bmad-enhanced 1.3.0 → 1.3.2

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/steps/step-05-success-criteria.md

@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+---
+step: 5
+workflow: lean-persona
+title: Success Criteria
+---
+
+# Step 5: Success Criteria
+
+What does a successful solution look like? How will the user know it's working? What are they willing to trade off?
+
+## Why This Matters
+
+Success criteria help us:
+- Define measurable outcomes (not just features)
+- Avoid building the wrong thing
+- Know when we've solved the problem (or when to pivot)
+- Understand acceptable trade-offs
+
+Without clear success criteria, we risk building something users think is "nice" but never actually use.
+
+## Your Task
+
+Answer these questions about success criteria:
+
+### 1. What's the desired outcome?
+If this solution worked perfectly, what would change in the user's life/work?
+
+Be specific and measurable. Not "less stressed" but "can answer 'Are we on track?' in <30 seconds with confidence."
+
+### 2. What success metrics matter?
+How will they measure success?
+
+- Time saved?
+- Money saved?
+- Quality improved?
+- Stress reduced?
+- Confidence increased?
+
+Define the metric AND the target threshold.
+
+### 3. How quickly do they need to see value?
+- Immediate (first use)?
+- Within a week?
+- Within a month?
+- Within a quarter?
+
+What's the acceptable "time to value"?
+
+### 4. What trade-offs are acceptable?
+What are they willing to sacrifice for the desired outcome?
+
+- Pay more for time saved?
+- Accept some complexity for power?
+- Sacrifice some features for simplicity?
+- Change workflows for better results?
+
+### 5. What trade-offs are NOT acceptable?
+What are the deal-breakers?
+
+## Example
+
+**Desired Outcome:**
+"I can confidently answer 'Are we on track?' in less than 30 seconds, and proactively spot problems before they become crises."
+
+**Success Metrics:**
+1. **Time to status check:** <30 seconds (vs. current 15+ minutes)
+2. **Proactive problem detection:** Catch blockers within 24 hours (vs. current 3-5 days)
+3. **Team interruptions:** <2 per day (vs. current 10+)
+4. **Manager confidence:** Can give accurate status updates without hunting for information
+5. **Wasted time:** <1 hour/week on status (vs. current 5 hours)
+
+**Time to Value:**
+- **Week 1:** Must be easier than current solution or team won't adopt
+- **Week 2:** Should reduce daily interruptions noticeably
+- **Month 1:** Should save 2+ hours/week measurably
+- **Month 3:** Should prevent at least one "missed deadline surprise"
+
+**Acceptable Trade-offs:**
+- ✅ Pay $10-30/person/month for 4+ hours saved weekly
+- ✅ Spend 2 hours learning the tool to save 5+ hours/week ongoing
+- ✅ Change Monday meeting format (shorter, more focused)
+- ✅ Require team to update status (if it's < 5 min/day)
+
+**NOT Acceptable Trade-offs:**
+- ❌ Add MORE overhead (e.g., 15 min/day to update)
+- ❌ Replace one complicated tool with another complicated tool
+- ❌ Require team to learn completely new workflow
+- ❌ Lose historical information/context
+- ❌ Create visibility for manager but burden for team
+
+---
+
+## Your Turn
+
+Please define success criteria using the structure above.
+
+**Tip:** If you can't define measurable success criteria, you can't validate whether your solution works. "Better" and "easier" aren't measurable. "Reduces time from 15 min to 2 min" is measurable.
+
+## Next Step
+
+When you've defined success criteria, I'll load:
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/steps/step-06-synthesize.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/steps/step-06-synthesize.md

