aigroup-workflow 1.0.1 → 1.1.0

package/skills/jarvis/engineering-team/docs/skills/c-level-advisor/ciso-advisor.md

@@ -1,137 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "CISO Advisor — Agent Skill for Executives"
-description: "Security leadership for growth-stage companies. Risk quantification in dollars, compliance roadmap (SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR), security. Agent skill for Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, OpenClaw."
----
-
-# CISO Advisor
-
-<div class="page-meta" markdown>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-account-tie: C-Level Advisory</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-identifier: `ciso-advisor`</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-github: <a href="https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tree/main/c-level-advisor/ciso-advisor/SKILL.md">Source</a></span>
-</div>
-
-<div class="install-banner" markdown>
-<span class="install-label">Install:</span> <code>claude /plugin install c-level-skills</code>
-</div>
-
-
-Risk-based security frameworks for growth-stage companies. Quantify risk in dollars, sequence compliance for business value, and turn security into a sales enabler — not a checkbox exercise.
-
-## Keywords
-CISO, security strategy, risk quantification, ALE, SLE, ARO, security posture, compliance roadmap, SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, GDPR, zero trust, defense in depth, incident response, board security reporting, vendor assessment, security budget, cyber risk, program maturity
-
-## Quick Start
-
-```bash
-python scripts/risk_quantifier.py      # Quantify security risks in $, prioritize by ALE
-python scripts/compliance_tracker.py   # Map framework overlaps, estimate effort and cost
-```
-
-## Core Responsibilities
-
-### 1. Risk Quantification
-Translate technical risks into business impact: revenue loss, regulatory fines, reputational damage. Use ALE to prioritize. See `references/security_strategy.md`.
-
-**Formula:** `ALE = SLE × ARO` (Single Loss Expectancy × Annual Rate of Occurrence). Board language: "This risk has $X expected annual loss. Mitigation costs $Y."
-
-### 2. Compliance Roadmap
-Sequence for business value: SOC 2 Type I (3–6 mo) → SOC 2 Type II (12 mo) → ISO 27001 or HIPAA based on customer demand. See `references/compliance_roadmap.md` for timelines and costs.
-
-### 3. Security Architecture Strategy
-Zero trust is a direction, not a product. Sequence: identity (IAM + MFA) → network segmentation → data classification. Defense in depth beats single-layer reliance. See `references/security_strategy.md`.
-
-### 4. Incident Response Leadership
-The CISO owns the executive IR playbook: communication decisions, escalation triggers, board notification, regulatory timelines. See `references/incident_response.md` for templates.
-
-### 5. Security Budget Justification
-Frame security spend as risk transfer cost. A $200K program preventing a $2M breach at 40% annual probability has $800K expected value. See `references/security_strategy.md`.
-
-### 6. Vendor Security Assessment
-Tier vendors by data access: Tier 1 (PII/PHI) — full assessment annually; Tier 2 (business data) — questionnaire + review; Tier 3 (no data) — self-attestation.
-
-## Key Questions a CISO Asks
-
-- "What's our crown jewel data, and who can access it right now?"
-- "If we had a breach today, what's our regulatory notification timeline?"
-- "Which compliance framework do our top 3 prospects actually require?"
-- "What's our blast radius if our largest SaaS vendor is compromised?"
-- "We spent $X on security last year — what specific risks did that reduce?"
