code-ai-installer 2.5.0 → 4.0.0

package/domains/analytics/locales/en/.agents/skills/value-chain-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -1,350 +1,350 @@
----
-name: value-chain-analysis
-description: Analysis of primary and support activities — costs, value added, competitive advantages
----
-# Value Chain Analysis — Primary and Support Activities
-
-## When to use
-- When searching for **competitive advantages** — where the company creates the most value.
-- When optimizing the **cost structure** — identifying inefficient links in the chain.
-- When making **make-or-buy** decisions — outsourcing, vertical integration, partnerships.
-- During **benchmarking** — comparing the value chain with competitors to identify gaps.
-
-## Input
-
-| Field | Required | Description |
-|------|:-----------:|----------|
-| Organization / BU | ✅ | Company or business unit for analysis |
-| Industry | ✅ | Industry context for benchmarking |
-| Business type | ✅ | Traditional (manufacturing/retail) / Digital (SaaS/platform) |
-| Product / service | ⬚ | Specific product for focused analysis |
-| Competitors for comparison | ⬚ | 1-3 competitors for benchmarking |
-| Financial data | ⬚ | Costs by activity (if available) |
-| Strategic goal | ⬚ | Cost optimization / differentiation / both |
-
-> If mandatory fields are not provided — **ask the user** before starting the analysis. Do not invent.
-
-## Data Sources
-1. Management accounting — costs by activity (ABC costing).
-2. Operational metrics — productivity, cycle time, quality by links.
-3. Customer data — satisfaction, NPS, complaints by touchpoints.
-4. Competitive analysis — benchmarks for key activities.
-5. Industry standards — best practices, average indicators.
-
-> Every fact — with source and date. Data older than 12 months — mark with ⚠️.
-
-### Connection with other skills
-| Skill | What we take | When to call |
-|------|-----------|----------------|
-| `competitive-analysis` | Competitor benchmarks by activity (steps 1-9) | To compare competitive position per activity |
-| `unit-economics` | Costs → margin structure, CAC from marketing (step 4) | To link the chain to unit economics |
-| `porters-five-forces` | Supplier power → Procurement (step 9), buyer power → Service (step 5) | If external forces impact chain links |
-| `swot-analysis` | Advantages → S, inefficiencies → W (step 11) | For integration into SWOT |
-| `web-research` | Industry benchmarks for costs and efficiency | If comparison data is missing |
-| `customer-journey-mapping` | Customer touchpoints → Marketing, Service (steps 4-5) | To link CX to chain links |
-
-## Framework Adaptation by Business Type
-
-| Activity (Porter) | Traditional Business | Digital / SaaS |
-|---------------------------|---------------------|----------------|
-| Inbound Logistics | Raw material receipt, warehousing | Data ingestion, API integrations, content procurement |
-| Operations | Manufacturing, assembly | Development (R&D), DevOps, deploy |
-| Outbound Logistics | Distribution, delivery | CDN, onboarding, provisioning |
-| Marketing & Sales | Advertising, channels, pricing | Growth, PLG, sales, partnerships |
-| Service | Warranty, repair, support | Customer Success, support, updates |
-| Infrastructure | Management, finance, legal | Management, finance, compliance |
-| HR | Hiring, training, motivation | Hiring, culture, remote |
-| Technological Development | R&D, innovation | Platform engineering, AI/ML |
-| Procurement | Purchasing, suppliers | Cloud vendors, API providers, SaaS tools |
-
-> For Digital/SaaS — use adapted activity names from the right column.
-
-## Protocol
-
-### Step 0 — Prepare Context
-1. Define the object of analysis and boundaries (whole company or specific BU / product).
-2. Determine business type: traditional or digital/SaaS (select adaptation).
-3. Record the strategic goal: cost leadership, differentiation, or both.
-4. Define the level of detail: aggregate (9 activities) or detailed (sub-activities).
-5. Gather available financial and operational data.
-
-### Step 1 — Inbound Logistics
-1. Identify key processes (adapt for business type).