@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+---
+step: 6
+workflow: lean-persona
+title: Synthesize
+---
+
+# Step 6: Synthesize
+
+Now let's bring it all together into a lean persona artifact with a clear validation plan.
+
+## Why This Matters
+
+The lean persona document serves as:
+- A shared understanding of who we're building for
+- A hypothesis to validate (not a truth to assume)
+- A decision-making tool (does this feature help THIS user do THIS job?)
+- A validation roadmap (what do we test first?)
+
+## Your Task
+
+I'll create the final lean persona artifact using all the insights you've provided. But first, I need a few final pieces:
+
+### 1. Identify your 3 riskiest assumptions
+
+Look back at everything you've shared. What are the 3 things you THINK are true but haven't validated?
+
+Examples:
+- ASSUMPTION: "Users spend 5+ hours/week on status tracking"
+- ASSUMPTION: "Team members would consistently update status if it took <5 min/day"
+- ASSUMPTION: "Managers value confidence over detailed reporting"
+
+### 2. Design 3 validation experiments
+
+For each risky assumption, how will you test it?
+
+**Format for each:**
+- **Hypothesis:** If [assumption], then [observable behavior]
+- **Method:** How will you test it? (Interview? Survey? Prototype? Landing page?)
+- **Success criteria:** What would prove/disprove the hypothesis?
+- **Timeline:** When will you run this test?
+
+### 3. Decide: What will you do with the results?
+
+- If hypothesis is VALIDATED → What's next?
+- If hypothesis is INVALIDATED → Pivot or persevere?
+
+## Example
+
+**Riskiest Assumptions:**
+
+1. **ASSUMPTION:** Remote managers spend 5+ hours/week just tracking team status
+   - **Why risky:** If it's only 1-2 hours, solving this isn't high priority
+
+2. **ASSUMPTION:** Managers would pay $20/person/month to save 3+ hours/week
+   - **Why risky:** If they won't pay, we don't have a business model
+
+3. **ASSUMPTION:** Team members would update status if it's async and takes <5 min/day
+   - **Why risky:** If team won't engage, tool is useless
+
+**Validation Experiments:**
+
+**Experiment 1: Time Spent on Status**
+- **Hypothesis:** If remote managers truly spend 5+ hours/week on status, then when asked to track their time for one week, at least 70% will record 5+ hours
+- **Method:** Recruit 20 remote managers, ask them to log time spent on "status checking/reporting" for one week
+- **Success Criteria:** 14+ out of 20 (70%) log 5+ hours
+- **Timeline:** Week 1-2
+- **Decision:** If validated → proceed to experiment 2. If invalidated → re-examine problem priority
+
+**Experiment 2: Willingness to Pay**
+- **Hypothesis:** If managers value time savings, then at least 30% who see a "Save 3 hours/week for $20/person/month" landing page will give us their email
+- **Method:** Create landing page, run $500 Google Ads campaign targeting "remote team management"
+- **Success Criteria:** 30%+ conversion rate (email signup)
+- **Timeline:** Week 3-4
+- **Decision:** If validated → build prototype. If invalidated → re-examine pricing or value prop
+
+**Experiment 3: Team Engagement**
+- **Hypothesis:** If status updates take <5 minutes and are async, then at least 80% of team members will update weekly
+- **Method:** Create Google Form "status template," ask 3 pilot teams to use for 4 weeks
+- **Success Criteria:** 80%+ weekly participation rate
+- **Timeline:** Week 5-8
+- **Decision:** If validated → begin MVP development. If invalidated → explore automated status (no manual input required)
+
+---
+
+## Your Turn
+
+Please provide:
+1. Your 3 riskiest assumptions
+2. Your 3 validation experiments (using format above)
+3. Your decision criteria for each outcome
+
+## Final Step
+
+When you've provided this information, I'll:
+1. Generate your complete lean persona artifact
+2. Save it to `{output_folder}/lean-persona-{persona-name}-{date}.md`
+3. Create a validation tracking checklist
+4. Suggest next steps with Wade (lean-experiment workflow) to run your experiments
+
+**Remember:** This lean persona is a HYPOTHESIS until validated. Treat it as a bet, not a truth. Your job now is to test that bet as quickly and cheaply as possible.
+
+---
+
+## Workflow Complete
+
+After synthesis, your lean persona artifact will include:
+- Complete job-to-be-done analysis
+- Current solution pain points
+- Problem contexts and triggers
+- Forces and anxieties
+- Success criteria and metrics
+- Riskiest assumptions highlighted
+- Validation experiments ready to run
+- Revision history to track what you learn
+
+Next suggested workflow: **Wade's lean-experiment** to run your validation experiments.

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/validate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+# Validate Lean Persona
+
+**Status:** Coming in v1.2.0
+
+**Agent:** Emma (Contextualization Expert)
+
+**Stream:** Contextualize
+
+## Overview
+
+This validation workflow helps you review lean personas against Lean Startup principles and ensure they're hypothesis-driven rather than assumption-based.
+
+## What Gets Validated
+
+- Is the job-to-be-done clearly defined?
+- Are current pain points specific and measurable?
+- Are desired outcomes testable?
+- Are assumptions explicitly stated?
+- Is there a clear validation plan?
+- Does this avoid demographic stereotypes?
+
+## Coming in v1.2.0
+
+This validation workflow will be available alongside the lean-persona workflow in March 2026.
+
+## Questions?
+
+For questions or to request early access:
+- GitHub Issues: https://github.com/amalik/BMAD-Enhanced/issues
+- Tag with: `workflow:lean-persona` and `v1.2.0`