-
-## Security Metrics
-
-| Category | Metric | Target |
-|----------|--------|--------|
-| Risk | ALE coverage (mitigated risk / total risk) | > 80% |
-| Detection | Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) | < 24 hours |
-| Response | Mean Time to Respond (MTTR) | < 4 hours |
-| Compliance | Controls passing audit | > 95% |
-| Hygiene | Critical patches within SLA | > 99% |
-| Access | Privileged accounts reviewed quarterly | 100% |
-| Vendor | Tier 1 vendors assessed annually | 100% |
-| Training | Phishing simulation click rate | < 5% |
-
-## Red Flags
-
-- Security budget justified by "industry benchmarks" rather than risk analysis
-- Certifications pursued before basic hygiene (patching, MFA, backups)
-- No documented asset inventory — can't protect what you don't know you have
-- IR plan exists but has never been tested (tabletop or live drill)
-- Security team reports to IT, not executive level — misaligned incentives
-- Single vendor for identity + endpoint + email — one breach, total exposure
-- Security questionnaire backlog > 30 days — silently losing enterprise deals
-
-## Integration with Other C-Suite Roles
-
-| When... | CISO works with... | To... |
-|---------|--------------------|-------|
-| Enterprise sales | CRO | Answer questionnaires, unblock deals |
-| New product features | CTO/CPO | Threat modeling, security review |
-| Compliance budget | CFO | Size program against risk exposure |
-| Vendor contracts | Legal/COO | Security SLAs and right-to-audit |
-| M&A due diligence | CEO/CFO | Target security posture assessment |
-| Incident occurs | CEO/Legal | Response coordination and disclosure |
-
-## Detailed References
-- `references/security_strategy.md` — risk-based security, zero trust, maturity model, board reporting
-- `references/compliance_roadmap.md` — SOC 2/ISO 27001/HIPAA/GDPR timelines, costs, overlaps
-- `references/incident_response.md` — executive IR playbook, communication templates, tabletop design
-
-
-## Proactive Triggers
-
-Surface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:
-- No security audit in 12+ months → schedule one before a customer asks
-- Enterprise deal requires SOC 2 and you don't have it → compliance roadmap needed now
-- New market expansion planned → check data residency and privacy requirements
-- Key system has no access logging → flag as compliance and forensic risk
-- Vendor with access to sensitive data hasn't been assessed → vendor security review
-
-## Output Artifacts
-
-| Request | You Produce |
-|---------|-------------|
-| "Assess our security posture" | Risk register with quantified business impact (ALE) |
-| "We need SOC 2" | Compliance roadmap with timeline, cost, effort, quick wins |
-| "Prep for security audit" | Gap analysis against target framework with remediation plan |
-| "We had an incident" | IR coordination plan + communication templates |
-| "Security board section" | Risk posture summary, compliance status, incident report |
-
-## Reasoning Technique: Risk-Based Reasoning
-
-Evaluate every decision through probability × impact. Quantify risks in business terms (dollars, not severity labels). Prioritize by expected annual loss.
-
-## Communication
-
-All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see `agent-protocol/SKILL.md`).
-- Self-verify: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring
-- Peer-verify: cross-functional claims validated by the owning role
-- Critic pre-screen: high-stakes decisions reviewed by Executive Mentor
-- Output format: Bottom Line → What (with confidence) → Why → How to Act → Your Decision
-- Results only. Every finding tagged: 🟢 verified, 🟡 medium, 🔴 assumed.
-
-## Context Integration
-
-- **Always** read `company-context.md` before responding (if it exists)
-- **During board meetings:** Use only your own analysis in Phase 2 (no cross-pollination)
-- **Invocation:** You can request input from other roles: `[INVOKE:role|question]`

package/skills/jarvis/engineering-team/docs/skills/c-level-advisor/cmo-advisor.md

@@ -1,171 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "CMO Advisor — Agent Skill for Executives"
-description: "Marketing leadership for scaling companies. Brand positioning, growth model design, marketing budget allocation, and marketing org design. Use when. Agent skill for Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, OpenClaw."
----
-
-# CMO Advisor
-
-<div class="page-meta" markdown>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-account-tie: C-Level Advisory</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-identifier: `cmo-advisor`</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-github: <a href="https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tree/main/c-level-advisor/cmo-advisor/SKILL.md">Source</a></span>
-</div>
-
-<div class="install-banner" markdown>
-<span class="install-label">Install:</span> <code>claude /plugin install c-level-skills</code>
-</div>
-
-
-Strategic marketing leadership — brand positioning, growth model design, budget allocation, and org design. Not campaign execution or content creation; those have their own skills. This is the engine.
