Copywriting — Persuasive Executive Communication

Transforms technical findings into decision-driving prose. Owns value propositions, calls to action, cost-of-inaction narratives, executive summaries, and recommendation justifications across all discovery deliverables. [EXPLICIT]

Grounding Guideline

The best copy does not convince — it reveals what the reader already knows but has not articulated. A C-level executive knows they have technical debt. They do not need to be told. They need the cost of inaction quantified and a clear path shown with options. Copy transforms data into decisions.

Persuasion Philosophy

1. Evidence before assertion. Never "we believe that" — always "the data shows that." Every claim carries a number, a source, or an explicit assumption. [EXPLICIT]
2. Demonstrated urgency, not declared. Not "it is urgent to act." Instead "the cost of inaction is X FTE-months/quarter, equivalent to..."
3. Options, not mandates. The decision-maker chooses. The consultant recommends with evidence and trade-offs. [EXPLICIT]
4. Radical conciseness. Every word must earn its place. If a sentence does not add information or move the reader, it is eliminated. [EXPLICIT]

Inputs

• $1 — Target audience: ceo, cto, cfo, board, mixed (default: mixed)
• $2 — Deliverable context: pitch, scenario, roadmap, summary, recommendation (default: summary)

Parse from $ARGUMENTS. [EXPLICIT]

Techniques Arsenal

Value Proposition Construction

Structure: [Quantified benefit] + [for whom] + [eliminating what pain] + [in what timeframe]

Example:
  BAD: "Improve the system architecture"
  GOOD: "Reduce time-to-market from 12 to 4 weeks, freeing 3 FTE-months/quarter
      currently consumed by workarounds in the legacy system"

Cost-of-Inaction (COI) Narrative

Pattern: [Quantified current state] → [Trend if no action] → [Cumulative impact] → [Point of no return]

Framing: "Each quarter without action costs [X] and accumulates [Y] of additional technical debt. [EXPLICIT]
          In [Z] months, the remediation cost exceeds the transformation cost."

Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS)

Phase	Purpose	Technique
Problem	State pain with data	Metrics, benchmarks, evidence tags
Agitate	Show consequences of inaction	COI projection, trend extrapolation
Solve	Present solution with options	3 scenarios, recommended path highlighted

Call to Action Design

Structure: [Specific action] + [concrete timeline] + [immediate next step] + [what happens if not]

Example:
  BAD: "It is recommended to proceed with modernization"
  GOOD: "Approving scenario B (incremental modernization) this week allows
      starting Sprint 0 in Q2 and capturing the first quick win (API gateway)
      before July. → Next step: alignment workshop with technical team."

Tone Calibration by Audience

Audience	Tone	Lead With	Avoid
CEO	Strategic, visionary	Competitive advantage, positioning	Technical jargon, implementation details
CTO	Technical-strategic	Technical risk, modernization	Excessive simplifications
CFO	Financial, quantitative	NPV, payback, cost avoidance	Narratives without numbers
Board	Governance, fiduciary	Risk-adjusted ROI, compliance	Operational detail
Mixed	Progressive: impact → technical	Impact headline + progressive depth	Assuming a single profile

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern	Correction
"It is worth noting that..."	Eliminate — go straight to the point
"It is important to highlight..."	Eliminate — if it were important, it needs no announcement
"It is recommended to consider..."	Recommend directly with evidence
Passive voice without agent	Active voice: who does what
Numbers without context	Always compare: vs baseline, vs industry, vs target
Assertions without evidence	Mandatory tag: [CÓDIGO], [CONFIG], [DOC], [INFERENCIA]
Superlatives without support	"The best" → "Superior by X% according to [metric]"

Output Configuration

• Language: Spanish (Latin American, business register — simple, clear, concise, direct)
• Attribution: Expert committee of the MetodologIA Discovery Framework
• Tagline: "Construido por profesionales, potenciado por la red agéntica de MetodologIA."

Validation Gate

Before delivery, every copy section must pass:

Criterion	Check
Every claim has evidence tag	[CÓDIGO], [CONFIG], [DOC], [INFERENCIA], [SUPUESTO]
Every number has context	vs baseline, vs benchmark, vs target
COI is quantified	FTE-months, cost/quarter, trend projection
CTA is specific	Action + timeline + next step
Zero filler phrases	No filler constructions, no "undoubtedly"
Audience tone match	Calibrated per target audience

Assumptions and Limits

• El input contiene hallazgos tecnicos ya validados; esta skill transforma, no investiga.
• El copy se produce en espanol (registro empresarial latinoamericano) salvo indicacion explicita.
• NUNCA producir precios. Solo FTE-meses, magnitudes, cost drivers.
• NUNCA usar verde (#00FF00) para exito. Usar gold (#FFD700) en contexto MetodologIA.
• Esta skill posee calidad de prosa y persuasion. NO posee arco narrativo entre entregables (eso es storytelling) ni visualizacion de datos (eso es data-storytelling).

Edge Cases

Edge Case	Handling Strategy
No quantitative data available	Use qualitative evidence with explicit [INFERENCIA] tags. Frame as "based on patterns observed in [N] files/modules/interviews". Declare limitation in the first line of the deliverable.
Multiple audiences in the same document	Apply progressive disclosure: executive headline + expandable technical detail. Use differentiated callouts per audience. Never assume a single reader profile.
Controversial recommendation or with political risk	Present all options with equal rigor. Recommend with explicit evidence. Document dissent in risk register. Include "Alternative Considerations" section before the CTA.
Client requests copy in a language other than Spanish	Produce in the requested language maintaining structure and techniques. Document key terminology in both languages. Prioritize clarity over literary style.

Decisions and Trade-offs

Decision	Justification	Discarded Alternative
Evidence before assertion as absolute rule	Credibility with executive audiences requires data first. A C-level detects unsupported copy in seconds.	Assert then justify: perceived as unfounded opinion.
Options over mandates (3 scenarios)	The decision-maker chooses; the consultant recommends with evidence. Increases decision ownership.	Single recommendation: perceived as imposition, generates resistance.
Radical conciseness over exhaustiveness	Executive attention time is limited. Every word must add information or move the reader.	Exhaustive prose: loses the executive audience in the second paragraph.
Quantified COI over declared urgency	"The cost of inaction is X FTE-months/quarter" is verifiable and actionable. "It is urgent to act" is opinion.	Declared urgency: does not differentiate from any other recommendation.

Knowledge Graph

graph TD
    subgraph Core["Core: Copywriting"]
        VP[Value Proposition]
        COI[Cost-of-Inaction]
        CTA[Call to Action]
        PAS[Problem-Agitate-Solve]
    end

    subgraph Inputs["Inputs"]
        AUD[Audiencia Target]
        FIND[Hallazgos Tecnicos]
        METRICS[Metricas y Datos]
        CTX[Contexto del Entregable]
    end

    subgraph Outputs["Outputs"]
        EXEC_SUM[Executive Summary]
        PITCH[Pitch Narrative]
        SCENARIO[Scenario Value Props]
        RECO[Recommendation Copy]
    end

    subgraph Related["Related Skills"]
        STORY[storytelling]
        DATASTORY[data-storytelling]
        TECHWRITE[technical-writing]
        EDITORIAL[editorial-director]
    end

    AUD --> VP
    FIND --> PAS
    METRICS --> COI
    CTX --> CTA
    VP --> EXEC_SUM
    COI --> PITCH
    PAS --> SCENARIO
    CTA --> RECO
    STORY --> Core
    DATASTORY --> METRICS
    TECHWRITE --> FIND
    EDITORIAL --> Core

Output Templates

Template 1: Executive Summary (Markdown)

