Quick-access analytical thinking frameworks for management consultants — from root cause analysis and phased implementation to stakeholder accountability and rapid executive communication. Designed for in-the-moment problem solving during client engagements. Use when user asks to "apply a framework", "MECE analysis", "hypothesis-driven", or mentions issue trees, pyramid principle, or structured problem-solving.
npx claudepluginhub lauraflorentin/skills-marketplace --plugin management-consultingThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
This is a working reference guide for the analytical frameworks that unlock faster problem-solving in client engagements. Each framework solves a specific consulting challenge: from turning decisions into accountability, to drilling past symptoms to root causes, to structuring persuasive communication that actually drives action.
Compares coding agents like Claude Code and Aider on custom YAML-defined codebase tasks using git worktrees, measuring pass rate, cost, time, and consistency.
Designs and optimizes AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, observation formats, error recovery, and context for higher task completion rates.
Designs, implements, and audits WCAG 2.2 AA accessible UIs for Web (ARIA/HTML5), iOS (SwiftUI traits), and Android (Compose semantics). Audits code for compliance gaps.
This is a working reference guide for the analytical frameworks that unlock faster problem-solving in client engagements. Each framework solves a specific consulting challenge: from turning decisions into accountability, to drilling past symptoms to root causes, to structuring persuasive communication that actually drives action.
These are not theoretical models. They are tools you use in the room, in real time, with stakeholders watching. They are designed to be applied under pressure when stakes are high and time is short.
Vague agreements don't get done. "We'll improve customer experience" is not a plan. What-by-When converts fuzzy consensus into concrete commitments with owners, specific dates, and tracked dependencies. It is the framework that transforms a good meeting into actual work.
| Action | Owner | Deadline | Dependencies | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Specific, verb-driven action] | [One person, by name] | [Specific date, MM/DD/YYYY] | [Blocked by? Enables?] | [On track / At risk / Complete] |
One Owner Per Action Do not write "Finance and Operations will align on the new policy." That is not an owner. That is a committee. Committees do not own accountability; they distribute it. You need a name: "Sarah Chen (Finance) leads alignment with Ops lead Marcus." This creates friction in the room sometimes, but that friction is productive—it forces the real decision about who is accountable.
Dates Must Be Specific "Next month" is not a deadline. "ASAP" is not a deadline. "End of Q2" is not a deadline when Q2 has 13 weeks. Write MM/DD/YYYY. If a deadline is truly uncertain, write the latest defensible date and flag it as "date subject to resource availability from IT" in the dependencies column. At least it is explicit.
Dependency Tracking Every action in a sequence either "enables" or is "blocked by" something else. Before you leave the room, verify that the first action has no blockers and that later actions are sequenced properly. Nothing derails a 90-day program faster than discovering in week 3 that you needed approval from the board before you could start.
Status Tracking Cadence Do not create a What-by-When and never look at it again. Review it weekly. Any item overdue by 3+ days without explanation or revised deadline gets escalated to the sponsor. This is not punishment. It is early warning that something is stuck.
| Action | Owner | Deadline | Dependencies | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conduct customer interview study (3 weeks, 15 interviews) | Julie Martinez (Marketing) | 02/28/2025 | None—start immediately | On track |
| Compile interview findings into trend report | Julie Martinez (Marketing) | 03/07/2025 | Blocked by: customer interviews complete | On track |
| Present findings and draft strategy to leadership team | Julie Martinez + VP Marketing | 03/14/2025 | Blocked by: findings report ready | On track |
| Finance to model budget impact of three strategic options | Brian Walsh (Finance) | 03/21/2025 | Blocked by: strategy options finalized | At risk—needs data from Julie by 03/17 |
| Board to approve chosen strategy and budget | CEO + CFO | 03/28/2025 | Blocked by: Finance modeling complete, Board agenda confirmed | On track |
| Marketing operations to map talent gaps against new strategy | Marcus Lee (Ops) | 04/04/2025 | Blocked by: strategy approved, org structure decisions made | Not started—waiting on board approval |
| Schedule recruiting kick-off for open roles | HR Lead Priya Desai | 04/11/2025 | Blocked by: talent mapping complete, hiring approvals in place | Not started |
Shared Ownership: "Marketing and Sales will work together on the segmentation model." When it fails (and it will), both teams point at the other. Instead: "Sarah owns the segmentation model. She will co-design with Sales but carries the deadline."
Vague Deadlines: "We'll finalize the proposal soon." Soon is not a date. A client executive might hear "three weeks." The project lead might hear "two months." By the time they talk again, trust is already damaged.
No Follow-Up Cadence: If you build the What-by-When and walk away, it will not be maintained. Assign a program manager or sponsor to own the weekly review. Make it 15 minutes. Same time, same day, every week. By week 3, people will stop "forgetting" their deadlines.
Circular Dependencies: "A blocks B, B blocks C, C blocks A." This happens when multiple teams are working in parallel without clear sequencing. When you spot it, escalate immediately to the sponsor. It usually means the phases were not designed correctly.
A well-maintained What-by-When becomes your weekly status report. Count the number of items: on track, at risk, overdue. Track completions. When you roll this into a steering committee update, you have objective data about execution velocity. Red items automatically escalate to the committee. At-risk items show where you need help. On-track items build confidence.
Many consultants make the mistake of writing elaborate status narratives. Skip that. Show the What-by-When table. It tells the story faster and more honestly.
Every transformation looks impossible if you try to build the final state all at once. Crawl-Walk-Run breaks any initiative into three maturity stages with clear success criteria and gates between them. It makes the impossible feel inevitable.
Crawl (Months 1–3): Foundation and Minimum Viable State
Walk (Months 3–9): Scale and Optimize
Run (Months 9+): Full Capability, Continuous Improvement
Gate from Crawl to Walk Before you scale, answer these questions:
If any answer is "no," stay in Crawl. Build the missing element. Do not move to Walk hoping to fix it later.
Gate from Walk to Run Before full rollout, verify:
Never start with the full feature set or the complete process redesign. Identify the 20% of the new capability that delivers 80% of the value. In Walk, you add the next 30%. In Run, you add the rest. This buys you time to build organizational readiness while still demonstrating early wins.
Example: New procurement platform
The hard parts (strategic sourcing, supplier relationships) are saved for Run, when the organization has momentum and training is embedded.
Crawl (Jan–Mar 2025): Proof of Concept
Walk (Apr–Aug 2025): Scale and Optimize
Run (Sep 2025+): Full Capability and Continuous Improvement
The most dangerous moment is the handoff from Crawl to Walk. Executives see early progress and want to skip Walk and go straight to Run. They say, "We do not have time for a slow rollout. Roll it out to everyone now."
This almost always fails. You end up with:
Your job is to protect the gate. Show the business case for Walk: "If we roll out to the full organization now and only 40% adopt the platform, we spend the money and get no return. The two-month Walk phase costs $200K but ensures we hit the 70% adoption target we need to break even. The gate review will trigger full rollout only if Walk hits its metrics."
For transformations with significant upside or competitive advantage, consider adding a "Fly" phase:
Do not talk about Fly until Run is stable. But it is worth signaling to the organization that continuous improvement is the expectation, not a one-time project.
For detailed templates, frameworks, and field-level guidance, read:
references/structured-thinking-reference.md — Complete framework details, templates, and examplesRead this file when the task requires: