@monoes/monomindcli 2.15.2 → 2.15.4

package/org-skills/offer-design/references/scarcity-urgency.md

@@ -0,0 +1,175 @@
+# Scarcity & Urgency
+
+The reason to buy now, not later.
+
+This is the most misused offer lever in the industry. Done right, it's a meaningful conversion lift and a respect-the-buyer's-time gesture. Done wrong (fake countdown timers, lies about inventory), it converts once and torches trust permanently.
+
+The repo voice: **only ship real scarcity.** If the scarcity is fake, take it off the page.
+
+## Scarcity vs urgency
+
+| | What it limits | Examples |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Scarcity** | Quantity | Cohort size, seats, inventory, batch, capacity |
+| **Urgency** | Time | Cohort deadline, season, bonus expiry, price increase |
+
+Both work via the same mechanism — they convert "I'll think about it" into "decide now." The difference is what enforces the decision: a limit on how many, or a limit on when.
+
+---
+
+## Honest scarcity formats
+
+The bar: **the constraint has to be real.** Here are the formats that work without lying.
+
+### Capacity-based scarcity
+
+You can only deliver to N customers at a time. The next slot opens when one finishes.
+
+> "We take 2 fractional CMO engagements per quarter. Next slot opens September 15."
+
+Works for: services, agencies, coaching, consulting, anything labor-bound.
+
+### Cohort scarcity
+
+The class starts on a date. After the date, the door closes until the next cohort.
+
+> "Cohort 7 starts October 1. Doors close September 28. Next cohort: January."
+
+Works for: courses, programs, group coaching, anything synchronous.
+
+### Founding-member pricing
+
+The first N buyers get a different price. After that, the price goes up.
+
+> "Founding pricing — $497/mo for the first 50 members. After we hit 50, the price moves to $797/mo."
+
+Works for: SaaS, communities, memberships. Critical: actually raise the price when you hit 50. Otherwise it was a lie.
+
+### Inventory-based scarcity
+
+You have N units. When they're gone, they're gone.
+
+> "We're only producing 100 of the print edition. Sold out, no reprints."
+
+Works for: physical products, limited-run digital, bespoke services.
+
+### Seasonal scarcity
+
+Demand or capacity is seasonal.
+
+> "Tax-prep service for Q1 2026 closes January 15. After that, we focus on existing clients only until April."
+
+Works for: tax, retail Q4, events, education enrollment, anything calendar-bound.
+
+### Bonus expiry
+
+A bonus is available only until X date. The core offer stays the same; the *added value* expires.
+
+> "Order by Friday and the 1:1 onboarding session is included. After Friday, the offer is the same but onboarding is +$497."
+
+Works for: anything with a launch window. Critical: actually remove the bonus when the date hits.
+
+### Price-increase scheduling
+
+The price goes up on a date. Communicate it transparently.
+
+> "On November 1, the program moves from $1,997 to $2,497. Anyone enrolled before November 1 keeps the $1,997 price for life."
+
+Works for: courses, SaaS, communities. Builds credibility because the buyer can verify it later.
+
+---
+
+## Fake scarcity to avoid
+
+Pattern-match and rip these off your page:
+
+### Countdown timers that reset
+
+The timer hits 0:00 and refreshes. The buyer comes back tomorrow, same timer, same urgency. Every buyer who notices loses trust.
+
+If you use a countdown, it ends on a real date. After that date, the discount or bonus actually ends — verifiably.
+
+### "Only 3 spots left"
+
+Especially on digital products where there's no capacity constraint. Especially when the number stays at "3" for weeks.
+
+Use this only when the constraint is real (cohort, capacity, inventory) AND when the number reflects reality.
+
+### Manufactured FOMO
+
+"127 people are looking at this page right now."
+
+These can be honest on some platforms (Booking.com etc.) when they reflect actual traffic. They're dishonest when fabricated. Buyers increasingly assume fabrication.
+
+### Bonus "stacking" that's always available
+
+"This bonus expires at midnight!" — but every page on the site says the same thing at midnight every night.
+
+The bonus has to actually expire, or the line is a lie.
+
+### "Last chance" emails for things that aren't actually last chance
+
+Repeated "FINAL HOURS" emails that send weekly. Every recipient who notices unsubscribes or stops opening.
+
+Use "last chance" once. If you use it multiple times, you've taught your list that "last chance" is meaningless.
+
+---
+
+## Why fake scarcity is uniquely costly
+
+Buyers compare notes. The internet is small.
+
+- One Reddit post about a fake countdown becomes the top Google result for your brand
+- One screenshot of "only 3 left" staying at 3 for a month becomes a viral thread
+- One "last chance" email that wasn't goes into a "marketing fails" newsletter
+
+Real scarcity converts ~the same as fake scarcity at the moment of purchase. The difference shows up at month 6, when fake-scarcity offers are facing trust collapse and real-scarcity offers are still compounding.
+
+If you have to fake it, you don't have an offer-design problem — you have a value-equation problem. Go back to [value-equation.md](value-equation.md).
+
+---
+
+## When scarcity isn't needed
+
+Some offers don't need scarcity:
+
+- **Subscription products** that customers can cancel anytime — the natural friction is low enough
+- **Low-priced impulse products** ($5–30) — the deliberation is short; scarcity feels forced
+- **Premium / luxury brands** — scarcity is implicit in the positioning; explicit scarcity reads as low-status
+- **High-trust audiences** who already know they'll buy — scarcity is unnecessary friction
+
+Don't force scarcity into offers that don't need it. The forced version is worse than no scarcity.
+
+---
+
+## The diagnostic
+
+For an existing offer with weak or no scarcity:
+
+1. **Is there a real constraint?** Capacity, cohort, inventory, season, batch. Find the real one.
+2. **What's the honest version of that constraint?** Write it in plain English.
+3. **Can the buyer verify it?** If you say "founding pricing for the first 50 members," can the buyer see the count?
+4. **Are you willing to actually enforce it?** When the constraint hits, do you have the discipline to actually close the door / raise the price / remove the bonus?
+5. **Where on the page does the scarcity appear?** It should be next to the buy button, not buried.
+
+If you can't find a real constraint, don't ship scarcity. The "trick" of fake scarcity is one of the most expensive shortcuts in marketing. The honest version is usually cheaper than people think — every business has *some* real constraint (capacity, calendar, batch, attention).
+
+---
+
+## Pairing with the rest of the offer
+
+Scarcity is the final lever. It only works if the rest of the offer is strong.
+
+- Strong offer + real scarcity = the buyer decides now
+- Weak offer + scarcity = the buyer decides not to buy, faster
+
+If conversions are bad, scarcity is rarely the first thing to fix. Run the diagnostic from [value-equation.md](value-equation.md) first.
+
+The order is:
+1. Strong dream outcome
+2. Specific perceived likelihood (proof + methodology + guarantee)
+3. Compressed time delay
+4. Reduced effort & sacrifice
+5. *Then* scarcity to get the decision now
+
+Scarcity is the close, not the offer.

package/org-skills/offer-design/references/value-equation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+# The Value Equation
+
+The single most useful frame for offer design. Originated in Alex Hormozi's *$100M Offers*; the underlying idea (multiply benefits, divide costs) is much older — direct-response copywriters have been doing it for a century.
+
+## The formula
+
+```
+              Dream Outcome  ×  Perceived Likelihood of Achievement
+  Value  =  ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
+              Time Delay     ×   Effort & Sacrifice
+```
+
+The customer compares the *Value* score to the *Price*. If Value > Price, they buy. If not, they don't, no matter how good the copy is.
+
+**Price is the comparison, not the value.** Most "lower the price" requests are actually "raise the numerator or lower the denominator" requests.
+
+---
+
+## Lever 1: Dream Outcome (numerator)
+
+What the customer *actually* wants — usually one or two levels above the surface ask.
+
+### Surface ask → dream outcome
+
+| Surface ask | Dream outcome |
+|-------------|---------------|
+| "I want a website" | "I want more qualified leads I can close" |
+| "I want to learn copywriting" | "I want to write copy clients pay me $5K+ per project for" |
+| "I want a meal plan" | "I want to feel confident in a swimsuit on a beach in 12 weeks" |
+| "I want fitness coaching" | "I want my back pain gone so I can pick up my kids without thinking about it" |
+| "I want a Notion template" | "I want to feel in control of my work for the first time in years" |
+| "I want to lower CAC" | "I want a marketing engine I can step away from for two weeks without things breaking" |
+
+### How to increase
+
+- **Name it specifically.** "Feel confident in a swimsuit" beats "lose weight." The specific name is the offer.
+- **Connect to the bigger goal.** The dream outcome behind the surface ask is almost always emotional or identity-based.
+- **Show the future state in concrete sensory terms.** What does the morning of day one *after they have it* actually look like?
+
+### Common mistake
+
+Pitching the surface ask. ("Get a website" instead of "get a website that brings you 5 qualified leads a week.") The bigger the buyer's pain, the more important this is — they're not buying a deliverable, they're buying a future.
+
+---
+
+## Lever 2: Perceived Likelihood of Achievement (numerator)
+
+Do they actually believe they'll get the dream outcome? This is the single most underweighted lever — most offers are perfectly fine on the dream outcome side but the buyer just doesn't think it'll work *for them*.
+
+### How to increase
+
+- **Proof** — case studies with names, numbers, before/after metrics, photos. Specific > glossy.
+- **Methodology specificity** — name your process. "The 5-step VAULT framework" beats "our proprietary system." Even if the substance is the same, naming it raises perceived likelihood.
+- **Guarantees** — risk reversal directly raises perceived likelihood (more in [guarantee-design.md](guarantee-design.md)).
+- **Reduce sample-of-one objection** — show people *like them* who got results. "Other people get results but I'm different" is the universal objection.
+- **Pre-empt the failure path** — explicitly address what could go wrong and how you handle it. Builds trust faster than hiding the risk.
+
+### Common mistake
+
+Stacking more features ("we also include X, Y, Z") instead of stacking more proof. Features address dream outcome. Proof addresses likelihood. Most stuck offers need proof, not features.
+
+---
+
+## Lever 3: Time Delay (denominator)
+
+How long from purchase to result. The denominator is doing a lot of work here — slow results don't just feel slow, they erode perceived likelihood (the longer it takes, the less the buyer believes it'll work).
+
+### How to decrease
+
+- **Faster first win** — find the smallest possible early result and engineer it into the first 7 days
+- **Onboarding velocity** — replace a 60-minute kickoff with a 10-minute async intake + Loom send
+- **Front-load the assets** — give the templates / swipe files / decks on day 1, not "throughout the program"
+- **Faster end-to-end timeline** — "in 8 weeks" beats "in 6 months." If you can credibly compress, do.
+- **Quick-start path** — explicit "first thing to do today" so they don't lose momentum
+
+### Common mistake
+
+Promising a faster timeline than you can deliver. The first time you miss it, perceived likelihood for every future buyer drops permanently as the failure story spreads.
+
+---
+
+## Lever 4: Effort & Sacrifice (denominator)
+
+What the buyer pays *besides money* — time, learning curve, decisions, willpower, social risk, opportunity cost.
+
+### How to decrease
+
+- **Done-for-you over do-it-yourself** — DFY tiers move the effort to you. Charge accordingly.
+- **Fewer decisions** — every decision the buyer makes is friction. Bundle, default, recommend.
+- **Lower learning curve** — pre-built templates, examples, defaults. "We did the thinking, you do the executing."
+- **Removed risk** — emotional risk (am I dumb if this doesn't work?), social risk (what will my team think?), opportunity cost (what am I not doing while I do this?). Address all three explicitly.
+- **Async over live** — for many buyers (founders, executives), removing synchronous commitments is huge value
+- **Less willpower required** — automation, accountability, environmental design
+
+### Common mistake
+
+Overestimating how much your buyer *enjoys* the work. They want the outcome, not the process. (Exception: identity-buyers — fitness, learning, mastery. For those, the process *is* part of the dream outcome. Read your buyer.)
+
+---
+
+## Diagnostic: scoring the levers
+
+When an offer is stuck, score each lever 1–10 honestly. The lowest is the binding constraint.
+
+### Quick scoring prompts
+
+- **Dream outcome (1–10)**: Can the buyer picture, in concrete sensory terms, the day after this works? Is the outcome named specifically enough that they can repeat it back to a friend?
+- **Perceived likelihood (1–10)**: Do they have at least three named, comparable proof points? Is the methodology specific enough to repeat? Have you addressed the "but my situation is different" objection?
+- **Time delay (1–10)**: What's the first concrete win, and how soon do they get it? What's the end-to-end timeline? Are there any "delay surfaces" (onboarding lag, asset drip, week-1 friction)?
+- **Effort & sacrifice (1–10)**: How much work does the buyer do? How many decisions? How much learning curve? How much synchronous time? How much emotional/social/opportunity-cost risk?
+
+### Worked example: a stuck $3K copywriting course
+
+Initial scoring:
+- Dream outcome: 6 (`become a better copywriter` — too vague)
+- Perceived likelihood: 4 (one testimonial, no methodology name)
+- Time delay: 5 (6-month course, no first-win mechanic)
+- Effort & sacrifice: 4 (lots of homework, live calls, weekly assignments)
+
+Lowest: effort & sacrifice and perceived likelihood are tied. Pick one (perceived likelihood — easier to move and unblocks more downstream work):
+
+- Name the methodology: "The VAULT framework — 5 angles every winning sales page uses"
+- Add 8 named-customer case studies with before/after copy + revenue numbers
+- Add an "even if you've never written before" cohort with 3 named graduates
+
+After: perceived likelihood goes 4 → 8. Course converts at ~3x baseline. Two months later, attack effort & sacrifice (replace weekly live calls with async + 1 live Q&A).
+
+---
+
+## Key idea to internalize
+
+**The price-vs-value comparison happens in the buyer's head, not yours.** You only know it's working when the buyer can articulate the dream outcome back to you in their own words, and when they don't need to ask "but does this actually work?"
+
+If they're asking either of those questions, you have a value equation problem, not a copy problem.

package/org-skills/onboarding-cro/LICENSE.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2025 Corey Haines
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

package/org-skills/onboarding-cro/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,264 @@
+---
+name: onboarding-cro
+description: "When the user wants to optimize post-signup onboarding, user activation, first-run experience, or time-to-value."
+tags: ["product","marketing","design"]
+tools: []
+license: MIT
+source: https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills
+source_path: "skills/onboarding"
+source_commit: 5b2c0007766c6a1cf1d53fd8fc73e979e0821022
+---
+# Onboarding CRO
+
+You are an expert in user onboarding and activation. Your goal is to help users reach their "aha moment" as quickly as possible and establish habits that lead to long-term retention.
+
+## Initial Assessment
+
+**Check for product marketing context first:**
+If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
+
+Before providing recommendations, understand:
+
+1. **Product Context** - What type of product? B2B or B2C? Core value proposition?
+2. **Activation Definition** - What's the "aha moment"? What action indicates a user "gets it"?
+3. **Current State** - What happens after signup? Where do users drop off?
+
+---
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### 1. Time-to-Value Is Everything
+Remove every step between signup and experiencing core value. Design the **Minimum Path to Value (MPTV)** — the least number of steps to experience enough value to make a confident decision (see [references/minimum-path-to-value.md](references/minimum-path-to-value.md)).
+
+### 2. One Goal Per Session
+Focus first session on one successful outcome. Save advanced features for later.
+
+### 3. Do, Don't Show
+Interactive > Tutorial. Doing the thing > Learning about the thing.
+
+### 4. Progress Creates Motivation
+Show advancement. Celebrate completions. Make the path visible. (See onboarding psychology below for the mechanisms.)
+
+---
+
+## Onboarding Psychology
+
+The principles that make progress mechanics, checklists, and prompts actually work:
+
+- **Endowed Progress Effect** — people finish faster when progress is already started for them. A checklist that opens at "20% done" (a step pre-completed on their behalf) drives roughly **+40% completion** vs. starting at 0%. Give users a head start, don't make them start from nothing.
+- **Peak-End Rule** — users remember an experience by its most intense moment (the *peak*) and its *end*, not the average. Engineer a clear high point (a win, a wow, a celebration) and end each session on a positive note.
+- **Goldilocks Rule** — motivation peaks when a task is neither too easy nor too hard, but *just right* on the edge of ability. Tune early steps so they're achievable but not trivial.
+- **BJ Fogg Behavior Model** — a behavior happens only when **Motivation × Ability × Prompt** converge at the same moment. If a step isn't happening, one of the three is missing: raise motivation, make it easier (Ability), or add a better-timed Prompt.
+- **Mario Kart boosters & blockers** (Ramli John) — treat onboarding like a race track. Add **boosters** (accelerants: pre-filled data, templates, quick wins, celebrations) and remove **blockers** (friction: required fields, dead ends, confusing empty states). Speed users toward value and clear obstacles from the lane.
+
+## Onboarding Toolkit (10 Components)
+
+The components you assemble an onboarding experience from. Use the fewest that reach value:
+
+| Component | Purpose |
+|-----------|---------|
+| Welcome forms | Capture role/goal to personalize the path (keep short — Hick's Law) |
+| Initial screens | First-run screens that orient and point to one clear action |
+| Drip emails | Multi-touch nurture — **one concept per email**, don't overload |
+| Skippable tutorials | Optional guidance users can bypass — never trap them |
+| Videos | Show complex workflows visually |
+| Docs / help center | Self-serve reference for when users get stuck |
+| Onboarding calls | Human touch for complex or high-value accounts |
+| Data inputs | Getting the user's real data in so value feels "real" |
+| Checklists | Ordered, value-first steps with visible progress (see below) |
+| Empty states | Guided first-action opportunities, not dead ends (see below) |
+
+---
+
+## Defining Activation
+
+**Judge activation by lead→customer conversion + 90-day retention, not lead volume.** More signups mean nothing if they don't convert and stick.
+
+Choose an **activation model** (freemium, free trial, paid trial, money-back, consultation) before designing the flow — the model shapes the whole onboarding path. See [references/activation-models.md](references/activation-models.md) for the 5 models, the credit-card tradeoff, Model-Market Fit, and the Evernote-vs-Notion parable.
+
+### Find Your Aha Moment
+
+The action that correlates most strongly with retention:
+- What do retained users do that churned users don't?
+- What's the earliest indicator of future engagement?
+
+**Examples by product type:**
+- Project management: Create first project + add team member
+- Analytics: Install tracking + see first report
+- Design tool: Create first design + export/share
+- Marketplace: Complete first transaction
+
+### Activation Metrics
+- % of signups who reach activation
+- Time to activation
+- Steps to activation
+- Activation by cohort/source
+
+---
+
+## Onboarding Flow Design
+
+### Immediate Post-Signup (First 30 Seconds)
+
+| Approach | Best For | Risk |
+|----------|----------|------|
+| Product-first | Simple products, B2C, mobile | Blank slate overwhelm |
+| Guided setup | Products needing personalization | Adds friction before value |
+| Value-first | Products with demo data | May not feel "real" |
+
+**Whatever you choose:**
+- Clear single next action
+- No dead ends
+- Progress indication if multi-step
+
+### Onboarding Checklist Pattern
+
+**When to use:**
+- Multiple setup steps required
+- Product has several features to discover
+- Self-serve B2B products
+
+**Best practices:**
+- 3-7 items (not overwhelming)
+- Order by value (most impactful first)
+- Start with quick wins
+- Progress bar/completion %
+- Celebration on completion
+- Dismiss option (don't trap users)
+
+### Empty States
+
+Empty states are onboarding opportunities, not dead ends.
+
+**Good empty state:**
+- Explains what this area is for
+- Shows what it looks like with data
+- Clear primary action to add first item
+- Optional: Pre-populate with example data
+
+### Tooltips and Guided Tours
+
+**When to use:** Complex UI, features that aren't self-evident, power features users might miss
+
+**Best practices:**
+- Max 3-5 steps per tour
+- Dismissable at any time
+- Don't repeat for returning users
+
+---
+
+## Multi-Channel Onboarding
+
+### Email + In-App Coordination
+
+**Trigger-based emails:**
+- Welcome email (immediate)
+- Incomplete onboarding (24h, 72h)
+- Activation achieved (celebration + next step)
+- Feature discovery (days 3, 7, 14)
+
+**Email should:**
+- Reinforce in-app actions, not duplicate them
+- Drive back to product with specific CTA
+- Be personalized based on actions taken
+
+---
+
+## Handling Stalled Users
+
+### Detection
+Define "stalled" criteria (X days inactive, incomplete setup)
+
+### Re-engagement Tactics
+
+1. **Email sequence** - Reminder of value, address blockers, offer help
+2. **In-app recovery** - Welcome back, pick up where left off
+3. **Human touch** - For high-value accounts, personal outreach
+
+---
+
+## Measurement
+
+### Key Metrics
+
+| Metric | Description |
+|--------|-------------|
+| Activation rate | % reaching activation event |
+| Time to activation | How long to first value |
+| Onboarding completion | % completing setup |
+| Day 1/7/30 retention | Return rate by timeframe |
+
+### Funnel Analysis
+
+Track drop-off at each step:
+```
+Signup → Step 1 → Step 2 → Activation → Retention
+100%      80%       60%       40%         25%
+```
+
+Identify biggest drops and focus there.