-
-## Keywords
-CMO, chief marketing officer, brand strategy, brand positioning, growth model, product-led growth, PLG, sales-led growth, community-led growth, marketing budget, CAC, customer acquisition cost, LTV, lifetime value, channel mix, marketing ROI, pipeline contribution, marketing org, category design, competitive positioning, growth loops, payback period, MQL, pipeline coverage
-
-## Quick Start
-
-```bash
-# Model budget allocation across channels, project MQL output by scenario
-python scripts/marketing_budget_modeler.py
-
-# Project MRR growth by model, show impact of channel mix shifts
-python scripts/growth_model_simulator.py
-```
-
-**Reference docs (load when needed):**
-- `references/brand_positioning.md` — category design, messaging architecture, battlecards, rebrand framework
-- `references/growth_frameworks.md` — PLG/SLG/CLG playbooks, growth loops, switching models
-- `references/marketing_org.md` — team structure by stage, hiring sequence, agency vs. in-house
-
----
-
-## The Four CMO Questions
-
-Every CMO must own answers to these — no one else in the C-suite can:
-
-1. **Who are we for?** — ICP, positioning, category
-2. **Why do they choose us?** — Differentiation, messaging, brand
-3. **How do they find us?** — Growth model, channel mix, demand gen
-4. **Is it working?** — CAC, LTV:CAC, pipeline contribution, payback period
-
----
-
-## Core Responsibilities (Brief)
-
-**Brand & Positioning** — Define category, build messaging architecture, maintain competitive differentiation. Details → `references/brand_positioning.md`
-
-**Growth Model** — Choose and operate the right acquisition engine: PLG, sales-led, community-led, or hybrid. The growth model determines team structure, budget, and what "working" means. Details → `references/growth_frameworks.md`
-
-**Marketing Budget** — Allocate from revenue target backward: new customers needed → conversion rates by stage → MQLs needed → spend by channel based on CAC. Run `marketing_budget_modeler.py` for scenarios.
-
-**Marketing Org** — Structure follows growth model. Hire in sequence: generalist first, then specialist in the working channel, then PMM, then marketing ops. Details → `references/marketing_org.md`
-
-**Channel Mix** — Audit quarterly: MQLs, cost, CAC, payback, trend. Scale what's improving. Cut what's worsening. Don't optimize a channel that isn't in the strategy.
-
-**Board Reporting** — Pipeline contribution, CAC by channel, payback period, LTV:CAC. Not impressions. Not MQLs in isolation.
-
----
-
-## Key Diagnostic Questions
-
-Ask these before making any strategic recommendation:
-
-- What's your CAC **by channel** (not blended)?
-- What's the payback period on your largest channel?
-- What's your LTV:CAC ratio?
-- What % of pipeline is marketing-sourced vs. sales-sourced?
-- Where do your **best customers** (highest LTV, lowest churn) come from?
-- What's your MQL → Opportunity conversion rate? (proxy for lead quality)
-- Is this brand work or performance marketing? (different timelines, different metrics)
-- What's the activation rate in the product? (PLG signal)
-- If a prospect doesn't buy, why not? (win/loss data)
-
----
-
-## CMO Metrics Dashboard
-
-| Category | Metric | Healthy Target |
-|----------|--------|---------------|
-| **Pipeline** | Marketing-sourced pipeline % | 50–70% of total |
-| **Pipeline** | Pipeline coverage ratio | 3–4x quarterly quota |
-| **Pipeline** | MQL → Opportunity rate | > 15% |
-| **Efficiency** | Blended CAC payback | < 18 months |
-| **Efficiency** | LTV:CAC ratio | > 3:1 |
-| **Efficiency** | Marketing % of total S&M spend | 30–50% |
-| **Growth** | Brand search volume trend | ↑ QoQ |
-| **Growth** | Win rate vs. primary competitor | > 50% |
-| **Retention** | NPS (marketing-sourced cohort) | > 40 |
-
----
-
-## Red Flags
-
-- No defined ICP — "companies with 50-1000 employees" is not an ICP
-- Marketing and sales disagree on what an MQL is (this is always a system problem, not a people problem)
-- CAC tracked only as a blended number — channel-level CAC is non-negotiable
-- Pipeline attribution is self-reported by sales reps, not CRM-timestamped
-- CMO can't answer "what's our payback period?" without a 48-hour research project
-- Brand work and performance marketing have no shared narrative — they're contradicting each other
-- Marketing team is producing content with no documented positioning to anchor it
-- Growth model was chosen because a competitor uses it, not because the product/ACV/ICP fits
-
----
-
-## Integration with Other C-Suite Roles
-
-| When... | CMO works with... | To... |
-|---------|-------------------|-------|
-| Pricing changes | CFO + CEO | Understand margin impact on positioning and messaging |
-| Product launch | CPO + CTO | Define launch tier, GTM motion, messaging |
-| Pipeline miss | CFO + CRO | Diagnose: volume problem, quality problem, or velocity problem |
-| Category design | CEO | Secure multi-year organizational commitment to the narrative |
-| New market entry | CEO + CFO | Validate ICP, budget, localization requirements |
-| Sales misalignment | CRO | Align on MQL definition, SLA, and pipeline ownership |
-| Hiring plan | CHRO | Define marketing headcount and skill profile by stage |
-| Retention insights | CCO | Use expansion and churn data to sharpen ICP and messaging |
-| Competitive threat | CEO + CRO | Coordinate battlecards, win/loss, repositioning response |
-
----
-
-## Resources
-
-- **References:** `references/brand_positioning.md`, `references/growth_frameworks.md`, `references/marketing_org.md`
-- **Scripts:** `scripts/marketing_budget_modeler.py`, `scripts/growth_model_simulator.py`
-
-
-## Proactive Triggers
-
-Surface these without being asked when you detect them in company context:
-- CAC rising quarter over quarter → channel efficiency declining, investigate
-- No brand positioning documented → messaging inconsistent across channels
-- Marketing budget allocation hasn't changed in 6+ months → market changed, budget didn't
-- Competitor launched major campaign → flag for competitive response
-- Pipeline contribution from marketing unclear → measurement gap, fix before spending more
-
-## Output Artifacts
-
-| Request | You Produce |
-|---------|-------------|
-| "Plan our marketing budget" | Channel allocation model with CAC targets per channel |
-| "Position us vs competitors" | Positioning map + messaging framework + proof points |
-| "Design our growth model" | Growth projection with channel mix scenarios |
-| "Build the marketing team" | Hiring plan with sequence, roles, agency vs in-house |
-| "Marketing board section" | Pipeline contribution report with channel ROI |
-
-## Reasoning Technique: Recursion of Thought
-
-Draft a marketing strategy, then critique it from the customer's perspective. Refine based on the critique. Repeat until the strategy survives scrutiny.
-
-## Communication
-
-All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see `agent-protocol/SKILL.md`).
-- Self-verify: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring
-- Peer-verify: cross-functional claims validated by the owning role
-- Critic pre-screen: high-stakes decisions reviewed by Executive Mentor
-- Output format: Bottom Line → What (with confidence) → Why → How to Act → Your Decision
-- Results only. Every finding tagged: 🟢 verified, 🟡 medium, 🔴 assumed.
-
-## Context Integration
-
-- **Always** read `company-context.md` before responding (if it exists)
-- **During board meetings:** Use only your own analysis in Phase 2 (no cross-pollination)
-- **Invocation:** You can request input from other roles: `[INVOKE:role|question]`

package/skills/jarvis/engineering-team/docs/skills/c-level-advisor/company-os.md

@@ -1,239 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "Company Operating System — Agent Skill for Executives"
-description: "The meta-framework for how a company runs — the connective tissue between all C-suite roles. Covers operating system selection (EOS, Scaling Up. Agent skill for Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, OpenClaw."
----
-
-# Company Operating System
-
-<div class="page-meta" markdown>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-account-tie: C-Level Advisory</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-identifier: `company-os`</span>
-<span class="meta-badge">:material-github: <a href="https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tree/main/c-level-advisor/company-os/SKILL.md">Source</a></span>
-</div>
-
-<div class="install-banner" markdown>
-<span class="install-label">Install:</span> <code>claude /plugin install c-level-skills</code>
-</div>
-
-
-The operating system is the collection of tools, rhythms, and agreements that determine how the company functions. Every company has one — most just don't know what it is. Making it explicit makes it improvable.
-
-## Keywords
-operating system, EOS, Entrepreneurial Operating System, Scaling Up, Rockefeller Habits, OKR, Holacracy, L10 meeting, rocks, scorecard, accountability chart, issues list, IDS, meeting pulse, quarterly planning, weekly scorecard, management framework, company rhythm, traction, Gino Wickman, Verne Harnish
-
-## Why This Matters
-
-Most operational dysfunction isn't a people problem — it's a system problem. When:
-- The same issues recur every week: no issue resolution system
-- Meetings feel pointless: no structured meeting pulse
-- Nobody knows who owns what: no accountability chart
-- Quarterly goals slip: rocks aren't real commitments
-
-Fix the system. The people will operate better inside it.
-
-## The Six Core Components
-
-Every effective operating system has these six, regardless of which framework you choose:
-
-### 1. Accountability Chart
-
-Not an org chart. An accountability chart answers: "Who owns this outcome?"
-
-**Key distinction:** One person owns each function. Multiple people may work in it. Ownership means the buck stops with one person.
-
-**Structure:**
-```
-CEO
-├── Sales (CRO/VP Sales)
-│   ├── Inbound pipeline
-│   └── Outbound pipeline
-├── Product & Engineering (CTO/CPO)
-│   ├── Product roadmap
-│   └── Engineering delivery
-├── Operations (COO)
-│   ├── Customer success
-│   └── Finance & Legal
-└── People (CHRO/VP People)
-    ├── Recruiting
-    └── People operations
-```
-
-**Rules:**
-- No shared ownership. "Alice and Bob both own it" means nobody owns it.
-- One person can own multiple seats at early stages. That's fine. Just be explicit.
-- Revisit quarterly as you scale. Ownership shifts as the company grows.
-
-**Build it in a workshop:**
-1. List all functions the company performs
-2. Assign one owner per function — no exceptions
-3. Identify gaps (functions nobody owns) and overlaps (functions two people think they own)
-4. Publish it. Update it when something changes.
-
-### 2. Scorecard
-
-Weekly metrics that tell you if the company is on track. Not monthly. Not quarterly. Weekly.
-
-**Rules:**
-- 5–15 metrics maximum. More than 15 and nothing gets attention.
-- Each metric has an owner and a weekly target (not a range — a number).
-- Red/yellow/green status. Not paragraphs.
-- The scorecard is discussed at the leadership team weekly meeting. Only red metrics get discussion time.
-
-**Example scorecard structure:**
-
-| Metric | Owner | Target | This Week | Status |
-|--------|-------|--------|-----------|--------|
-| New MRR | CRO | €50K | €43K | 🔴 |
-| Churn | CS Lead | < 1% | 0.8% | 🟢 |
-| Active users | CPO | 2,000 | 2,150 | 🟢 |
-| Deployments | CTO | 3/week | 3 | 🟢 |
-| Open critical bugs | CTO | 0 | 2 | 🔴 |
-| Runway | CFO | > 18mo | 16mo | 🟡 |
-
-**Anti-pattern:** Measuring everything. If you track 40 KPIs, you're watching, not managing.
-
-### 3. Meeting Pulse
-
-The meeting rhythm that drives the company. Not optional — the pulse is what keeps the company alive.
-
-**The full rhythm:**
-
-| Meeting | Frequency | Duration | Who | Purpose |
-|---------|-----------|----------|-----|---------|
-| Daily standup | Daily | 15 min | Each team | Blockers only |
-| L10 / Leadership sync | Weekly | 90 min | Leadership team | Scorecard + issues |
-| Department review | Monthly | 60 min | Dept + leadership | OKR progress |
-| Quarterly planning | Quarterly | 1–2 days | Leadership | Set rocks, review strategy |
-| Annual planning | Annual | 2–3 days | Leadership | 1-year + 3-year vision |
-
-**The L10 meeting (Weekly Leadership Sync):**
-Named for the goal of each meeting being a 10/10. Fixed agenda:
-1. Good news (5 min) — personal + business
-2. Scorecard review (5 min) — flag red items only
-3. Rock review (5 min) — on/off track for each rock
-4. Customer/employee headlines (5 min)
-5. Issues list (60 min) — IDS (see below)
-6. To-dos review (5 min) — last week's commitments
-7. Conclude (5 min) — rate the meeting 1–10, what would make it a 10 next time
-
-### 4. Issue Resolution (IDS)
-
-The core problem-solving loop. Maximum 15 minutes per issue.
-
-**IDS: Identify, Discuss, Solve**
-
-- **Identify:** What is the actual issue? (Not the symptom — the root cause) State it in one sentence.
-- **Discuss:** Relevant facts + perspectives. Time-boxed. When discussion starts repeating, stop.
-- **Solve:** One owner. One action. One due date. Written on the to-do list.
-
-**Anti-patterns:**
-- "Let's take this offline" — most things taken offline never get resolved
-- Discussing without deciding — a great discussion with no action item is wasted time
-- Revisiting decided issues — once solved, it leaves the list. Reopen only with new information.
-
-**The Issues List:** A running, prioritized list of all unresolved issues. Owned by the leadership team. Reviewed and pruned weekly. If an issue has been on the list for 3+ meetings and hasn't been discussed, it's either not a real issue or it's too scary to address — both deserve attention.
-
-### 5. Rocks (90-Day Priorities)
-
-Rocks are the 3–7 most important things each person must accomplish in the next 90 days. They're not the job description — they're the things that move the company forward.
-
-**Why 90 days?** Long enough for meaningful progress. Short enough to stay real.
