agentic-team-templates 0.19.1 → 0.20.0

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "agentic-team-templates",
-  "version": "0.19.1",
+  "version": "0.20.0",
   "description": "AI coding assistant templates for Cursor IDE. Pre-configured rules and guidelines that help AI assistants write better code. - use at your own risk",
   "keywords": [
     "cursor",

package/src/index.js

@@ -75,11 +75,21 @@ const TEMPLATES = {
     description: 'World-class pedagogy with evidence-based teaching, learning retention, gamification, and assessment design',
     rules: ['accessibility.md', 'assessment.md', 'curriculum.md', 'engagement.md', 'instructional-design.md', 'overview.md', 'retention.md']
   },
+  'executive-assistant': {
+    category: 'professional',
+    description: 'Executive support with calendar optimization, communication management, meeting coordination, and priority triage',
+    rules: ['calendar.md', 'confidentiality.md', 'email.md', 'meetings.md', 'overview.md', 'prioritization.md', 'stakeholder-management.md', 'travel.md']
+  },
   'fullstack': {
     category: 'engineering',
     description: 'Full-stack web applications (Next.js, Nuxt, SvelteKit, Remix)',
     rules: ['api-contracts.md', 'architecture.md', 'overview.md', 'shared-types.md', 'testing.md']
   },
+  'grant-writer': {
+    category: 'professional',
+    description: 'Grant writing with proposal development, budget justification, compliance management, and post-award stewardship',
+    rules: ['budgets.md', 'compliance.md', 'funding-research.md', 'narrative.md', 'overview.md', 'post-award.md', 'review-criteria.md', 'sustainability.md']
+  },
   'golang-expert': {
     category: 'languages',
     description: 'Principal-level Go engineering (concurrency, stdlib, production patterns, testing)',
@@ -120,6 +130,11 @@ const TEMPLATES = {
     description: 'Product management with customer-centric discovery, prioritization, and execution',
     rules: ['communication.md', 'discovery.md', 'metrics.md', 'overview.md', 'prioritization.md', 'requirements.md']
   },
+  'project-manager': {
+    category: 'business',
+    description: 'Project management with WBS planning, risk management, status reporting, and change control',
+    rules: ['overview.md', 'reporting.md', 'risk-management.md', 'scheduling.md', 'scope-management.md', 'stakeholder-management.md']
+  },
   'python-expert': {
     category: 'languages',
     description: 'Principal-level Python engineering (type system, async, testing, FastAPI, Django)',
@@ -135,6 +150,11 @@ const TEMPLATES = {
     description: 'Principal-level Rust engineering (ownership, concurrency, unsafe, traits, async)',
     rules: ['concurrency.md', 'ecosystem-and-tooling.md', 'error-handling.md', 'overview.md', 'ownership-and-borrowing.md', 'performance-and-unsafe.md', 'testing.md', 'traits-and-generics.md']
   },
+  'supply-chain': {
+    category: 'business',
+    description: 'Supply chain management with inventory optimization, demand forecasting, supplier evaluation, and logistics',
+    rules: ['cost-modeling.md', 'demand-forecasting.md', 'inventory-management.md', 'logistics.md', 'overview.md', 'supplier-evaluation.md']
+  },
   'swift-expert': {
     category: 'languages',
     description: 'Principal-level Swift engineering (concurrency, SwiftUI, protocols, testing, Apple platforms)',

package/src/index.test.js

@@ -87,8 +87,10 @@ describe('Constants', () => {
         'devops-sre',
         'documentation',
         'educator',
+        'executive-assistant',
         'fullstack',
         'golang-expert',
+        'grant-writer',
         'java-expert',
         'javascript-expert',
         'kotlin-expert',
@@ -96,9 +98,11 @@ describe('Constants', () => {
         'mobile',
         'platform-engineering',
         'product-manager',
+        'project-manager',
         'python-expert',
         'qa-engineering',
         'rust-expert',
+        'supply-chain',
         'swift-expert',
         'testing',
         'utility-agent',

package/templates/business/project-manager/.cursor/rules/overview.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+# Project Management
+
+Principal-level guidelines for disciplined project planning and execution.