-2. Assess costs and value added:
-
-   | Metric | Value | Benchmark | Source |
-   |---------|:--------:|:--------:|----------|
-   | Costs (% of total) | X% | X% | [Source] |
-   | Value added | [Description] | — | [Source] |
-   | Key efficiency metric | [KPI: cycle time, reliability] | [Benchmark] | [Source] |
-
-3. Scoring:
-   - **Costs (1-5):** 1 = minimal, 5 = excessive.
-   - **Value (1-5):** 1 = minimal, 5 = critical for the customer.
-   - **Efficiency Score = Value / Costs** (>1.0 = efficient, <1.0 = inefficient).
-4. Competitive position: Advantage / Parity / Disadvantage.
-
-### Step 2 — Operations
-Similar structure: processes → costs/value → scoring → competitive position.
-
-Key metrics: quality (defect rate), speed (cycle time), agility (time-to-market).
-
-### Step 3 — Outbound Logistics
-Key metrics: delivery speed, coverage, reliability, cost per unit.
-
-### Step 4 — Marketing & Sales
-Key metrics: CAC, ROAS, conversion, sales cycle length, brand awareness.
-
-> Link to `$unit-economics`: CAC from this link → unit economics.
-
-### Step 5 — Service
-Key metrics: NPS, CSAT, SLA compliance, time-to-resolution, retention impact.
-
-> Link to `$customer-journey-mapping`: touchpoints in retention/advocacy.
-
-### Steps 6-9 — Support Activities
-
-For each (Infrastructure, HR, Technological Development, Procurement) — similar structure:
-1. Key processes (adapted for business type).
-2. Costs (% of total) + value added.
-3. Scoring: Costs (1-5), Value (1-5), Efficiency Score.
-4. Competitive position.
-
-**For each support activity — define its contribution to primary ones:**
-
-| Support | Impacts primary | How |
-|----------------|---------------------|-----|
-| Infrastructure | All | Quality of management, planning, compliance |
-| HR | Operations, Service | Team quality → product and support quality |
-| Technological Development | Operations, Marketing | Innovations → differentiation, automation → costs |
-| Procurement | Inbound Logistics, Operations | Quality and cost of inputs |
-
-### Step 10 — Linkage Analysis
-1. Identify key dependencies between activities:
-
-   | Linkage | Activity A → Activity B | Description | Optimization Effect |
-   |-------|:-------------:|----------|-------------------|
-   | [L1] | Procurement → Operations | Input quality → defect rate | Better suppliers → -X% defects |
-   | [L2] | Operations → Service | Product quality → support load | Fewer bugs → -X% tickets |
-   | [L3] | HR → Marketing | Sales skills → conversion | Training → +X% win rate |
-
-2. Identify **trade-offs**: where optimizing one link degrades another.
-3. Identify **synergies**: where investments in one link improve several.
-
-### Step 11 — Consolidated Analysis and Scoring
-
-Compile all activities into a single table:
-
-| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
-|---|-----------------|:-----------:|:-------------:|:--------------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
-| 1 | Inbound Logistics | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
-
-**Define zones using the Costs × Value matrix:**
-
-| | Low Costs | High Costs |
-|--|:--------------:|:---------------:|
-| **High Value** | 🟢 Super-efficient → Invest | 🟡 Justified → Maintain |
-| **Low Value** | ⚪ Neutral → Outsourcing? | 🔴 Inefficient → Optimize |
-
-### Step 12 — Recommendations
-1. TOP-3 sources of competitive advantage (🟢 + 🟡 with high value).
-2. TOP-3 optimization zones (🔴 inefficient).
-3. Make-or-buy decisions:
-
-   | Activity | Decision | Justification | Expected Effect |
-   |-----------------|---------|-------------|:----------------:|
-   | [Activity] | Make / Buy / Partner | [Why] | [Savings / Value growth] |
-
-4. Action plan with priorities, owners, deadlines, and KPIs.
-
-## Example — B2B SaaS: HR Recruiting Automation Platform
-
-**Context:** HR-tech SaaS, 200 clients, $2.4M ARR, 45 employees, RF. Strategy: differentiation via AI.
