivers that aren't improving despite being prioritized. + +**Write Principle:** Only `ceos-cashflow` writes to `data/cashflow/`. Other skills may reference cash flow assessments for financial context. diff --git a/skills/ceos-lma/SKILL.md b/skills/ceos-lma/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2d5f697 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/ceos-lma/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,489 @@ +--- +name: ceos-lma +description: Use when assessing leadership and management effectiveness using the LMA framework +file-access: [data/lma/, templates/lma-assessment.md, data/accountability.md, data/people/, data/clarity/, data/meetings/l10/, data/conversations/] +tools-used: [Read, Write, Glob] +--- + +# ceos-lma + +Assess leadership and management effectiveness using the LMA (Leadership + Management = Accountability) framework — EOS Toolbox tool #11. Walk a manager through rating themselves on 5 Leadership Practices and 5 Management Practices, calculate scores, flag areas needing attention, and optionally gather 360-degree feedback from direct reports. + +**Not for:** Evaluating whether someone is a fit for their seat (use `ceos-people`), defining organizational structure (use `ceos-accountability`), or running quarterly conversations (use `ceos-quarterly`). LMA assesses *whether* you're practicing leadership and management habits, not *whether* you're the right person for the role. + +## When to Use + +- "Run LMA assessment" or "LMA checklist" or "LMA for [person]" +- "How am I doing as a manager?" or "how am I doing as a leader?" +- "Leadership assessment" or "management assessment" +- "Am I creating accountability?" or "am I holding my team accountable?" +- "LMA review" or "show LMA scores" or "team LMA summary" +- "360 feedback for [person]" or "get feedback from my team" +- "Run LMA" or "leadership and management check" + +## Context + +### Finding the CEOS Repository + +Search upward from the current directory for the `.ceos` marker file. This file marks the root of the CEOS repository. + +If `.ceos` is not found, stop and tell the user: "Not in a CEOS repository. Clone your CEOS repo and run setup.sh first." + +**Sync before use:** Once you find the CEOS root, run `git -C pull --ff-only --quiet 2>/dev/null` to get the latest data from teammates. If it fails (conflict or offline), continue silently with local data. + +### Key Files + +| File | Purpose | +|------|---------| +| `data/lma/` | LMA assessment files (one per person) | +| `templates/lma-assessment.md` | Template for new LMA assessments | +| `data/accountability.md` | Source of management relationships and seat info (read-only — use ceos-accountability to modify) | +| `data/people/` | People Analyzer evaluations (read-only — reference for context) | +| `data/clarity/` | Clarity Break records (read-only — informs Leadership Practice #5) | +| `data/meetings/l10/` | L10 meeting notes (read-only — informs Management Practice #3) | +| `data/conversations/` | Quarterly conversation records (read-only — informs Management Practice #4) | + +### LMA File Format + +Each person has a markdown file at `data/lma/firstname-lastname.md` with YAML frontmatter: + +```yaml +person: "Brad Feld" +seat: "Visionary" +date: "2026-02-15" +status: active # active | reviewed | stale +leadership_score: 4.2 +management_score: 3.8 +overall_score: 4.0 +leadership_practices: + clear_direction: 5 + necessary_tools: 4 + letting_go: 4 + greater_good: 5 + clarity_breaks: 3 +management_practices: + clear_expectations: 4 + communicating_well: 4 + meeting_pulse: 3 + quarterly_conversations: 4 + rewarding_recognizing: 4 +feedback: [] +last_assessed: "2026-02-15" +``` + +**File naming:** `firstname-lastname.md` — lowercase, hyphenated. Person-centric (survives role changes). + +### Status Values + +| Status | Meaning | When | +|--------|---------|------| +| `active` | Current assessment, may need development actions | After initial assessment or re-assessment | +| `reviewed` | Assessment reviewed, development plan updated | After a Review session | +| `stale` | Assessment is > 120 days old | Flagged automatically by Review mode | + +### The 10 Practices + +#### Leadership Practices + +| # | Practice | Description | Data Source | +|---|----------|-------------|-------------| +| 1 | Giving clear direction | Setting vision, priorities, and expectations so people know where they're going | Self-assessment | +| 2 | Providing the necessary tools | Ensuring people have what they need — training, resources, systems, authority | Self-assessment | +| 3 | Letting go of the vine | Empowering others instead of micromanaging; trusting the team to execute | Self-assessment | +| 4 | Acting with the greater good in mind | Making decisions for the organization's benefit, not personal interest | Self-assessment | +| 5 | Taking Clarity Breaks | Stepping away to think strategically — "work ON the business, not IN it" | `data/clarity/` frequency | + +#### Management Practices + +| # | Practice | Description | Data Source | +|---|----------|-------------|-------------| +| 1 | Keeping expectations clear | Each direct report knows their seat, roles, Rocks, and measurables | Self-assessment | +| 2 | Communicating well | Open, honest, two-way communication with the team | Self-assessment | +| 3 | Maintaining the right meeting pulse | Running consistent, productive weekly meetings (L10s) | `data/meetings/l10/` regularity | +| 4 | Having quarterly conversations | Formal quarterly check-ins with each direct report | `data/conversations/` frequency | +| 5 | Rewarding and recognizing | Acknowledging great work and addressing underperformance | Self-assessment | + +### Rating Scale + +| Rating | Meaning | +|--------|---------| +| 1 | Never / Not at all | +| 2 | Rarely | +| 3 | Sometimes | +| 4 | Usually | +| 5 | Consistently | + +Scores below 3 indicate a practice that needs focused development. + +## Process + +### Mode: Assess + +Use when running an LMA self-assessment for a specific person. Recommended quarterly — ideally before Quarterly Planning sessions. + +#### Step 1: Identify the Person + +Ask for the person's name. Check if `data/lma/firstname-lastname.md` already exists. + +- **Exists:** Read the file, show previous scores: "You have an existing LMA assessment from [date] (Leadership: [X], Management: [Y], Overall: [Z]). Re-assess (start fresh scores) or update (revise notes only)?" +- **New person:** Will create from `templates/lma-assessment.md` + +#### Step 2: Pull Context from Accountability Chart + +Read `data/accountability.md` to find the person's seat(s) and identify their direct reports. + +- **Has a seat:** Display: "[Person] holds the [Seat] seat with [N] direct reports." +- **No seat found:** Warn: "[Person] has no seat defined in the Accountability Chart. LMA requires a management/leadership context. Add them via `ceos-accountability`, or proceed with manual context." + +#### Step 3: Gather Cross-Skill Context + +Read data from related skills to provide evidence-based context for specific practices: + +**Clarity Breaks (Leadership Practice #5):** +- Read `data/clarity/` via Glob. Count files from the last 90 days. +- Display: "[N] Clarity Breaks in the last 90 days" or "No Clarity Break records found. Consider running `ceos-clarity` to establish Clarity Break habits." + +**L10 Meeting Pulse (Management Practice #3):** +- Read `data/meetings/l10/` via Glob. Check meeting frequency over the last 8 weeks. +- Display: "[N] L10 meetings in the last 8 weeks ([frequency])" or "No L10 meeting records found. Consider running `ceos-l10` to establish meeting pulse." + +**Quarterly Conversations (Management Practice #4):** +- Read `data/conversations/` via Glob. Check for conversations in the current and previous quarter. +- Display: "[N] quarterly conversations recorded" or "No quarterly conversation records found." + +Show context summary before rating: + +``` +Cross-Skill Context for [Person] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + Clarity Breaks (last 90 days): [N] sessions + L10 Meeting Pulse (last 8 weeks): [N]/8 weeks + Quarterly Conversations (current + prev quarter): [N] conversations +``` + +#### Step 4: Rate Leadership Practices + +Present each of the 5 Leadership Practices one at a time with its description and any relevant context data. Collect a 1-5 rating for each. + +For Practice #5 (Clarity Breaks), include the context data: "Your records show [N] Clarity Breaks in the last 90 days." + +After all 5 are rated, calculate Leadership Score as the average (one decimal place). + +``` +Leadership Practices — [Person] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| # | Practice | Rating | Notes | +|---|----------|--------|-------| +| 1 | Giving clear direction | [1-5] | [user notes] | +| 2 | Providing the necessary tools | [1-5] | | +| 3 | Letting go of the vine | [1-5] | | +| 4 | Acting with the greater good in mind | [1-5] | | +| 5 | Taking Clarity Breaks | [1-5] | [N] breaks in 90 days | + +Leadership Score: [X.X] / 5.0 +``` + +#### Step 5: Rate Management Practices + +Present each of the 5 Management Practices with description and relevant context data. Collect a 1-5 rating for each. + +For Practice #3 (Meeting Pulse), include: "Records show [N]/8 L10 meetings in the last 8 weeks." +For Practice #4 (Quarterly Conversations), include: "[N] quarterly conversations recorded." + +Calculate Management Score as the average (one decimal place). + +``` +Management Practices — [Person] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| # | Practice | Rating | Notes | +|---|----------|--------|-------| +| 1 | Keeping expectations clear | [1-5] | | +| 2 | Communicating well | [1-5] | | +| 3 | Maintaining the right meeting pulse | [1-5] | [N]/8 L10s | +| 4 | Having quarterly conversations | [1-5] | [N] conversations | +| 5 | Rewarding and recognizing | [1-5] | | + +Management Score: [X.X] / 5.0 +``` + +#### Step 6: Calculate LMA Score + +Overall LMA Score = average of Leadership Score and Management Score (one decimal place). + +``` +LMA Score — [Person] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + + Leadership: [X.X] / 5.0 + Management: [X.X] / 5.0 + ───────────────────────── + Overall LMA: [X.X] / 5.0 + + Leadership + Management = Accountability +``` + +#### Step 7: Flag Practices Below 3 + +List any practices scoring below 3 with suggested development actions: + +``` +Flagged Practices (Below 3) +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +⚠️ [Practice Name] — rated [N]/5 + Suggested: [specific, actionable development suggestion] + +⚠️ [Practice Name] — rated [N]/5 + Suggested: [specific suggestion] +``` + +If no practices are below 3: "No practices flagged — all rated 3 or above." + +#### Step 8: Save the File + +Show the complete file before writing. Ask: "Save this LMA assessment?" + +Write to `data/lma/firstname-lastname.md` using the template. Update: +- YAML frontmatter: all scores, practice ratings, date, status +- Markdown body: populate practice tables with ratings and notes +- Assessment History: add dated entry + +If re-assessing, preserve existing Assessment History entries and add a new one. + +--- + +### Mode: Review + +Use when reviewing LMA results across all managers or for checking team-wide patterns. + +#### Step 1: Read All LMA Files + +Read all files from `data/lma/` via `Glob("data/lma/*.md")`. Parse YAML frontmatter. + +If no files exist: "No LMA assessments found. Run an Assess for your first team member." + +#### Step 2: Display Summary Table + +``` +LMA Review — Team Overview +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| Name | Seat | Last Assessed | Leadership | Management | Overall LMA | Flag | +|------|------|--------------|------------|------------|-------------|------| +| Brad Feld | Visionary | 2026-02-15 | 4.2 | 3.8 | 4.0 | | +| Sarah Chen | Integrator | 2026-01-10 | 3.6 | 4.4 | 4.0 | | +| Mike Torres | VP Sales | 2025-09-15 | 3.0 | 2.8 | 2.9 | ⚠️ Mgmt | + +Team averages: + Leadership: [X.X] + Management: [X.X] + Overall LMA: [X.X] +``` + +#### Step 3: Identify Team-Wide Patterns + +Aggregate practice scores across all managers. Find the lowest-scoring practices: + +``` +Lowest-Scoring Practices (Team Average) +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| Practice | Type | Team Avg | Below 3 Count | +|----------|------|---------|---------------| +| Taking Clarity Breaks | Leadership | 2.5 | 2/3 managers | +| Maintaining meeting pulse | Management | 3.0 | 1/3 managers | +``` + +#### Step 4: Flag Stale Assessments + +Check `last_assessed` date for each person. If > 120 days ago: + +"📅 [Person]'s LMA assessment is [N] days old. Consider re-running before the next Quarterly Planning session." + +#### Step 5: Show Trends + +If a person has multiple assessment history entries (from re-assessments), show the trend: + +``` +LMA Trend — [Person] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| Date | Leadership | Management | Overall | Direction | +|------|-----------|------------|---------|-----------| +| 2025-11-01 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 3.3 | | +| 2026-02-15 | 4.2 | 3.8 | 4.0 | ↑ Improving | +``` + +#### Step 6: Drill Down + +Ask: "Want to view details for a specific person, or run a new Assess?" + +--- + +### Mode: 360 + +Use when gathering feedback from direct reports to compare against a manager's self-assessment. This creates a gap analysis between self-perception and team perception. + +#### Step 1: Identify the Manager + +Ask for the manager's name. Read `data/lma/firstname-lastname.md`. + +- **Has self-assessment:** Load it, show current self-ratings. +- **No self-assessment:** "No LMA self-assessment found for [person]. Run an Assess first — 360 feedback requires a self-assessment to compare against." + +#### Step 2: Identify Direct Reports + +Read `data/accountability.md` to find people who report to this manager. + +- **Has direct reports:** Display the list: "[Person] manages: [Name 1], [Name 2], [Name 3]" +- **No direct reports found:** "360 mode requires direct reports. [Person] has none listed in the Accountability Chart. Use `ceos-accountability` to update the org chart, or name respondents manually." + +Ask which direct reports will provide feedback (may be a subset). + +#### Step 3: Collect Feedback + +For each respondent, rate the manager on all 10 practices (1-5). Use the same rating scale: + +"[Respondent Name] is rating [Manager Name]'s leadership and management practices." + +Present all 10 practices and collect ratings. This can be done one respondent at a time — the feedback array is additive. Each session adds one respondent's feedback. + +Store each respondent's feedback in the `feedback` frontmatter array: + +```yaml +feedback: + - name: "Sarah Chen" + relationship: "direct report" + ratings: [4, 3, 5, 4, 3, 4, 4, 3, 4, 3] # 10 ratings in practice order + date: "2026-02-15" +``` + +The ratings array follows practice order: Leadership 1-5, then Management 1-5. + +#### Step 4: Compare Self vs Team + +After at least one respondent's feedback is collected, display the comparison: + +``` +360 Comparison — [Manager Name] +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +Leadership Practices: +| # | Practice | Self | Team Avg | Gap | +|---|----------|------|---------|-----| +| 1 | Giving clear direction | 5 | 4.0 | -1.0 | +| 2 | Providing the necessary tools | 4 | 3.5 | -0.5 | +| 3 | Letting go of the vine | 4 | 4.5 | +0.5 | +| 4 | Acting with the greater good | 5 | 4.5 | -0.5 | +| 5 | Taking Clarity Breaks | 3 | 3.0 | 0.0 | + +Management Practices: +| # | Practice | Self | Team Avg | Gap | +|---|----------|------|---------|-----| +| 1 | Keeping expectations clear | 4 | 3.0 | -1.0 | +| 2 | Communicating well | 4 | 3.5 | -0.5 | +| 3 | Maintaining meeting pulse | 3 | 4.0 | +1.0 | +| 4 | Having quarterly conversations | 4 | 3.0 | -1.0 ⚠️ | +| 5 | Rewarding and recognizing | 4 | 2.5 | -1.5 ⚠️ | +``` + +#### Step 5: Flag Large Gaps + +Flag any practice where the absolute gap between self and team average is >= 2 points: + +``` +Significant Gaps (≥ 2 points) +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +⚠️ [Practice Name] — Self: [X], Team: [Y] (gap: [Z]) + This is worth discussing with the team. Large gaps indicate a + difference between how you perceive your effectiveness and how + your team experiences it. +``` + +If no gaps >= 2: "No significant gaps detected. Self-assessment and team feedback are generally aligned." + +#### Step 6: Save Updated File + +Show the complete updated file before writing. Ask: "Save this 360 feedback?" + +Update: +- YAML frontmatter: add respondent to `feedback` array +- Markdown body: update 360 Feedback table with respondent's data +- Assessment History: add dated entry for 360 feedback collection + +## Output Format + +**Assess:** Practice rating tables (Leadership and Management), calculated scores, flagged practices below 3, and complete file shown before save. + +**Review:** Summary table with all managers, Leadership/Management/Overall scores, stale flags, team-wide practice patterns, and trends if multiple assessments exist. + +**360:** Side-by-side comparison table (Self vs Team Average vs Gap) for all 10 practices. Flagged gaps >= 2 points. Complete file shown before save. + +## Guardrails + +- **Always show the complete file before writing.** Never modify an LMA file without showing the change and getting approval. +- **Validate ratings are 1-5.** Reject values outside this range with: "Ratings must be between 1 (Never) and 5 (Consistently)." +- **Don't auto-invoke other skills.** When LMA results suggest running a Clarity Break or scheduling a quarterly conversation, mention the option but let the user decide. Say "Would you like to start a Clarity Break?" rather than doing it automatically. +- **Don't confuse with People Analyzer.** LMA is a self-assessment of leadership/management effectiveness. People Analyzer (`ceos-people`) evaluates whether someone is the right person in the right seat. If the user seems to be evaluating a person's fit, suggest `ceos-people` instead. +- **360 requires existing self-assessment.** Don't allow 360 feedback without a self-assessment to compare against. The comparison is the value. +- **Sensitive data warning.** On first use in a session, remind the user: "LMA assessments contain information about leadership effectiveness. This repo should be private." +- **Respect the quarterly cadence.** Suggest running LMA before Quarterly Planning sessions. Flag assessments > 120 days old. But don't nag — once per session is enough. +- **One rating per practice.** Don't allow split ratings (e.g., "3.5"). Use whole numbers 1-5 only. +- **Cross-skill data is context, not deterministic.** Low Clarity Break count doesn't automatically mean a low Leadership #5 rating. Present the data and let the user decide their rating. + +## Integration Notes + +### Accountability Chart (ceos-accountability) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/accountability.md` — seat names, owners, and reporting relationships +- **Purpose:** Identifies who the manager is, what seat they hold, and who their direct reports are. Essential for both Assess (context) and 360 (respondent identification). + +### People Analyzer (ceos-people) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/people/firstname-lastname.md` — GWC assessment, current status +- **Purpose:** Optional context during Assess. If a person is `below_bar`, LMA can help identify whether it's a leadership gap (not empowering them) or a management gap (unclear expectations). + +### Clarity Break (ceos-clarity) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/clarity/` — Clarity Break notes and frequency +- **Purpose:** Provides evidence for Leadership Practice #5 (Taking Clarity Breaks). Count of recent breaks gives objective context for the self-rating. + +### L10 Meetings (ceos-l10) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/meetings/l10/` — L10 meeting notes +- **Purpose:** Provides evidence for Management Practice #3 (Maintaining the right meeting pulse). Meeting frequency and regularity give objective context. + +### Quarterly Conversations (ceos-quarterly) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/conversations/` — Quarterly conversation records +- **Purpose:** Provides evidence for Management Practice #4 (Having quarterly conversations). Conversation frequency gives objective context. + +### Quarterly Planning (ceos-quarterly-planning) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** No direct data access +- **Purpose:** LMA is ideally run before Quarterly Planning sessions. Leadership and management effectiveness directly impacts Rock execution and team accountability. + +### Annual Planning (ceos-annual) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** No direct data access +- **Purpose:** Annual planning is a natural time to re-assess LMA. Leaders reassess their effectiveness as they plan the new year. + +### Delegate and Elevate (ceos-delegate) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** No direct data access +- **Purpose:** Related development tool. LMA assesses *how* you lead and manage. Delegate and Elevate assesses *what work* you should focus on. Both serve leadership development. + +### Write Principle + +**Only `ceos-lma` writes to `data/lma/`.** Other skills may reference LMA assessments for leadership development context, but do not modify them. diff --git a/skills/ceos-trust/SKILL.md b/skills/ceos-trust/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7c07c4f --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/ceos-trust/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,604 @@ +--- +name: ceos-trust +description: Use when building vulnerability-based trust through quarterly team exercises from the EOS Trust Builders toolbox +file-access: [data/trust/, templates/trust-exercise.md, data/accountability.md, data/checkups/] +tools-used: [Read, Write, Glob] +--- + +# ceos-trust + +Facilitate the 10 Trust Builder exercises from the EOS Toolbox, progressing from low to high vulnerability. Acts as a facilitation guide — providing instructions, timing, debrief questions, and recording outcomes — rather than trying to replicate exercises digitally. Teams typically do one exercise per quarter, building deeper trust over time. Drawn from Patrick Lencioni's "Five Dysfunctions of a Team" framework. + +**Not for:** People evaluation (use `ceos-people`), organizational health assessment (use `ceos-checkup`), or performance conversations (use `ceos-quarterly`). The Trust Builders are team-level exercises focused on vulnerability-based trust, not individual assessment. + +## When to Use + +- "Build team trust" or "trust building exercise" +- "Run the next trust exercise" or "facilitate trust builders" +- "What trust exercise is next?" or "trust exercise schedule" +- "Show trust exercise history" or "review trust progression" +- "Personal histories exercise" or any specific exercise name +- "How is our team trust?" or "trust level check" +- "Quarterly trust exercise" or "team bonding exercise" +- Any discussion about vulnerability-based trust, team bonding, or the EOS Trust Builders + +## Context + +### Finding the CEOS Repository + +Search upward from the current directory for the `.ceos` marker file. This file marks the root of the CEOS repository. + +If `.ceos` is not found, stop and tell the user: "Not in a CEOS repository. Clone your CEOS repo and run setup.sh first." + +**Sync before use:** Once you find the CEOS root, run `git -C pull --ff-only --quiet 2>/dev/null` to get the latest data from teammates. If it fails (conflict or offline), continue silently with local data. + +### Key Files + +| File | Purpose | +|------|---------| +| `data/trust/` | Exercise records — one file per completed exercise | +| `templates/trust-exercise.md` | Template for recording exercise outcomes | +| `data/accountability.md` | Team composition for participant suggestions (read-only — use ceos-accountability to modify) | +| `data/checkups/` | Organizational Checkup scores for trust cross-reference (read-only — use ceos-checkup to modify) | + +### The 10 Exercises + +| # | Exercise | Vulnerability | Time Box | Description | +|---|----------|--------------|----------|-------------| +| 1 | Personal Histories | Low | 30-45 min | Each team member shares personal background (hometown, family, first job, hobbies) | +| 2 | DISC/Kolbe Profiles | Low | 45-60 min | Share and discuss personality/working style assessment results | +| 3 | Lifeline Exercise | Medium | 45-60 min | Map significant life events on a timeline, share with the team | +| 4 | One Thing | Medium | 20-30 min | Each person shares one thing the team doesn't know about them | +| 5 | Feedback Round | Medium | 45-60 min | Structured positive and constructive feedback for each team member | +| 6 | Strengths Spotlight | Medium | 30-45 min | Each person identifies their top strengths, team validates and adds | +| 7 | Conflict Norms | Medium-High | 45-60 min | Establish how the team will handle disagreement and conflict | +| 8 | Accountability Partners | Medium-High | 30-45 min | Pair up for mutual accountability check-ins between meetings | +| 9 | Team Effectiveness Debrief | High | 60-90 min | Rate and discuss how the team works together as a unit | +| 10 | Vulnerability Circle | High | 30-60 min | Share a current struggle, fear, or area where you need help | + +### Vulnerability Levels + +| Level | Exercises | What It Means | +|-------|-----------|---------------| +| Low | 1-2 | Safe sharing — factual information, low personal risk | +| Medium | 3-6 | Personal sharing with moderate risk — life events, feedback, strengths | +| Medium-High | 7-8 | Navigating conflict and accountability — requires existing trust | +| High | 9-10 | Deep vulnerability — honest assessment of team and personal struggles | + +### Exercise Record Format + +Each completed exercise is a markdown file at `data/trust/YYYY-MM-DD-exercise-slug.md` with YAML frontmatter: + +```yaml +date: "2026-02-16" +exercise_number: 1 +exercise_name: "Personal Histories" +participants: ["Brad Feld", "Daniel"] +facilitator: "Brad Feld" +duration_minutes: 35 +vulnerability_level: low +status: complete +``` + +**File naming:** `YYYY-MM-DD-exercise-slug.md` — date prefix for chronological ordering, exercise slug identifies the type. + +### Exercise Slug Reference + +| # | Exercise | Slug | +|---|----------|------| +| 1 | Personal Histories | `personal-histories` | +| 2 | DISC/Kolbe Profiles | `disc-kolbe-profiles` | +| 3 | Lifeline Exercise | `lifeline-exercise` | +| 4 | One Thing | `one-thing` | +| 5 | Feedback Round | `feedback-round` | +| 6 | Strengths Spotlight | `strengths-spotlight` | +| 7 | Conflict Norms | `conflict-norms` | +| 8 | Accountability Partners | `accountability-partners` | +| 9 | Team Effectiveness Debrief | `team-effectiveness-debrief` | +| 10 | Vulnerability Circle | `vulnerability-circle` | + +## Process + +### Mode: Facilitate + +Use when guiding the team through the next Trust Builder exercise. This is the primary mode — one exercise per session. + +#### Step 1: Determine Which Exercise + +Read all files from `data/trust/` via `Glob("data/trust/*.md")`. Parse YAML frontmatter to find completed exercises by `exercise_number`. + +Determine the next exercise in sequence (lowest number not yet completed). + +- **No exercises completed:** Start with #1 Personal Histories. +- **Some completed:** Recommend the next in sequence. +- **All 10 completed:** "All 10 Trust Builder exercises are complete! Consider starting Cycle 2 — repeating exercises builds deeper trust each time. Recommend starting again with #1 Personal Histories." + +Display the recommendation: + +``` +Next Trust Builder: #N [Name] +Vulnerability level: [low/medium/high] +Time box: [N-N] minutes +Last exercise: #[N-1] [Name] on [date] + +Ready to facilitate? +``` + +#### Step 2: Check Readiness + +**For medium or higher vulnerability exercises (3+):** +"This is a [level]-vulnerability exercise. Ensure the team has completed the earlier exercises and the environment feels psychologically safe." + +**For exercise #2 (DISC/Kolbe Profiles):** +"Note: Participants should have completed their DISC and/or Kolbe assessments before this exercise. Has everyone taken their assessments?" + +**For exercise #5 (Feedback Round):** +"Note: This exercise involves giving and receiving direct feedback. Remind the team that feedback should be specific, actionable, and delivered with positive intent." + +**For exercise #7+ (Medium-High and High):** +"This exercise requires a foundation of trust from earlier exercises. If the team hasn't built that foundation, consider revisiting exercises 1-6 first." + +#### Step 3: Read Participants + +Read `data/accountability.md` to identify leadership team members. Suggest them as participants. + +"Who is participating? (Default: leadership team from Accountability Chart)" + +Allow the user to confirm or modify the participant list. + +#### Step 4: Provide Facilitation Guide + +Display the exercise-specific facilitation guide based on the exercise number. Each exercise follows this structure: + +**Purpose → Setup → Steps → Time Management → Debrief Questions** + +--- + +**Exercise 1: Personal Histories** + +*Purpose:* Break down barriers by sharing personal backgrounds. This is the foundation — it humanizes teammates beyond their work roles. + +*Setup:* Gather the team in a comfortable setting. No notes needed. Go around the table. + +*Steps:* +1. Each person shares (3-5 minutes per person): + - Where did you grow up? + - How many siblings do you have? + - What was your first job? + - What's a unique hobby or interest? + - What's something most people don't know about you? +2. After each person shares, allow brief reactions (no extended discussion) +3. Complete the full round before moving to debrief + +*Time Management:* 3-5 min per person + 10 min debrief. For a team of 6: ~40 minutes total. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. What surprised you about someone's background? +2. Did you discover something in common with a teammate? +3. How does knowing this personal context change how you might work together? + +--- + +**Exercise 2: DISC/Kolbe Profiles** + +*Purpose:* Understand each other's working styles to improve communication and reduce friction. + +*Setup:* All participants must have completed their DISC and/or Kolbe assessments beforehand. Print or display results. + +*Steps:* +1. Each person shares their profile (3-5 minutes): + - Their dominant DISC style (D, I, S, or C) + - Their Kolbe MO (if available) + - "Here's what this means about how I work best..." + - "Here's what might frustrate me or slow me down..." +2. After all have shared, discuss as a team: + - Where do profiles complement each other? + - Where might profiles clash? + - What accommodations could help? + +*Time Management:* 5 min per person + 15-20 min group discussion. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. Which profile differences explain past friction? +2. How can we use this knowledge to communicate better? +3. What's one thing you'll do differently knowing your teammates' styles? + +--- + +**Exercise 3: Lifeline Exercise** + +*Purpose:* Build deeper understanding by sharing the significant events that shaped who you are. + +*Setup:* Give each person a blank piece of paper. Draw a horizontal line (the lifeline) from birth to present. Mark significant events above the line (positive) and below the line (negative/challenging). + +*Steps:* +1. Silent preparation (5-10 minutes): Each person maps their lifeline +2. Each person presents their lifeline (5-8 minutes): + - Walk through the major events chronologically + - Explain why each event was significant + - Share how it shaped who you are today +3. After each presentation, team members may ask one clarifying question (optional) +4. No judgment, no advice — just listening + +*Time Management:* 10 min prep + 8 min per person + 10 min debrief. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. What common themes did you notice across lifelines? +2. How does understanding someone's life journey affect your empathy for them? +3. What did it feel like to share? What did it feel like to listen? + +--- + +**Exercise 4: One Thing** + +*Purpose:* A quick exercise to build on existing trust by sharing something new and personal. + +*Setup:* Simple round-table format. No preparation needed. + +*Steps:* +1. Each person shares one thing the team doesn't know about them (2-3 minutes each) + - Can be personal, professional, quirky, or meaningful + - The "one thing" should feel slightly vulnerable — beyond surface-level facts +2. Brief reactions allowed after each share +3. Keep it light but genuine + +*Time Management:* 3 min per person + 5 min debrief. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. What was the hardest part about choosing your "one thing"? +2. Did anyone's share change your perception of them? +3. What does this exercise tell you about the team's comfort level? + +--- + +**Exercise 5: Feedback Round** + +*Purpose:* Practice giving and receiving honest feedback in a structured, safe format. + +*Setup:* Each person will give feedback to every other team member. Prepare by thinking about one strength and one area for growth per person. + +*Steps:* +1. Go person by person — one person is the "focus" at a time +2. Each team member shares for the focus person: + - "Your greatest strength that helps the team is..." + - "One area where I think you could grow is..." +3. The focus person listens without responding (except to say "thank you") +4. After all feedback is given, the focus person may ask ONE clarifying question +5. Move to the next focus person + +*Time Management:* For a team of N, each round takes ~3 min × (N-1) people giving feedback + 2 min transition. Total: roughly 5-8 min per focus person. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. What feedback surprised you the most? +2. Was it harder to give or receive feedback? +3. What's one piece of feedback you want to act on this quarter? +4. How can we make giving feedback a more regular practice? + +--- + +**Exercise 6: Strengths Spotlight** + +*Purpose:* Reinforce what each person does best and ensure the team leverages individual strengths. + +*Setup:* Each person prepares a list of their top 3-5 personal strengths before the session. + +*Steps:* +1. Each person presents their self-identified strengths (2-3 minutes) +2. Team members respond: + - Validate: "I agree — I see that strength when you..." + - Add: "I'd also add [strength] because..." + - Reframe: "I'd describe it slightly differently as..." +3. Record the final agreed-upon strengths list for each person + +*Time Management:* 5-7 min per person + 10 min debrief. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. Were your self-identified strengths aligned with how the team sees you? +2. What strength did a teammate identify that you hadn't considered? +3. How can we better leverage each person's strengths in our daily work? + +--- + +**Exercise 7: Conflict Norms** + +*Purpose:* Establish explicit agreements for how the team will handle disagreement, preventing unhealthy conflict patterns. + +*Setup:* Whiteboard or shared document. This is a group discussion, not individual sharing. + +*Steps:* +1. Discuss current conflict patterns (10-15 minutes): + - "When we disagree, what typically happens?" + - "What works well about how we handle conflict?" + - "What doesn't work?" +2. Brainstorm conflict norms (15-20 minutes): + - How do we raise disagreements? (In the room, not in the hallway) + - How do we ensure everyone speaks? (Round-table before open discussion) + - How do we resolve impasses? (Leader decides after hearing all views) + - What's off-limits? (Personal attacks, relitigating decided issues) +3. Agree on 5-7 specific norms (10-15 minutes) +4. Write them down — these become the team's conflict agreement + +*Time Management:* 45-60 minutes for the full exercise. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. Which norm will be hardest for the team to follow? +2. What will we do when someone breaks a norm? +3. How will we revisit these norms to make sure they're working? + +--- + +**Exercise 8: Accountability Partners** + +*Purpose:* Create peer-to-peer accountability relationships that supplement the formal meeting structure. + +*Setup:* Pair team members. Consider pairing people who don't work closely together or who have complementary strengths. + +*Steps:* +1. Discuss the concept (5 minutes): Accountability partners check in between L10s to help each other stay on track with Rocks, To-Dos, and personal development +2. Form pairs (5-10 minutes): Each pair commits to: + - A weekly 15-minute check-in (phone, video, or in-person) + - What they'll cover: Rock progress, To-Do completion, one personal goal + - How they'll hold each other accountable (direct, constructive) +3. Each pair shares their plan with the team (2-3 minutes per pair) +4. Set a review date (e.g., end of quarter) to assess whether the partnerships are working + +*Time Management:* 30-45 minutes total. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. What do you hope to get from your accountability partner? +2. What makes you nervous about this level of accountability? +3. How will you handle it if your partner isn't following through? + +--- + +**Exercise 9: Team Effectiveness Debrief** + +*Purpose:* Honestly assess how the team functions as a unit — what's working, what isn't, and what needs to change. + +*Setup:* Each person independently rates the team on 5 dimensions (1-5 scale) before the session: +1. Trust — Do we feel safe being vulnerable? +2. Conflict — Do we engage in productive disagreement? +3. Commitment — Do we align behind decisions? +4. Accountability — Do we hold each other to standards? +5. Results — Are we focused on collective outcomes? + +(These map to Lencioni's Five Dysfunctions pyramid.) + +*Steps:* +1. Share individual ratings (go around, no discussion yet) — 10 minutes +2. Identify the biggest gaps (where ratings diverge most) — 10 minutes +3. Deep-dive on the lowest-scoring dimension: + - What specific behaviors drive the low score? + - What would a "5" look like? + - What's one thing we could change this quarter? +4. Repeat for the second-lowest dimension if time allows +5. Agree on 2-3 team commitments + +*Time Management:* 60-90 minutes. This is the most substantive exercise. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. Were you surprised by anyone else's ratings? +2. Which dimension do you personally need to work on most? +3. What's the single most important thing we can improve as a team? +4. How will we measure whether we've improved by next quarter? + +--- + +**Exercise 10: Vulnerability Circle** + +*Purpose:* The deepest trust exercise — each person shares a current struggle, fear, or area where they need support. + +*Setup:* This exercise requires strong existing trust. Ensure exercises 1-9 have been completed. Set the tone: "This is a safe space. What's shared here stays here. Our only job is to listen and support." + +*Steps:* +1. Set ground rules (5 minutes): + - No fixing, no advice (unless asked) + - No judgment + - Confidentiality — nothing leaves this room + - It's OK to pass (but encouragement to try) +2. Each person shares (5-8 minutes): + - "The thing I'm struggling with most right now is..." + - "What I'm most afraid of is..." + - "Where I need help from this team is..." +3. After each share, the team responds: + - Brief acknowledgment: "Thank you for sharing that" + - One supportive statement (optional): "I relate because..." or "I want you to know..." +4. Complete the full circle before debrief + +*Time Management:* 5-8 min per person + 15 min debrief. For a team of 6: ~50-60 minutes. + +*Debrief Questions:* +1. How did it feel to share at this level? +2. What did you learn about the team's capacity for support? +3. How has our trust level changed from Exercise 1 to now? +4. What do we want to commit to as a team going forward? + +--- + +#### Step 5: Record Outcomes + +After the exercise is complete, ask the user for: + +1. **Key takeaways:** "What were the main insights or outcomes from this exercise?" (3-5 bullet points) +2. **Facilitation notes:** "How did the exercise go? Any observations about the process?" +3. **Debrief notes:** "How did the debrief discussion go?" +4. **Follow-up actions:** "Any action items that came out of this?" (optional) +5. **Duration:** "How long did the exercise take?" + +Create a new file from `templates/trust-exercise.md` at `data/trust/YYYY-MM-DD-exercise-slug.md`. Fill in all frontmatter fields and body sections. + +#### Step 6: Save + +Show the complete file before writing. Ask: "Save this trust exercise record?" + +After saving, display: + +``` +Exercise #N [Name] complete! + +Progression: N/10 exercises completed +Next: #[N+1] [Name] ([vulnerability level]) +Recommended timing: Next quarter (~90 days) + +Trust exercises build on each other. The next exercise +will go deeper — schedule it for your next quarterly session. +``` + +--- + +### Mode: Schedule + +Use when checking which exercises have been completed, what's next, and whether the team is on cadence. + +#### Step 1: Load All Records + +Read all files from `data/trust/` via `Glob("data/trust/*.md")`. Parse YAML frontmatter. + +If no files exist: "No trust exercises recorded yet. Start with Exercise #1: Personal Histories using Facilitate mode." + +#### Step 2: Build Progression Table + +``` +Trust Builders — Progression +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| # | Exercise | Level | Status | Date | Participants | +|---|----------|-------|--------|------|-------------| +| 1 | Personal Histories | Low | ✓ Done | 2026-01-15 | Brad, Daniel | +| 2 | DISC/Kolbe Profiles | Low | ✓ Done | 2026-04-10 | Brad, Daniel | +| 3 | Lifeline Exercise | Medium | → Next | — | — | +| 4 | One Thing | Medium | Pending | — | — | +| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | +| 10 | Vulnerability Circle | High | Pending | — | — | + +Progress: 2/10 exercises (20%) +██████░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ 20% +``` + +#### Step 3: Flag Staleness + +Calculate days since most recent exercise. + +- **> 120 days:** "⚠️ [N] days since last trust exercise. Recommended cadence is quarterly (~90 days). Consider scheduling the next exercise." +- **90-120 days:** "The next trust exercise is due soon — last one was [N] days ago." +- **< 90 days:** No flag. + +#### Step 4: Cross-Reference Checkup Trust Score + +Optionally read `data/checkups/` for the most recent organizational checkup. Look for Question 11 score (leadership trust question). + +- **Score < 3.0:** "📊 Checkup Question 11 (leadership trust) scored [X]/5. The Trust Builders exercises can help improve this. Consider prioritizing the next exercise." +- **Score ≥ 3.0:** Mention the score but no urgent recommendation. + +If no checkup data exists, skip this step silently. + +--- + +### Mode: Review + +Use when reviewing the history of trust exercises — dates, participants, key takeaways, and progression over time. + +#### Step 1: Load All Records + +Read all files from `data/trust/` via `Glob("data/trust/*.md")`. Parse YAML frontmatter. + +If no files exist: "No trust exercises recorded yet. Start with Exercise #1: Personal Histories using Facilitate mode." + +#### Step 2: Display History Table + +Show all completed exercises chronologically: + +``` +Trust Builders — Exercise History +━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ + +| Date | # | Exercise | Level | Duration | Participants | Key Takeaway | +|------|---|----------|-------|----------|-------------|-------------| +| 2026-01-15 | 1 | Personal Histories | Low | 35 min | Brad, Daniel | Discovered shared background in... | +| 2026-04-10 | 2 | DISC/Kolbe Profiles | Low | 50 min | Brad, Daniel | Brad is high-D, Daniel is high-I... | +``` + +#### Step 3: Show Progression Summary + +``` +Progression Summary: + Completed: N/10 exercises + Current cycle: 1 (exercises 1-10) + Exercises by vulnerability level: + Low (1-2): N completed + Medium (3-6): N completed + Medium-High (7-8): N completed + High (9-10): N completed + Avg time between exercises: [N] days + Total time invested: [N] minutes across [N] exercises +``` + +#### Step 4: Show Cycle Status + +If all 10 exercises are complete: + +``` +🎉 Cycle 1 Complete! + +All 10 Trust Builder exercises have been completed. +Consider starting Cycle 2 — repeating exercises builds deeper trust. +Many teams report that exercises hit differently the second time around, +especially as the team evolves and new members join. +``` + +If the team has completed multiple cycles, show cycle-over-cycle comparison. + +#### Step 5: Drill Down + +Ask: "Want to view the full record for a specific exercise?" + +If yes, read and display the complete file for the requested exercise. + +## Output Format + +**Facilitate:** Exercise-specific facilitation guide with purpose, setup, steps, time management, and debrief questions. Outcome record shown before save. Post-exercise summary with next exercise recommendation. + +**Schedule:** Progression table showing all 10 exercises with completion status, staleness warnings, and checkup trust score cross-reference. Visual progress bar. + +**Review:** Chronological history table with dates, exercises, levels, durations, and key takeaways. Progression summary by vulnerability level. Cycle status. + +## Guardrails + +- **Always show the complete file before writing.** Never save an exercise record without displaying it and getting approval. +- **Don't auto-invoke other skills.** When trust results suggest running a checkup or updating people evaluations, mention the option but let the user decide. Say "Would you like to run an organizational checkup?" rather than doing it automatically. +- **Sensitive data warning.** On first use in a session, remind the user: "Trust exercise records contain personal sharing and vulnerability-based feedback. This repo should be private." +- **Respect the vulnerability progression.** Do not recommend skipping ahead to high-vulnerability exercises if earlier exercises haven't been completed. If the team attempts exercise 7+ without completing 1-6, warn: "Exercises 7-10 require a foundation of trust from earlier exercises. Consider completing exercises [missing numbers] first." +- **Facilitation guide, not digital exercise.** The skill provides instructions and records outcomes — the actual exercises happen in person or in a live meeting. Don't try to simulate the exercises by asking participants to type their responses. +- **Don't pressure sharing.** The exercises involve vulnerability. If a participant wants to pass, that's acceptable. Note it in the record but don't push. +- **One exercise per session.** Each facilitation session covers one exercise. Don't try to run multiple exercises in sequence — each needs time to land emotionally. +- **Confidentiality reminder.** For exercises 7+ (medium-high and high vulnerability), remind the team: "What's shared in this exercise stays within the team." + +## Integration Notes + +### Accountability Chart (ceos-accountability) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/accountability.md` — seat names, owners, team members +- **Purpose:** Identifies leadership team members for participant suggestions during Facilitate mode. The accountability chart defines who should be in the room for trust exercises. + +### Organizational Checkup (ceos-checkup) + +- **Direction:** Read +- **What data:** `data/checkups/` — organizational health assessment scores +- **Purpose:** Question 11 in the checkup measures leadership team trust. Low scores (< 3.0) suggest prioritizing Trust Builder exercises. Schedule mode cross-references the most recent checkup trust score. + +### Annual Planning (ceos-annual) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** No direct data access +- **Purpose:** Annual planning sessions often include a review of team trust and may trigger scheduling the next Trust Builder exercise. The trust exercise progression can inform annual planning discussions about team health. + +### Quarterly Planning (ceos-quarterly-planning) + +- **Direction:** Related +- **What data:** No direct data access +- **Purpose:** The quarterly cadence of trust exercises aligns naturally with quarterly planning. Review trust progression as part of the quarterly planning agenda. Schedule the next exercise if overdue. + +### Write Principle + +**Only `ceos-trust` writes to `data/trust/`.** Other skills may reference trust exercise data for team health context, but do not modify exercise records. diff --git a/templates/assistance-daily.md b/templates/assistance-daily.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a017a20 --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/assistance-daily.md @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +--- +date: "{{date}}" +leader: "{{leader}}" +assistant: "{{assistant}}" +items_reviewed: 0 +items_handed_off: 0 +items_completed: 0 +duration_minutes: null +--- + +# Daily Standup — {{date}} + +**Leader:** {{leader}} +**Assistant:** {{assistant}} + +--- + +## Stack Review + +*Items reviewed from the stack during this meeting.* + +| # | Item | Urgency | Decision | Notes | +|---|------|---------|----------|-------| +| 1 | [Stack item title] | [today/this_week/whenever] | [hand_off/defer/done] | [Any context] | + +--- + +## New Items Added + +*New items that came up during the meeting.* + +| # | Item | Urgency | Assigned To | Notes | +|---|------|---------|-------------|-------| +| 1 | [New item] | [today/this_week/whenever] | [Person] | [Context] | + +--- + +## Action Items + +*Specific actions to complete before next daily standup.* + +- [ ] [Action item with owner] + +--- + +## Meeting Notes + +[Any additional discussion, observations, or follow-up needed] diff --git a/templates/assistance-stack.md b/templates/assistance-stack.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ebba7a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/assistance-stack.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +id: "{{id}}" +title: "{{title}}" +from: "{{from}}" +to: "{{to}}" +urgency: pending # today | this_week | whenever +status: pending # pending | handed_off | done +created: "{{date}}" +handed_off: null +completed: null +--- + +# {{title}} + +**From:** {{from}} +**To:** {{to}} +**Urgency:** Pending +**Created:** {{date}} + +## Details + +[Description of the task or item being delegated] + +## Notes + +[Any context, background, or special instructions] + +## Outcome + +[Filled in when status changes to done — what happened, any follow-up needed] diff --git a/templates/cashflow-assessment.md b/templates/cashflow-assessment.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..124b161 --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/cashflow-assessment.md @@ -0,0 +1,200 @@ +--- +date: "{{date}}" +participants: "{{team_members}}" +status: in_progress +overall_summary: null +drivers: + price: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + volume: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + cogs_margin: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + ar_days: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + ap_days: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + inventory_wip: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + opex: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null + debt_structure: + current_state: null + potential: null + owner: null + baseline_metric: null + target_metric: null + priority_rank: null + notes: null +--- + +# Cash Flow Assessment — {{date}} + +**Participants:** {{team_members}} + +--- + +## Driver Summary + +| # | Driver | Potential | Owner | Baseline | Target | Priority | +|---|--------|-----------|-------|----------|--------|----------| +| 1 | Price | | | | | | +| 2 | Volume | | | | | | +| 3 | COGS / Margin | | | | | | +| 4 | A/R Days | | | | | | +| 5 | A/P Days | | | | | | +| 6 | Inventory / WIP | | | | | | +| 7 | Operating Expenses | | | | | | +| 8 | Debt Structure | | | | | | + +--- + +## 1. Price + +**Current State:** +> [How are prices set? When was the last price increase?] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 2. Volume + +**Current State:** +> [Current sales volume and growth trajectory] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 3. COGS / Margin + +**Current State:** +> [Current cost structure and gross margin] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 4. A/R Days + +**Current State:** +> [Current days sales outstanding and collection process] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 5. A/P Days + +**Current State:** +> [Current payment terms with vendors] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 6. Inventory / WIP + +**Current State:** +> [Current inventory levels or work-in-progress backlog] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 7. Operating Expenses + +**Current State:** +> [Major expense categories and trends] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## 8. Debt Structure + +**Current State:** +> [Current debt mix, terms, and cost of capital] + +**Improvement Potential:** [high/medium/low/none] +**Baseline:** [Current metric] +**Target:** [Desired metric] +**Owner:** [Name] + +--- + +## Action Plan + +| # | Driver | Action | Owner | Timeline | Status | +|---|--------|--------|-------|----------|--------| +| 1 | | | | | | + +--- + +## Assessment Notes + +- {{date}}: Cash flow assessment conducted diff --git a/templates/l10-meeting.md b/templates/l10-meeting.md index 6c36412..acadd53 100644 --- a/templates/l10-meeting.md +++ b/templates/l10-meeting.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ --- date: "{{date}}" -attendees: [{{team_members}}] +attendees: "{{attendees}}" rating: null --- diff --git a/templates/lma-assessment.md b/templates/lma-assessment.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..edbbfbb --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/lma-assessment.md @@ -0,0 +1,102 @@ +--- +person: "{{person}}" +seat: "{{seat}}" +date: "{{date}}" +status: active # active | reviewed | stale +leadership_score: null +management_score: null +overall_score: null +leadership_practices: + clear_direction: null # 1-5 or null + necessary_tools: null + letting_go: null + greater_good: null + clarity_breaks: null +management_practices: + clear_expectations: null # 1-5 or null + communicating_well: null + meeting_pulse: null + quarterly_conversations: null + rewarding_recognizing: null +feedback: [] # 360 feedback entries +last_assessed: "{{date}}" +--- + +# {{person}} — LMA Assessment + +**Seat:** {{seat}} +**Last Assessed:** {{date}} +**Status:** Active + +--- + +## Leadership Practices + +*5 practices that inspire people to follow you.* + +| # | Practice | Rating | Notes | +|---|----------|--------|-------| +| 1 | Giving clear direction | | | +| 2 | Providing the necessary tools | | | +| 3 | Letting go of the vine | | | +| 4 | Acting with the greater good in mind | | | +| 5 | Taking Clarity Breaks | | | + +**Leadership Score:** — + +--- + +## Management Practices + +*5 practices that create systems of accountability.* + +| # | Practice | Rating | Notes | +|---|----------|--------|-------| +| 1 | Keeping expectations clear | | | +| 2 | Communicating well | | | +| 3 | Maintaining the right meeting pulse | | | +| 4 | Having quarterly conversations | | | +| 5 | Rewarding and recognizing | | | + +**Management Score:** — + +--- + +## LMA Score + +**Leadership + Management = Accountability** + +| Component | Score | +|-----------|-------| +| Leadership | — | +| Management | — | +| **Overall LMA** | **—** | + +--- + +## Flagged Practices + +*Practices scoring below 3 need attention.* + +*(None flagged yet)* + +--- + +## 360 Feedback + +*Feedback from direct reports comparing self-assessment vs team perception.* + +| Respondent | Date | Leadership Avg | Management Avg | Overall Avg | +|-----------|------|---------------|----------------|-------------| + +--- + +## Development Plan + +- [ ] [Action item based on flagged practices] + +--- + +## Assessment History + +- {{date}}: Initial LMA assessment conducted diff --git a/templates/quarterly-quick.md b/templates/quarterly-quick.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..65d2aab --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/quarterly-quick.md @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +--- +type: quick +person: "[Full Name]" +manager: "[Manager Name]" +quarter: "{{quarter}}" +date: "{{date}}" +core_values_rating: null +gwc_status: null +rocks_completion_rate: null +--- + +# 5-5-5 Check-In — [Full Name] + +**Manager:** [Manager Name] +**Quarter:** {{quarter}} +**Date:** {{date}} + +--- + +## Employee Speaks (5 min) + +*What does the employee want to share? Focus on Core Values, Rocks, and their Role (GWC).* + +**Core Values:** [How are they living the Core Values?] + +**Rocks:** [How are their Rocks going?] + +**Role (GWC):** [How do they feel about their seat — Get It, Want It, Capacity?] + +--- + +## Manager Speaks (5 min) + +*What does the manager want to share? Focus on performance, wins, and concerns.* + +**Performance:** [How is the employee doing overall?] + +**Wins:** [What's going well? Recognize achievements.] + +**Concerns:** [Any issues to address?] + +--- + +## Together (5 min) + +*Agree on next steps and commitments together.* + +**Next Steps:** +- [Agreed action or commitment] + +**Commitments:** +- [What each person will do before next check-in] + +--- + +## Conversation History + +- {{date}}: 5-5-5 check-in conducted diff --git a/templates/trust-exercise.md b/templates/trust-exercise.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..93f0406 --- /dev/null +++ b/templates/trust-exercise.md @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +--- +date: "{{date}}" +exercise_number: null # 1-10 +exercise_name: "{{exercise_name}}" +participants: [] # List of team member names +facilitator: "{{facilitator}}" +duration_minutes: null +vulnerability_level: "{{vulnerability_level}}" # low | medium | high +status: complete +--- + +# {{exercise_name}} — {{date}} + +**Exercise:** #{{exercise_number}} of 10 +**Vulnerability Level:** {{vulnerability_level}} +**Facilitator:** {{facilitator}} +**Participants:** {{participants}} +**Duration:** {{duration_minutes}} minutes + +--- + +## Setup + +[Pre-exercise preparation notes — what was needed before starting] + +--- + +## Facilitation Notes + +[What happened during the exercise — observations about how it went] + +--- + +## Key Takeaways + +[Team insights and outcomes — what emerged from the exercise] + +- [Takeaway 1] +- [Takeaway 2] +- [Takeaway 3] + +--- + +## Debrief Notes + +[Post-exercise discussion — how the team reflected on the experience] + +--- + +## Follow-Up Actions + +- [ ] [Action item with owner, if any]