+
+## Scope
+
+This ruleset applies to:
+
+- Project initiation and charter development
+- Scope management and WBS creation
+- Risk and issue tracking (RAID logs)
+- Schedule planning and critical path management
+- Team coordination and resource allocation
+- Status reporting and dashboards
+- Change control processes
+- Lessons learned and project closure
+
+## Core Philosophy
+
+**Projects succeed through disciplined planning, transparent communication, and rigorous scope control.** Every project artifact should trace back to the charter's objectives and success criteria.
+
+## Fundamental Principles
+
+### 1. Plan Before Executing
+
+Invest time in upfront planning. A well-decomposed WBS prevents scope creep and estimation failures downstream.
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: "Let's just start building and figure it out as we go"
+Right: "Let's decompose the scope into work packages before we estimate or schedule"
+```
+
+### 2. Guard the Baseline
+
+Once the scope, schedule, and budget baselines are set, all changes go through formal change control. No exceptions.
+
+### 3. Risks Are Managed, Not Ignored
+
+Identify risks early, assess them objectively, plan responses, and track them weekly. A risk register is a living document.
+
+### 4. Communicate Relentlessly
+
+Stakeholder misalignment is the most common cause of project failure. Over-communicate status, risks, and decisions.
+
+### 5. Measure Progress Objectively
+
+Use earned value metrics and milestone tracking, not gut feelings, to assess project health.
+
+## Project Structure
+
+```text
+project/
+├── initiation/
+│   ├── charter.md                # Project charter
+│   ├── stakeholder-register.md   # Stakeholder analysis
+│   └── business-case.md          # Justification
+├── planning/
+│   ├── wbs.md                    # Work breakdown structure
+│   ├── schedule.md               # Timeline and milestones
+│   ├── raci.md                   # Responsibility matrix
+│   ├── risk-register.md          # Risk register
+│   ├── communication-plan.md     # Stakeholder comms plan
+│   └── change-control.md         # Change management process
+├── execution/
+│   ├── status-reports/           # Weekly status reports
+│   ├── meeting-notes/            # Meeting minutes
+│   └── deliverables/             # Work products
+├── monitoring/
+│   ├── raid-log.md               # Risks, assumptions, issues, dependencies
+│   ├── change-requests/          # Formal change requests
+│   └── dashboards/               # Project dashboards
+└── closure/
+    ├── lessons-learned.md        # Retrospective findings
+    ├── final-report.md           # Project closure report
+    └── archive/                  # Archived documentation
+```
+
+## Decision Framework
+
+When evaluating any project decision:
+
+1. **Scope Impact**: Does this change the project baseline?
+2. **Risk Exposure**: Does this introduce or increase risk?
+3. **Stakeholder Alignment**: Have affected parties been consulted?
+4. **Resource Availability**: Do we have the capacity to execute?
+5. **Trade-off Transparency**: What are we giving up to do this?
+
+## Communication Standards
+
+- Lead status reports with the overall RAG status
+- Quantify impacts (days delayed, dollars at risk) rather than using vague language
+- Escalate early with proposed solutions, not just problems
+- Document all decisions with rationale and participants
+- Tailor communication depth to audience (executives get summaries, teams get details)

package/templates/business/project-manager/.cursor/rules/reporting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
+# Status Reporting
+
+Guidelines for transparent, actionable project reporting and dashboards.
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### Report for Decisions, Not Documentation
+
+Every report should enable a decision or action. If nobody will act on the information, do not include it.
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: 500-word narrative describing what happened last week
+Right: RAG status with specific metrics, blockers, and decisions needed
+```
+
+### Bad News Early
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: Report GREEN → GREEN → GREEN → suddenly RED
+Right: Report GREEN → AMBER (with mitigation plan) → back to GREEN
+```
+
+## RAG Status Framework
+
+### Definitions
+
+| Status | Definition | Criteria |
+|--------|------------|----------|
+| GREEN | On track | Schedule, budget, scope, and quality within tolerance |
+| AMBER | At risk | One or more areas approaching tolerance limits; PM-level action in progress |
+| RED | Off track | One or more areas beyond tolerance; sponsor/steering committee intervention needed |
+
+### Tolerance Thresholds
+
+| Dimension | GREEN | AMBER | RED |
+|-----------|-------|-------|-----|
+| Schedule | Within 5% of plan | 5-15% deviation | > 15% deviation |
+| Budget | Within 5% of plan | 5-10% deviation | > 10% deviation |
+| Scope | No uncontrolled changes | Minor changes under review | Significant uncontrolled changes |
+| Quality | All criteria met | Some criteria at risk | Critical criteria failing |
+| Resources | Fully staffed | Minor gaps with mitigation | Key roles unfilled |
+
+### When to Change Status
+
+```markdown
+GREEN → AMBER:
+- A risk trigger has fired but mitigation is underway
+- A dependency is at risk but alternatives exist
+- Schedule slippage is within buffer but trending
+
+AMBER → RED:
+- Mitigation is not working
+- Critical path is impacted with no recovery plan
+- Budget overrun exceeds contingency
+- Key stakeholder escalation is needed
+
+RED → AMBER:
+- Recovery plan is approved and in progress
+- Key blocker is resolved
+- Additional resources secured
+
+AMBER → GREEN:
+- Risk has been mitigated or retired
+- Schedule recovered to within tolerance
+- Issue resolved with no lasting impact
+```
+
+## Weekly Status Report
+
+### Structure
+
+```markdown
+## Project Status: [Project Name]
+**Period**: [Date Range] | **PM**: [Name] | **Overall**: GREEN/AMBER/RED
+
+### Executive Summary
+[2-3 sentences maximum. Lead with the most important item.]
+
+### Status by Dimension
+| Dimension | Status | Trend | Commentary |
+|-----------|--------|-------|------------|
+| Schedule | GREEN | → | On track for March milestone |
+| Budget | AMBER | ↓ | Vendor costs 8% above estimate; negotiating |
+| Scope | GREEN | → | No change requests this period |
+| Quality | GREEN | ↑ | Defect rate declining |
+| Resources | GREEN | → | Team fully staffed |
+
+### Key Accomplishments
+1. [Deliverable/milestone completed]
+2. [Risk resolved or mitigated]
+
+### Planned Activities (Next Period)
+1. [Key activity and expected outcome]
+2. [Key activity and expected outcome]
+
+### Risks & Issues (Top 3)
+| ID | Type | Description | Impact | Owner | Action |
+|----|------|-------------|--------|-------|--------|
+| R-003 | Risk | [Description] | Schedule +1wk | [Name] | [Action] |
+| I-007 | Issue | [Description] | Quality | [Name] | [Action] |
+
+### Milestones
+| Milestone | Baseline | Forecast | Variance | Status |
+|-----------|----------|----------|----------|--------|
+| Design Review | Mar 15 | Mar 15 | 0 days | GREEN |
+| Dev Complete | Apr 30 | May 7 | +7 days | AMBER |
+| Go-Live | Jun 1 | Jun 1 | 0 days | GREEN |
+
+### Decisions Needed
+1. [Decision]: [Context] - Needed by [Date]
+
+### Budget Summary
+| Category | Budget | Spent | Forecast | Variance |
+|----------|--------|-------|----------|----------|
+| Internal Labor | $50K | $22K | $48K | -$2K |
+| External Vendor | $30K | $18K | $33K | +$3K |
+| **Total** | **$80K** | **$40K** | **$81K** | **+$1K** |
+```
+
+## Milestone Tracking
+
+### Milestone Report
+
+```text
+Milestone Timeline (Visual)
+
+Q1 2025                    Q2 2025
+Jan     Feb     Mar       Apr     May     Jun
+─────────────────────────────────────────────────
+  ◆ Kickoff                ◆ Dev Complete
+          ◆ Design Review          ◆ UAT Complete
+                  ◆ Dev Start              ◆ Go-Live
+
+◆ = On Track    ◇ = At Risk    ○ = Missed    ● = Complete
+```
+
+### Milestone Health Rules
+
+| Scenario | Status | Action |
+|----------|--------|--------|
+| On track, no blockers | GREEN | Continue monitoring |
+| Predecessor delayed, but float exists | GREEN | Monitor float consumption |
+| Predecessor delayed, float consumed | AMBER | Escalate; identify acceleration options |
+| Critical path milestone at risk | RED | Recovery plan required immediately |
+| Milestone missed | RED | Re-baseline with sponsor approval |
+
+## Earned Value Management
+
+### Core Metrics
+
+```text
+Example: Project budget $100K, 10-month duration, end of Month 5
+
+Planned Value (PV):    $50K  (50% of work should be done)
+Earned Value (EV):     $45K  (45% of work is done)
+Actual Cost (AC):      $55K  (spent $55K so far)
+
+Schedule Variance:     EV - PV = $45K - $50K = -$5K (behind schedule)
+Cost Variance:         EV - AC = $45K - $55K = -$10K (over budget)
+SPI:                   EV / PV = 0.90 (90% schedule efficiency)
+CPI:                   EV / AC = 0.82 (82% cost efficiency)
+EAC:                   BAC / CPI = $100K / 0.82 = $122K (projected total cost)
+```
+
+### EVM Interpretation Guide
+
+| Metric | Good | Warning | Bad |
+|--------|------|---------|-----|
+| SPI | > 1.0 | 0.9 - 1.0 | < 0.9 |
+| CPI | > 1.0 | 0.9 - 1.0 | < 0.9 |
+| SV | Positive | Slightly negative | Significantly negative |
+| CV | Positive | Slightly negative | Significantly negative |
+
+### When to Use EVM
+
+- Projects with defined budgets and schedules
+- Multi-month projects where trends matter
+- Executive reporting that requires objectivity
+- Projects with contractual cost/schedule obligations
+
+## Executive Summaries
+
+### One-Page Executive Summary
+
+```markdown
+## [Project Name] - Executive Status
+
+**Overall**: GREEN/AMBER/RED | **Date**: [Date] | **PM**: [Name]
+
+### Bottom Line
+[One sentence: project state and most critical item]
+
+### Key Metrics
+| Metric | Value | Target | Status |
+|--------|-------|--------|--------|
+| Schedule (SPI) | 0.95 | 1.0 | AMBER |
+| Budget (CPI) | 1.02 | 1.0 | GREEN |
+| Scope | 0 open CRs | < 3 | GREEN |
+
+### Top Risk
+[One sentence describing the highest-priority risk and its response]
+
+### Decision Needed
+[One sentence describing the decision, options, and deadline]
+
+### Next Milestone
+[Milestone name] - [Date] - [Status]
+```
+
+### Audience-Specific Reporting
+
+| Audience | Content | Detail Level | Frequency |
+|----------|---------|--------------|-----------|
+| Steering Committee | Strategic status, decisions, escalations | High-level | Monthly |
+| Sponsor | Overall health, risks, budget | Summary | Weekly |
+| Project Team | Tasks, blockers, dependencies | Detailed | Daily/Weekly |
+| PMO | Portfolio-level metrics | Standardized | Monthly |
+| External Stakeholders | Milestones, deliverables | Curated | As agreed |
+
+## Dashboard Design
+
+### Dashboard Structure
+
+```text
+Project Dashboard
+┌──────────────────────────────────────────────┐
+│ Overall Status: [RAG]  |  SPI: X  |  CPI: X │
+├──────────────────────────────────────────────┤
+│ Milestone Timeline (Gantt/visual)            │
+├──────────────┬───────────────────────────────┤
+│ Budget       │ Risks & Issues               │
+│ - Planned    │ - Top 3 risks                │
+│ - Actual     │ - Open issues                │
+│ - Forecast   │ - Trending                   │
+├──────────────┴───────────────────────────────┤
+│ Team Velocity / Throughput                   │
+└──────────────────────────────────────────────┘
+```
+
+### Dashboard Anti-Patterns
+
+| Anti-Pattern | Problem | Fix |
+|--------------|---------|-----|
+| Too many metrics | Information overload | Focus on 5-7 key metrics |
+| No context | Numbers without meaning | Include targets and trends |
+| Stale data | Decisions based on old info | Automate updates; show "as of" date |
+| Vanity metrics | Impressive but not actionable | Every metric should inform a decision |
+| Missing trends | Can't see direction of change | Include trend arrows or sparklines |
+
+## Common Pitfalls
+
+| Pitfall | Symptom | Solution |
+|---------|---------|----------|
+| Watermelon reporting | Green on outside, red inside | Mandate dimension-level RAG, not just overall |
+| Report without action | Reports filed, never discussed | Require "Decisions Needed" section |
+| Inconsistent format | Every PM reports differently | Standardize templates across the PMO |
+| Too much detail for executives | Eyes glaze over | Separate executive summary from detailed report |
+| No trend tracking | Can't see if things are getting better or worse | Include trend indicators on every metric |
+| Reporting effort exceeds value | PM spends Friday writing reports | Automate where possible; keep reports concise |

package/templates/business/project-manager/.cursor/rules/risk-management.md

@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+# Risk Management
+
+Guidelines for identifying, assessing, and responding to project risks.
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### Risk vs. Issue
+
+| Concept | Definition | Action |
+|---------|------------|--------|
+| **Risk** | Uncertain event that may occur in the future | Plan a response before it happens |
+| **Issue** | Problem that has already occurred | Resolve it now |
+
+A risk becomes an issue when it materializes. Good risk management prevents most issues.
+
+### Proactive Over Reactive
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: Wait for problems to appear, then firefight
+Right: Identify potential problems early, plan responses, monitor triggers
+```
+
+## Risk Identification
+
+### Identification Techniques
+
+| Technique | Description | When to Use |
+|-----------|-------------|-------------|
+| Brainstorming | Team generates risks freely | Project kickoff |
+| Checklist review | Review common risk categories | Every phase gate |
+| Expert interviews | Consult experienced stakeholders | Complex or novel projects |
+| Assumption analysis | Test each assumption for risk | Planning phase |
+| SWOT analysis | Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats | Strategic projects |
+| Lessons learned review | Check past project risks | Similar projects |
+
+### Risk Categories
+
+```text
+Project Risks
+├── Technical
+│   ├── Technology maturity
+│   ├── Integration complexity
+│   └── Performance requirements
+├── External
+│   ├── Vendor reliability
+│   ├── Regulatory changes
+│   └── Market conditions
+├── Organizational
+│   ├── Resource availability
+│   ├── Stakeholder alignment
+│   └── Funding stability
+├── Project Management
+│   ├── Estimation accuracy
+│   ├── Scope definition
+│   └── Communication gaps
+└── Quality
+    ├── Requirements completeness
+    ├── Testing coverage
+    └── Acceptance criteria clarity
+```
+
+### Risk Statement Format
+
+```markdown
+Good: "Due to [cause], [risk event] may occur, resulting in [impact]."
+
+Example: "Due to the vendor's limited track record with our platform,
+the integration may require additional custom development,
+resulting in a 3-week schedule delay and $15K additional cost."
+
+Bad: "Vendor might be late." (No cause, no specific impact)
+```
+
+## Risk Assessment
+
+### Qualitative Analysis
+
+**Probability Scale:**
+| Rating | Label | Description |
+|--------|-------|-------------|
+| 5 | Almost Certain | > 80% likelihood |
+| 4 | Likely | 60-80% |
+| 3 | Possible | 40-60% |
+| 2 | Unlikely | 20-40% |
+| 1 | Rare | < 20% |
+
+**Impact Scale:**
+| Rating | Label | Schedule | Budget | Quality |
+|--------|-------|----------|--------|---------|
+| 5 | Critical | > 4 weeks delay | > 20% overrun | Unacceptable to sponsor |
+| 4 | Major | 2-4 weeks delay | 10-20% overrun | Major rework required |
+| 3 | Moderate | 1-2 weeks delay | 5-10% overrun | Significant rework |
+| 2 | Minor | < 1 week delay | < 5% overrun | Minor rework |
+| 1 | Negligible | < 1 day delay | < 1% overrun | Cosmetic only |
+
+**Risk Score = Probability x Impact**
+
+### Risk Priority Matrix
+
+```text
+              Impact
+              1    2    3    4    5
+Probability
+    5       │  5 │ 10 │ 15 │ 20 │ 25 │  ← Immediate action
+    4       │  4 │  8 │ 12 │ 16 │ 20 │  ← Active management
+    3       │  3 │  6 │  9 │ 12 │ 15 │  ← Monitor closely
+    2       │  2 │  4 │  6 │  8 │ 10 │  ← Watch list
+    1       │  1 │  2 │  3 │  4 │  5 │  ← Accept and monitor
+```
+
+| Score Range | Priority | Review Frequency |
+|-------------|----------|------------------|
+| 15-25 | Critical | Daily |
+| 10-14 | High | Twice weekly |
+| 5-9 | Medium | Weekly |
+| 1-4 | Low | Bi-weekly |
+
+### Quantitative Analysis (When Warranted)
+
+For high-value projects, use:
+
+- **Expected Monetary Value (EMV)**: Probability x Dollar Impact
+- **Three-Point Estimate**: (Optimistic + 4 x Most Likely + Pessimistic) / 6
+- **Monte Carlo Simulation**: Model schedule and cost uncertainty
+
+## Risk Response Strategies
+
+### For Threats (Negative Risks)
+
+| Strategy | Description | Example |
+|----------|-------------|---------|
+| **Avoid** | Change plan to eliminate risk | Use proven technology instead of experimental |
+| **Transfer** | Shift impact to third party | Fixed-price contract with vendor, insurance |
