Translates strategic recommendations into executable plans through option development and scoring, business case construction, roadmap design, and detailed implementation with workstreams and governance.
npx claudepluginhub anotb/management-consulting-pluginThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
Translate strategic recommendations into concrete, funded, governed plans that organizations can actually execute. This covers translating strategy into executable plans across four connected stages: generating and evaluating options, building the business case, designing the roadmap, and developing the implementation plan. For the ongoing oversight structure (steering committees, status report...
Analyzes plans via pre-mortem: extracts assumptions across market/execution/customer/competitive/financial/dependency categories, rates confidence and impact, maps high-risk vulnerabilities. Run before resource commitment or presentations.
Builds strategic product roadmaps in Now/Next/Later format with quarterly themes, milestones, dependencies, resource allocation, and stakeholder templates for 3-12 month planning.
Build a product roadmap with sequenced bets and explicit tradeoffs. Use when asked to "build a roadmap", "prioritize the backlog strategically", "what do we build next quarter", "sequence our bets", "what should we focus on", or "product strategy for the next N months".
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Translate strategic recommendations into concrete, funded, governed plans that organizations can actually execute. This covers translating strategy into executable plans across four connected stages: generating and evaluating options, building the business case, designing the roadmap, and developing the implementation plan. For the ongoing oversight structure (steering committees, status reporting, risk management), see project-governance.
Most strategies fail in execution, not in formulation. The gap between "we should do X" and "X is happening" is where most value gets destroyed. This skill covers that gap systematically.
The four stages flow naturally but don't always run sequentially. Sometimes you start with options because the path isn't clear. Sometimes the recommendation is already made and you need to jump straight to business case and planning. Meet the work where it is.
Strategic Option Business Roadmap Implementation
Recommendation → Development → Case → Design → Plan
"We should..." "Here are "Here's why "Here's "Here's exactly
the ways it's worth it" the order" how we do it"
we could..."
Before committing to a path, develop genuinely different options. Not three flavors of the same thing... structurally different approaches that represent real strategic choices.
Clarify what's being decided before generating options.
Define weighted evaluation criteria upfront:
| Criterion | Weight | Definition of Success |
|---|---|---|
| [Criterion 1] | X% | [What "good" looks like] |
| [Criterion 2] | X% | [What "good" looks like] |
| [Criterion 3] | X% | [What "good" looks like] |
| Total | 100% |
Create 3-5 genuinely differentiated options. Each should represent a distinct strategic posture, not just incremental variations. Always include "do nothing" as a baseline.
For each option:
Good option sets include a range: a conservative option, an aggressive option, and something in between. If all your options look similar, you haven't explored the space.
Score each option against the weighted criteria:
| Criterion | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C | Do Nothing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Criterion 1] | X% | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] |
| [Criterion 2] | X% | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] |
| [Criterion 3] | X% | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [1-5] |
| Weighted Score | 100% | X.X | X.X | X.X | X.X |
Scoring guide:
Beyond the quantitative scoring, assess each option qualitatively:
Stress-test the leading option under different conditions. At minimum, test against optimistic, base, and pessimistic scenarios.
| Option | Optimistic | Base | Pessimistic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Option A | [Performance] | [Performance] | [Performance] |
| Option B | [Performance] | [Performance] | [Performance] |
Run sensitivity analysis on criteria weights: which criteria, if weighted differently, would change the recommendation? If a small shift in weights flips the answer, the decision is closer than it looks.
State it clearly. A recommendation has:
The business case answers one question: is this worth doing? It must convince decision-makers to fund the initiative and provide the financial framework for tracking value delivery.
A business case that works has these sections, roughly in this order:
This is the decision brief. Many stakeholders will read nothing else. It must contain the problem, the solution, the investment required, the expected return, and a clear recommendation.