+
+---
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Onboarding Audit
+For each issue: Finding → Impact → Recommendation → Priority
+
+### Onboarding Flow Design
+- Activation goal
+- Step-by-step flow
+- Checklist items (if applicable)
+- Empty state copy
+- Email sequence triggers
+- Metrics plan
+
+---
+
+## Common Patterns by Product Type
+
+| Product Type | Key Steps |
+|--------------|-----------|
+| B2B SaaS | Setup wizard → First value action → Team invite → Deep setup |
+| Marketplace | Complete profile → Browse → First transaction → Repeat loop |
+| Mobile App | Permissions → Quick win → Push setup → Habit loop |
+| Content Platform | Follow/customize → Consume → Create → Engage |
+
+---
+
+## Experiment Ideas
+
+When recommending experiments, consider tests for:
+- Flow simplification (step count, ordering)
+- Progress and motivation mechanics
+- Personalization by role or goal
+- Support and help availability
+
+**For comprehensive experiment ideas**: See [references/experiments.md](references/experiments.md)
+
+---
+
+## References
+
+- **[references/minimum-path-to-value.md](references/minimum-path-to-value.md)** — MPTV, Hick's Law, the inventory→remove→reconstruct process, abandonment benchmarks (40–60% after one session; 75–80% within day one), and patterns (Stripe, Calendly, Notion).
+- **[references/activation-models.md](references/activation-models.md)** — the 5 activation models, credit-card tradeoff, Model-Market Fit, Evernote vs. Notion.
+- **[references/experiments.md](references/experiments.md)** — comprehensive A/B test and experiment ideas.
+
+---
+
+## Task-Specific Questions
+
+1. What action most correlates with retention?
+2. What happens immediately after signup?
+3. Where do users currently drop off?
+4. What's your activation rate target?
+5. Do you have cohort analysis on successful vs. churned users?
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+- **signup**: For optimizing the signup before onboarding
+- **emails**: For onboarding email series
+- **paywalls**: For converting to paid during/after onboarding
+- **ab-testing**: For testing onboarding changes

package/org-skills/onboarding-cro/references/activation-models.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# Activation Models
+
+The activation model is *how* you let a user experience value before they pay. It shapes signup volume, conversion, and the entire onboarding path. Pick the model before you design the flow.
+
+## The 5 activation models
+
+### 1. Freemium
+A free tier that never expires, with paid tiers for more capacity or features.
+
+- Best when: the free tier delivers real value *and* naturally hits limits that motivate upgrading.
+- Risk: give away too much and users never need to pay (see Evernote below).
+
+### 2. Free trial
+Full (or near-full) access for a fixed window: **3, 7, 14, or 30 days**.
+
+- Shorter trials create urgency and force faster time-to-value; longer trials suit complex products with longer setup.
+- **Credit-card requirement is the key lever**: requiring a card up front **cuts signups by 50–70%**, but the users who do sign up **convert 2–3× better**. Fewer, higher-intent leads vs. more, lower-intent leads — choose based on your funnel goals.
+
+### 3. Paid trial
+A low-cost paid entry, typically **$7–10 for 7 days**.
+
+- Filters out tire-kickers while lowering the barrier vs. full price.
+- Signals seriousness on both sides and pre-collects payment details.
+
+### 4. Money-back guarantee
+Charge full price up front, with a no-questions refund window.
+
+- Removes purchase risk without giving anything away for free.
+- Works when the product delivers value quickly enough to beat the refund window.
+
+### 5. Consultation / white-glove
+A human conversation (demo, call, or hands-on setup) gates access — the **Superhuman** model.
+
+- Best for high-touch, high-price, or complex products where a human ensures the user reaches value.
+- Doesn't scale cheaply, but converts and retains well when done right.
+
+## Model-Market Fit
+
+**Model-Market Fit (Brian Balfour): "your market dictates your model."**
+
+You don't get to freely choose your activation model — your market chooses it for you. Price point, buyer sophistication, sales complexity, time-to-value, and competitor norms all constrain what will work. A self-serve $20/mo tool and a $50k enterprise platform cannot use the same model. Match the model to the market before optimizing the onboarding inside it.
+
+## The Evernote vs. Notion parable
+
+Two lessons on how much to give away:
+
+- **Evernote — gave away too much free.** The free tier was generous enough that most users never needed to upgrade. Free was a destination, not a doorway. Growth without matching monetization.
+- **Notion — hook, then limit.** Let users experience real value, then hit meaningful limits (blocks, members, features) that create a natural, well-timed reason to pay.
+
+The principle: **the free experience should hook, not satisfy.** Give enough value to prove the product and build the habit — but structure the limits so that continued value requires upgrading.
+
+## Choosing
+
+1. Start from your market (Model-Market Fit), not your preference.
+2. Decide the card-vs-no-card tradeoff explicitly: volume of leads vs. quality of leads.
+3. Design the free/trial experience to hook and then limit — never to fully satisfy.
+4. Whatever the model, the onboarding inside it still needs the shortest possible path to value (see [minimum-path-to-value.md](minimum-path-to-value.md)).