+| **Mitigate** | Reduce probability or impact | Cross-train team members, add prototyping phase |
+| **Accept (Active)** | Set aside contingency | Reserve budget and schedule buffer |
+| **Accept (Passive)** | Acknowledge and do nothing | Document for awareness only |
+| **Escalate** | Beyond PM's authority | Raise to sponsor or steering committee |
+
+### For Opportunities (Positive Risks)
+
+| Strategy | Description | Example |
+|----------|-------------|---------|
+| **Exploit** | Ensure opportunity is realized | Assign best resources to critical tasks |
+| **Enhance** | Increase probability or impact | Invest in training to accelerate delivery |
+| **Share** | Partner with others to capture benefit | Joint venture for new market |
+| **Accept** | Take advantage if it occurs | No special action needed |
+
+### Response Planning Template
+
+```markdown
+## Risk Response: [R-XXX]
+
+**Risk**: [Description]
+**Strategy**: [Avoid/Transfer/Mitigate/Accept/Escalate]
+
+**Response Actions**:
+1. [Action 1] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
+2. [Action 2] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
+
+**Trigger**: [What indicates this risk is materializing]
+
+**Contingency Plan**: [What to do if risk occurs despite response]
+
+**Residual Risk**: [Risk remaining after response is implemented]
+```
+
+## Risk Register
+
+### Register Template
+
+| ID | Risk | Category | Prob | Impact | Score | Strategy | Response | Owner | Trigger | Status |
+|----|------|----------|------|--------|-------|----------|----------|-------|---------|--------|
+| R-001 | [Description] | Technical | 4 | 3 | 12 | Mitigate | [Action] | [Name] | [Trigger] | Open |
+
+### Risk Review Cadence
+
+```text
+Weekly Risk Review (15 min in team standup):
+├── Review open risks and status
+├── Check for new risks
+├── Assess if any triggers have fired
+└── Update scores based on new information
+
+Monthly Risk Deep-Dive (30 min):
+├── Re-assess all risk scores
+├── Review effectiveness of responses
+├── Identify emerging risk patterns
+└── Update risk register and report to sponsor
+```
+
+## Issue Escalation
+
+### Escalation Framework
+
+```text
+Level 1: Team Level
+├── PM and team attempt resolution
+├── Timeframe: 1-2 business days
+└── Example: Task dependency conflict
+
+Level 2: Functional Management
+├── Escalate to department heads
+├── Timeframe: 3-5 business days
+└── Example: Resource conflict between projects
+
+Level 3: Sponsor/Steering Committee
+├── Escalate to project sponsor
+├── Timeframe: Requires decision within 1 week
+└── Example: Budget increase needed, major scope change
+
+Level 4: Executive Leadership
+├── Escalate to C-suite
+├── Timeframe: Urgent, same-day response needed
+└── Example: Project cancellation risk, regulatory issue
+```
+
+### Escalation Template
+
+```markdown
+## Issue Escalation: [I-XXX]
+
+**Escalated By**: [Name] | **Date**: [Date] | **Urgency**: High/Critical
+
+### Issue
+[Description of the problem]
+
+### Impact
+- Schedule: [X days/weeks delay if unresolved]
+- Budget: [$X additional cost]
+- Quality: [Impact on deliverables]
+
+### Actions Taken
+1. [What has been tried]
+2. [Why it did not resolve the issue]
+
+### Options
+| Option | Pros | Cons | Recommendation |
+|--------|------|------|----------------|
+| A | [Pros] | [Cons] | |
+| B | [Pros] | [Cons] | Recommended |
+
+### Decision Needed By
+[Date] - [Consequence of delayed decision]
+```
+
+## Common Pitfalls
+
+| Pitfall | Symptom | Solution |
+|---------|---------|----------|
+| Risks identified but never reviewed | Stale risk register | Schedule weekly risk reviews |
+| All risks scored as "medium" | No differentiation | Calibrate scoring with team; use concrete criteria |
+| No risk owners | Nobody acts on risks | Assign every risk an individual owner |
+| Risks without response plans | Risks sit as "open" indefinitely | Require response plan within 1 week of identification |
+| Ignoring positive risks | Missed opportunities | Include opportunity assessment in risk reviews |
+| Confusing risks and issues | Reactive management | Clarify definitions at kickoff; maintain separate logs |