Filename: Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.md

# Resumen Ejecutivo: {project}

## Headline
{Una linea: beneficio cuantificado + para quien + eliminando que dolor}

## Situacion Actual
{2-3 parrafos: estado actual con evidencia [TAGS], metricas con contexto}

## Costo de Inaccion
{Proyeccion cuantificada: FTE-meses/trimestre, tendencia, punto de no retorno}

## Opciones
| Escenario | Inversion (FTE-meses) | Beneficio | Timeline | Riesgo |
|---|---|---|---|---|

## Recomendacion
{Escenario recomendado con justificacion basada en evidencia}

## Siguiente Paso
{Accion especifica + timeline + que pasa si no se actua}

Template 1b: Executive Summary (HTML, bajo demanda)

Filename: Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.html

HTML self-contained branded (Design System MetodologIA v5). Dark-First Executive. Incluye headline hero con metricas de impacto, COI projection visual, y comparativa de escenarios con CTA destacado. WCAG AA, responsive. [EXPLICIT]

Template 1c: Executive Summary (DOCX, bajo demanda)

Filename: {fase}_Executive_Summary_{project}_{WIP}.docx Via python-docx con Design System MetodologIA v5. Cover page, TOC auto, headers/footers branded, tablas zebra. Poppins headings (navy), Trebuchet MS body, gold accents. [EXPLICIT]

Template 1d: Executive Summary (XLSX, bajo demanda)

Filename: {fase}_Executive_Summary_{cliente}_{WIP}.xlsx Via openpyxl con MetodologIA Design System v5. Headers con fondo navy y tipografía Poppins en blanco, conditional formatting por escenario y prioridad, auto-filters en todas las columnas, valores directos sin fórmulas. [EXPLICIT]

Template 1e: Executive Summary (PPTX, bajo demanda)

Filename: {fase}_{entregable}_{cliente}_{WIP}.pptx Via python-pptx con MetodologIA Design System v5. Slide master con gradiente navy, titulos Poppins, cuerpo Trebuchet MS, acentos gold. Max 20 slides (ejecutiva) / 30 slides (tecnica). Speaker notes con referencias de evidencia. Para comites directivos y presentaciones C-level. [EXPLICIT]

Template 2: Pitch Narrative (HTML)

Filename: Pitch_{project}_{WIP|Aprobado}.html

Estructura HTML con secciones:
- Hero: headline con metricas de impacto
- Problem: estado actual con datos y evidencia visual
- Agitate: costo de inaccion con proyeccion temporal
- Solve: 3 escenarios con comparativa visual
- CTA: accion recomendada con timeline y siguiente paso
- Footer: atribucion MetodologIA + evidencia tags summary
Estilo: colores MetodologIA (#122562 primary, #1F2833 background)

Evaluacion

Dimension	Peso	Criterio
Trigger Accuracy	10%	Se activa ante solicitudes de copy ejecutivo, pitch, value proposition, CTA, o resumen persuasivo
Completeness	25%	Incluye value proposition construida, COI cuantificado, CTA especifico, y tono calibrado por audiencia
Clarity	20%	Cero frases de relleno; cada afirmacion tiene evidencia; voz activa predominante
Robustness	20%	Produce copy efectivo con datos parciales, multiples audiencias, y recomendaciones controversiales
Efficiency	10%	Genera copy listo para entrega con parametros minimos (audiencia + contexto)
Value Density	15%	Cada parrafo contiene informacion accionable; ratio de conversion dato-a-decision es alto

Umbral minimo: 7/10

Cross-References

• metodologia-storytelling — Arco narrativo cross-deliverable que el copy apoya
• metodologia-data-storytelling — Metricas interpretadas que el copy consume
• metodologia-technical-writing — Precision documental que el copy transforma en prosa ejecutiva
• metodologia-editorial-director — Coordinacion editorial cross-entregable

Limits

• This skill owns prose quality and persuasion. It does NOT own narrative arc across deliverables (that's editorial-director) or data visualization (that's metodologia-data-viz-storytelling).
• NEVER produce prices. Only FTE-months, magnitudes, cost drivers.
• NEVER use green (#00FF00) for success in any output. Use gold (#FFD700).

Usage

Example invocations:

• "/copywriting" — Run the full copywriting workflow
• "copywriting on this project" — Apply to current context