Quantify the problem. "We're losing money" is not a problem statement. "We're losing $4.2M annually in customer churn driven by post-sale service failures" is.
| Pain Point | Annual Impact | Frequency | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Pain 1] | $[Amount] | [How often] | [Getting better/worse] |
| [Pain 2] | $[Amount] | [How often] | [Getting better/worse] |
Calculate the cost of inaction explicitly. What happens over 3-5 years if we do nothing? This is the baseline against which the investment is compared.
| Cost of Inaction | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Cost driver 1] | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| [Cost driver 2] | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Total | $X | $X | $X | $X |
Establish measurable baselines. You can't show improvement without a starting point.
| Metric | Current Value | Industry Benchmark | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Benchmark] | [Gap] |
| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Benchmark] | [Gap] |
This is the core of the business case. Build it in layers:
Investment Required (what we're spending):
| Category | Year 0 | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital expenditure | $X | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Implementation costs | $X | $X | $X | ||
| Change management | $X | $X | $X | ||
| Training | $X | $X | $X | ||
| Contingency (10-15%) | $X | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Total Investment | $X | $X | $X | $X | $X |
Benefits Realization (what we're getting back):
| Benefit | Type | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Revenue benefit] | Top-line | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| [Cost reduction] | Bottom-line | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| [Risk avoidance] | Quantified risk | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| [Productivity gain] | Efficiency | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Total Benefits | $X | $X | $X | $X |
Return Metrics:
| Metric | Value | Hurdle Rate | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| NPV | $XX | > $0 | [Pass/Fail] |
| IRR | XX% | [Org hurdle] | [Pass/Fail] |
| Payback Period | X years | [Org threshold] | [Pass/Fail] |
| ROI | XX% | [Org threshold] | [Pass/Fail] |
Sensitivity Analysis (how robust are these numbers):
| Variable | -20% | Base Case | +20% | Swing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benefits realization | $XX | $XX | $XX | $XX |
| Cost overrun | $XX | $XX | $XX | $XX |
| Timeline delay | $XX | $XX | $XX | $XX |
| Adoption rate | $XX | $XX | $XX | $XX |
Which variables have the biggest swing? That's where management attention should focus.
Total Cost of Ownership (the real long-term cost):
| Component | Years 1-3 | Years 4-5 | Years 6-10 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial investment | $X | $X | ||
| Ongoing licensing/ops | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Maintenance | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Training & support | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| TCO | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation | Residual Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Risk 1] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [What we'll do] | [After mitigation] |
| [Risk 2] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [What we'll do] | [After mitigation] |
The roadmap answers: what happens when, and in what order? It translates the approved business case into a sequenced plan with phases, milestones, and dependencies.
Each phase needs a clear objective, a reason it comes in this order, and criteria for moving to the next phase.
## Phase 1: [Name] ([Duration])
### Objective
[What this phase achieves and why it comes first]
### Key Initiatives
| Initiative | Description | Priority | Dependencies |
|------------|-------------|----------|--------------|
| [Initiative 1] | [What it involves] | [High/Med] | [What must come first] |
| [Initiative 2] | [What it involves] | [High/Med] | [What must come first] |
### Deliverables
- [Concrete deliverable 1]
- [Concrete deliverable 2]
### Success Criteria
| Criterion | Target | How Measured |
|-----------|--------|-------------|
| [Criterion 1] | [Specific target] | [Measurement method] |
| [Criterion 2] | [Specific target] | [Measurement method] |
Repeat for each phase. Common phase patterns:
Dependencies drive the critical path. Map them explicitly:
Critical Dependencies (delay here delays everything):
| Initiative | Depends On | Impact if Delayed | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Initiative] | [Predecessor] | [What breaks] | [What we'll do] |
Resource Dependencies (shared resources across workstreams):
External Dependencies (things outside your control):
Define the milestones that mark real progress (not just calendar dates):
| Milestone | Target Date | Phase | Success Criteria | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | [Date] | Phase 1 | [How we know we're there] | [What must be done] |
| M2 | [Date] | Phase 1 | [How we know we're there] | [M1] |
| M3 | [Date] | Phase 2 | [How we know we're there] | [M2] |
Good milestones are:
| Resource Category | Phase 1 | Phase 2 | Phase 3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FTEs | X | X | X | X |
| Capital | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Operating | $X | $X | $X | $X |
The implementation plan is the most granular level. It translates the roadmap into workstreams with named owners, specific deliverables, and governance mechanisms.