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+workflow: lean-persona
+type: step-file
+description: Create lean user personas focused on jobs-to-be-done and problem contexts
+author: Emma (contextualization-expert)
+version: 1.2.0
+---
+
+# Create Lean Persona Workflow
+
+This workflow guides you through creating a lean user persona using Lean Startup principles.
+
+## What is a Lean Persona?
+
+A lean persona is a hypothesis-driven representation of your target user that focuses on jobs-to-be-done and problem contexts rather than demographics. Unlike traditional personas, lean personas:
+
+- **Focus on behavior, not demographics** - What they're trying to do, not who they are
+- **Are hypothesis-driven** - Every insight is an assumption until validated
+- **Link to validation** - Each assumption has a plan to test it
+- **Stay lean** - Only capture what's needed to make decisions
+
+## Workflow Structure
+
+**Step-file architecture:**
+- Just-in-time loading (each step loads only when needed)
+- Sequential enforcement (must complete step N before step N+1)
+- State tracking in frontmatter (progress preserved)
+
+## Steps Overview
+
+1. **Define Job-to-be-Done** - What is the user trying to accomplish?
+2. **Current Solution Analysis** - How do they solve this today? What are the pain points?
+3. **Problem Contexts** - When, where, and why does this problem occur?
+4. **Forces & Anxieties** - What pushes them to change? What holds them back?
+5. **Success Criteria** - What would a successful solution look like?
+6. **Synthesize** - Create the final lean persona artifact
+
+## Output
+
+**Artifact:** Lean persona markdown file in `{output_folder}/lean-persona-{persona-name}-{date}.md`
+
+**Template:** Uses [lean-persona.template.md](lean-persona.template.md)
+
+---
+
+## INITIALIZATION
+
+Load config from {project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/config.yaml
+
+Load step: {project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/lean-persona/steps/step-01-define-job.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/mvp.template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+---
+title: "MVP Specification: {mvp-name}"
+date: {date}
+created-by: {user-name} with Wade (lean-experiments-specialist)
+type: mvp-spec
+status: HYPOTHESIS
+version: 1.0
+---
+
+# MVP Specification: {mvp-name}
+
+## Riskiest Assumption
+
+{riskiest-assumption}
+
+## Success Criteria
+
+{success-criteria}
+
+## MVP Scope
+
+### What's In
+{scope-in}
+
+### What's Out
+{scope-out}
+
+## Build-Measure-Learn Plan
+
+{bml-plan}
+
+## Timeline
+
+{timeline}
+
+---
+
+**Created with:** BMAD-Enhanced v1.2.0 - Vortex Framework (Externalize Stream)
+**Agent:** Wade (Lean Experiments Specialist)
+**Workflow:** mvp

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-01-riskiest-assumption.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+---
+step: 1
+workflow: mvp
+title: Identify Riskiest Assumption
+---
+
+# Step 1: Identify Riskiest Assumption
+
+What assumption, if wrong, would kill your idea?
+
+## Your Task
+
+Identify your riskiest assumption and why it's critical.
+
+## Next Step
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-02-success-criteria.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-02-success-criteria.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+step: 2
+workflow: mvp
+title: Define Success Criteria
+---
+
+# Step 2: Define Success Criteria
+
+How will you know if your MVP succeeded or failed?
+
+## Next Step
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-03-smallest-test.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-03-smallest-test.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+step: 3
+workflow: mvp
+title: Design Smallest Test
+---
+
+# Step 3: Design Smallest Test
+
+What's the absolute minimum you can build to test your assumption?
+
+## Next Step
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-04-scope-features.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-04-scope-features.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+step: 4
+workflow: mvp
+title: Scope MVP Features
+---
+
+# Step 4: Scope MVP Features
+
+What features are absolutely necessary? What can wait?
+
+## Next Step
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-05-build-measure-learn.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-05-build-measure-learn.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+step: 5
+workflow: mvp
+title: Plan Build-Measure-Learn
+---
+
+# Step 5: Plan Build-Measure-Learn
+
+How will you build, measure, and learn from this MVP?
+
+## Next Step
+
+{project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-06-synthesize.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-06-synthesize.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+step: 6
+workflow: mvp
+title: Synthesize
+---
+
+# Step 6: Synthesize
+
+Create your final MVP specification.
+
+## Workflow Complete
+
+Next: Use lean-experiment workflow to run your Build-Measure-Learn cycle.

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/validate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+# Validate MVP Design
+
+**Status:** Coming in v1.2.0
+
+**Agent:** Wade (Lean Experiments Specialist)
+
+**Stream:** Externalize
+
+## Overview
+
+This validation workflow helps you review MVP designs to ensure they're truly minimal and focused on learning.
+
+## What Gets Validated
+
+- Is the value proposition clear and testable?
+- Are the riskiest assumptions identified?
+- Is the scope truly minimal (nothing extra)?
+- Are success metrics actionable (not vanity metrics)?
+- Is the build plan realistic?
+- Does this focus on learning over perfection?
+
+## Coming in v1.2.0
+
+This validation workflow will be available alongside the mvp workflow in March 2026.
+
+## Questions?
+
+For questions or to request early access:
+- GitHub Issues: https://github.com/amalik/BMAD-Enhanced/issues
+- Tag with: `workflow:mvp` and `v1.2.0`

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/workflow.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+workflow: mvp
+type: step-file
+description: Design Minimum Viable Product specifications using Build-Measure-Learn
+author: Wade (lean-experiments-specialist)
+version: 1.2.0
+---
+
+# Design MVP Workflow
+
+This workflow guides you through designing a Minimum Viable Product that tests your riskiest assumptions.
+
+## What is an MVP?
+
+An MVP is NOT a feature-light product. It's the smallest thing that tests your riskiest assumption and enables validated learning.
+
+## Steps Overview
+
+1. **Identify Riskiest Assumption** - What could kill this idea?
+2. **Define Success Criteria** - How will you know if it worked?
+3. **Design Smallest Test** - What's the minimum to test the assumption?
+4. **Scope MVP Features** - What's absolutely necessary?
+5. **Plan Build-Measure-Learn** - How will you learn?
+6. **Synthesize** - Create MVP specification document
+
+## Output
+
+**Artifact:** MVP spec in `{output_folder}/mvp-spec-{mvp-name}-{date}.md`
+
+---
+
+## INITIALIZATION
+
+Load config from {project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/config.yaml
+
+Load step: {project-root}/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/mvp/steps/step-01-riskiest-assumption.md

package/_bmad/bme/_vortex/workflows/product-vision/product-vision.template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+---
+title: "Product Vision: {product-name}"
+date: {date}
+created-by: {user-name} with Emma (contextualization-expert)
+type: product-vision
+status: DRAFT
+version: 1.0
+---
+
+# Product Vision: {product-name}
+
+## Vision Statement
+
+> {vision-statement}
+
+**For** {target-users}
+**Who** {problem-statement}
+**The** {product-name} **is a** {product-category}
+**That** {key-benefit}
+**Unlike** {competition}
+**Our product** {unique-differentiation}
+
+---
+
+## The Problem We're Solving
+
+### Problem Statement
+{problem-description}
+
+### Why This Matters
+{problem-importance}
+
+### Market Size & Opportunity
+{market-opportunity}
+
+### Current Alternatives & Their Limitations
+{existing-solutions}
+
+---
+
+## Who We Serve
+
+### Primary Target User
+{primary-target}
+
+### Secondary Target Users
+{secondary-targets}
+
+### Market Segments
+{market-segments}
+
+---
+
+## Our Unique Approach
+
+### What Makes Us Different
+{differentiation}
+
+### Our Competitive Advantage
+{competitive-advantage}
+
+### Why Now?
+{timing-rationale}
+
+---
+
+## Future State (3-5 Years)
+
+### Where We're Headed
+{future-vision}
+
+### Success Looks Like
+{success-description}
+
+### Key Milestones
+{milestones}
+
+---
+
+## Guiding Principles
+
+### What We Won't Compromise
+{principles}
+
+### What We Say No To
+{anti-patterns}
+
+### Our Values
+{values}
+
+---
+
+## Success Metrics
+
+### North Star Metric
+{north-star-metric}
+
+### Supporting Metrics
+{supporting-metrics}
+
+### Leading Indicators
+{leading-indicators}
+
+---
+
+## Strategic Assumptions
+
+### Critical Assumptions (Must be true)
+{critical-assumptions}
+
+### Important Assumptions (Should validate)
+{important-assumptions}
+
+### Nice-to-Validate (Lower priority)
+{nice-to-validate}
+
+---
+
+## Validation Plan
+
+### How We'll Test This Vision
+{validation-strategy}
+
+### Timeline
+{validation-timeline}
+
+### Decision Criteria
+{decision-criteria}
+
+---
+
+## Team Alignment
+
+### Who Contributed
+{contributors}
+
+### Alignment Score
+{alignment-score}
+
+### Open Questions
+{open-questions}
+
+---
+
+**Created with:** BMAD-Enhanced v1.2.0 - Vortex Framework (Contextualize Stream)
+**Agent:** Emma (Contextualization Expert)
+**Workflow:** product-vision