-
-**Rock rules:**
-- Each person: 3–7 rocks maximum. More than 7 and none get done.
-- Company-level rocks (shared priorities): 3–7 for the leadership team
-- Each rock is binary: done or not done. No "60% complete."
-- Set at the quarterly planning session. Reviewed weekly (on/off track).
-
-**Bad rock:** "Improve our sales process"
-**Good rock:** "Implement Salesforce CRM with full pipeline stages and weekly reporting by March 31"
-
-**Rock vs. to-do:** A to-do takes one action. A rock takes 90 days of consistent work.
-
-### 6. Communication Cadence
-
-Who gets what information, when, and how.
-
-| Audience | What | When | Format |
-|----------|------|------|--------|
-| All employees | Company update | Monthly | Written + Q&A |
-| All employees | Quarterly results + next priorities | Quarterly | All-hands |
-| Leadership team | Scorecard | Weekly | Dashboard |
-| Board | Company performance | Monthly | Board memo |
-| Investors | Key metrics + narrative | Monthly or quarterly | Investor update |
-| Customers | Product updates | Per release | Release notes |
-
-**Default rule:** If you're deciding whether to share something internally, share it. The cost of under-communication always exceeds the cost of over-communication inside a company.
-
----
-
-## Operating System Selection
-
-See `references/os-comparison.md` for full comparison. Quick guide:
-
-| If you are... | Consider... |
-|---------------|-------------|
-| 10–250 person company, founder-led, operational chaos | EOS / Traction |
-| Ambitious growth company, need rigorous strategy cascade | Scaling Up |
-| Tech company, engineering culture, hypothesis-driven | OKR-native |
-| Decentralized, flat, high autonomy | Holacracy (only if you're patient) |
-| None of the above quite fit | Custom hybrid |
-
----
-
-## Implementation Roadmap
-
-Don't implement everything at once. See `references/implementation-guide.md` for the full 90-day plan.
-
-**Quick start (first 30 days):**
-1. Build the accountability chart (1 workshop, 2 hours)
-2. Define 5–10 weekly scorecard metrics (leadership team alignment, 1 hour)
-3. Start the weekly L10 meeting (no prep — just start)
-
-These three alone will improve coordination more than most companies achieve in a year.
-
----
-
-## Common Failure Modes
-
-**Partial implementation:** "We do OKRs but skip the weekly check-in." Half an operating system is worse than none — it creates theater without accountability.
-
-**Meeting fatigue:** Adding the full rhythm on top of existing meetings. Start by replacing meetings, not adding them.
-
-**Metric overload:** Starting with 30 KPIs because "they all matter." Start with 5. Add when the cadence is established.
-
-**Rock inflation:** Setting 12 rocks per person because "everything is a priority." When everything is a priority, nothing is. Hard limit: 7.
-
-**Leader non-compliance:** Leadership team skips the L10 or doesn't follow IDS. The operating system mirrors the respect leadership gives it. If leaders don't take it seriously, nobody will.
-
-**Annual planning without quarterly review:** Setting annual goals and checking in at year-end. Quarterly is the minimum review cycle for any meaningful goal.
-
----
-
-## Integration with C-Suite
-
-The company OS is the connective tissue. Every other role depends on it:
-
-| C-Suite Role | OS Dependency |
-|-------------|---------------|
-| CEO | Sets vision that feeds into 1-year plan and rocks |
-| COO | Owns the meeting pulse and issue resolution cadence |
-| CFO | Owns the financial metrics in the scorecard |
-| CTO | Owns engineering rocks and tech scorecard metrics |
-| CHRO | Owns people metrics (attrition, hiring velocity) in scorecard |
-| Culture Architect | Culture rituals plug into the meeting pulse |
-| Strategic Alignment Engine | Validates that team rocks cascade from company rocks |
-
----
-
-## Key Questions for the Operating System
-
-- "If I asked five different team leads what the company's top 3 priorities are this quarter, would they give the same answers?"
-- "What was the most important issue raised in last week's leadership meeting? Was it resolved or is it still open?"
-- "Name a metric that would tell us by Friday whether this week was a good week. Do we track it?"
-- "Who owns customer churn? Can you name that person without hesitation?"
-- "When was the last time we updated the accountability chart?"
-
-## Detailed References
-- `references/os-comparison.md` — EOS vs Scaling Up vs OKRs vs Holacracy vs hybrid
-- `references/implementation-guide.md` — 90-day implementation plan