Break the implementation into logical workstreams. Each workstream should be:
| Workstream | Description | Lead | Key Deliverables | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [WS 1] | [What it covers] | [Name] | [Deliverables] | [Other WS] |
| [WS 2] | [What it covers] | [Name] | [Deliverables] | [Other WS] |
| [WS 3] | [What it covers] | [Name] | [Deliverables] | [Other WS] |
Build the timeline phase by phase with milestones and owners:
## Phase 1: [Name] ([Duration])
Objective: [What we achieve]
| Milestone | Target | Dependencies | Owner |
|-----------|--------|--------------|-------|
| [M1] | [Date] | [None] | [Name] |
| [M2] | [Date] | [M1] | [Name] |
## Phase 2: [Name] ([Duration])
Objective: [What we achieve]
| Milestone | Target | Dependencies | Owner |
|-----------|--------|--------------|-------|
| [M3] | [Date] | [M2] | [Name] |
| [M4] | [Date] | [M3] | [Name] |
Identify the longest dependency chain that drives the overall timeline:
Define who does what. One accountable owner per deliverable. Shared accountability means no accountability.
| Activity / Deliverable | Sponsor | Program Lead | WS Lead | Team | Client SMEs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Deliverable 1] | A | R | C | I | C |
| [Deliverable 2] | I | A | R | R | C |
| [Key decision] | A | R | C | I | I |
Rules: One "A" per activity. At least one "R". Minimize "C" to avoid bottlenecks. "A" and "I" should not be the same person for the same activity.
| Role | Workstream | FTE | Duration | Skills Required |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Role 1] | [WS 1] | X.X | [Time] | [Skills] |
| [Role 2] | [WS 2] | X.X | [Time] | [Skills] |
Budget by workstream:
| Workstream | Labor | External | Other | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [WS 1] | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| [WS 2] | $X | $X | $X | $X |
| Contingency (10-15%) | $X | |||
| Total | $X | $X | $X | $X |
Meeting Cadence:
| Forum | Frequency | Attendees | Purpose | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steering Committee | Bi-weekly | Sponsor, Program Lead, WS Leads | Decisions, escalations | 60 min |
| Program Review | Weekly | Program Lead, WS Leads | Progress, risks, dependencies | 45 min |
| Workstream Standup | 2-3x/week | WS Lead, Team | Task coordination, blockers | 15 min |
Phase Gates (prevent premature transitions):
| Gate | Transition | Entry Criteria | Exit Criteria | Approver |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | Foundation -> Build | [Requirements defined, team staffed] | [Assessment complete, design approved] | [Sponsor] |
| G2 | Build -> Deploy | [Solutions developed, tested] | [Pilot successful, rollout plan approved] | [Sponsor] |
| G3 | Deploy -> Operate | [Full rollout complete] | [Adoption targets met, handover done] | [Sponsor] |
Escalation Path:
Change Control:
| Change Type | Approval Required | Process |
|---|---|---|
| Minor scope change | Program Lead | Document, assess impact, approve/reject |
| Major scope change | Steering Committee | Formal change request, impact analysis, SteerCo decision |
| Timeline shift (< 2 weeks) | Program Lead | Update plan, notify stakeholders |
| Timeline shift (> 2 weeks) | Steering Committee | Root cause analysis, recovery plan, SteerCo approval |
| Budget variance (< 10%) | Program Lead | Document, adjust within contingency |
| Budget variance (> 10%) | Steering Committee | Business case for additional funding |
| Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Risk 1] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Specific action] | [Name] |
| [Risk 2] | [H/M/L] | [H/M/L] | [Specific action] | [Name] |
Contingency plans for high-impact risks:
Not every engagement needs all four stages. Match the entry point to the situation:
| Situation | Start At | Skip |
|---|---|---|
| Decision not yet made, multiple paths possible | Stage 1 (Options) | Nothing |
| Recommendation exists, needs funding approval | Stage 2 (Business Case) | Stage 1 |
| Approved and funded, needs execution plan | Stage 3 (Roadmap) | Stages 1-2 |
| Roadmap exists, needs operational detail | Stage 4 (Implementation) | Stages 1-3 |
| Existing plan needs restructuring | Diagnose first, then appropriate stage | Depends |
Each stage feeds the next:
| From | To | What Carries Over |
|---|---|---|
| Options | Business Case | Recommended option, investment estimate, risk profile, trade-offs accepted |
| Business Case | Roadmap | Approved budget, benefits timeline, key risks, success metrics |
| Roadmap | Implementation | Phase structure, milestones, dependencies, resource envelope |