brainstorm-pivots

Brainstorm Pivots & Tweaks

Generate a slate of variations on the captured idea — small tweaks, feature additions, scope reductions, and full pivots — each scored on what it improves and what it costs.

Steps

1. Read the idea + all available lens outputs (vc-lens, tam-analysis, b2b-b2c-fit, assumptions, hardware-feasibility, dev-spec, social-impact). The richer the prior analysis, the better the brainstorm.
2. Generate at least 10 variations, mixed across categories:
   • Scope cuts — what gets removed to ship faster / cheaper
   • Feature additions — non-obvious adjacent features that strengthen the wedge
   • Customer pivots — same solution, different segment (e.g. B2C → B2B prosumer)
   • Business-model pivots — same product, different monetisation (subscription → marketplace fee → licensing)
   • Geographic pivots — start narrow (local market) vs. start global
   • Wedge swaps — what if the lead use case were different
   • Partnership / channel plays — what if it were sold through an existing distributor
3. For each variation, score:
   • What it improves (feasibility, TAM, defensibility, capital efficiency, time-to-revenue, fit-to-user)
   • What it costs (complexity, diluted vision, harder GTM, etc.)
   • Difficulty to evaluate further (one experiment vs. months of work)
4. Group the slate into:
   • Top 3 to seriously consider — biggest improvement, lowest cost
   • Worth a follow-up conversation — interesting but unclear
   • Discarded — captured for completeness, with one-line rationale

Output

<workspace_path>/ideas/<slug>/analysis/brainstorm-pivots.md with frontmatter:

---
lens: brainstorm-pivots
generated: YYYY-MM-DD
top_pick: <one-line>
---

Notes

• Bias the brainstorm toward variations the user could actually execute given their context. A "raise $20M" pivot for a bootstrapper is wasted ink.
• A pivot that improves five dimensions but the user hates is still a bad pivot. Note when a variation conflicts with stated user values.