-
-### Consolidated Table
-
-**Primary Activities:**
-
-| # | Activity (SaaS Adaptation) | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Effic. | Comp. | Action |
-|---|---------------------|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:------:|:-------:|----------|
-| 1 | Data ingestion / API | 5% | 2 | 3 | 1.5 | Parity | Maintain |
-| 2 | Development (R&D) | 35% | 4 | 5 | 1.25 | **Advantage** | Invest (AI) |
-| 3 | Onboarding / CDN | 8% | 3 | 4 | 1.33 | Advantage | Maintain (3-day deploy) |
-| 4 | Growth / Sales | 25% | 4 | 3 | 0.75 | **Disadvantage** | 🔴 Optimize |
-| 5 | Customer Success | 12% | 3 | 5 | 1.67 | Advantage | Invest (NPS 72) |
-
-**Support Activities:**
-
-| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Effic. | Comp. | Action |
-|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:------:|:-------:|----------|
-| 6 | Management / compliance | 5% | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | Parity | Maintain |
-| 7 | HR (hiring, culture) | 3% | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 🟢 Super-effic | Invest |
-| 8 | Platform engineering | 5% | 3 | 5 | 1.67 | Advantage | Invest |
-| 9 | Cloud / API vendors | 2% | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | Parity | Maintain |
-
-**Margin:** 85% gross (Revenue $200K/mo − COGS $30K).
-
-### Linkages
-
-| Linkage | A → B | Effect | Trade-off / Synergy |
-|-------|:-----:|--------|:-------------------:|
-| R&D → Customer Success | Fewer bugs → -30% tickets | Synergy ✅ |
-| R&D → Growth/Sales | AI features → differentiation → +conversion | Synergy ✅ |
-| HR → R&D | Hiring quality → development speed | Synergy ✅ |
-| Growth/Sales → Customer Success | Aggressive sales → bad-fit clients → churn | Trade-off ⚠️ |
-
-### Competitive Advantages (TOP-3)
-
-| # | Activity | Advantage | Sustainability | Proof |
-|---|-----|-------------|:------------:|----------------|
-| 1 | R&D | AI personalization (only ones in RF market) | High (patent + team) | 3 ML engineers, patent pending |
-| 2 | Customer Success | NPS 72 vs industry 45 | Medium (copyable via processes) | Q1 2026 survey, N=180 |
-| 3 | Onboarding | 3-day deploy vs competitors' 2-4 weeks | Medium | CRM: last 20 deployments |
-
-### Optimization Zones (TOP-3)
-
-| # | Activity | Problem | Recommendation | Effect |
-|---|-----|---------|-------------|:------:|
-| 1 | Growth/Sales | Efficiency 0.75, CAC $1,450 (LinkedIn $2,500) | Reallocate budget: LinkedIn → Content/Referral | CAC → $1,100 (-24%) |
-| 2 | Growth/Sales | Sales team 3 ppl., bottleneck | Hire 2 SDRs + partner program | Pipeline ×2 |
-| 3 | Data ingestion | No 1C integration (30% drop-off) | Develop 1C integration | -30% drop-off |
-
-### Make-or-Buy
-
-| Activity | Decision | Justification | Effect |
-|-----|---------|-------------|:------:|
-| Cloud infrastructure | Buy (Yandex Cloud) | Not core competence, commodity | -15% vs on-premise |
-| AI/ML models | Make (in-house) | Core differentiator, cannot offload | Moat |
-| L1 Support | Partner (outsourced 50%) | Standard tickets, non-differentiating | -20% support costs |
-
-## Validation (Quality Gate)
-
-- [ ] All 5 primary activities analyzed (adapted for business type)
-- [ ] All 4 support activities analyzed
-- [ ] For each activity: costs (%), scoring (1-5 costs, 1-5 value), Efficiency Score
-- [ ] Competitive position defined per activity (Advantage / Parity / Disadvantage)
-- [ ] Linkages between activities analyzed: synergies and trade-offs
-- [ ] Costs × Value matrix filled, zones defined (🟢/🟡/⚪/🔴)
-- [ ] TOP-3 competitive advantages with sustainability and proofs
-- [ ] TOP-3 optimization zones with recommendations and expected effect
-- [ ] Make-or-buy decisions justified for key activities
-- [ ] Benchmarking conducted (against competitors or industry standards)
-- [ ] Data sources cited; data older than 12 mo marked ⚠️
-
-> If validation fails — iterate until it passes, do not hand off further.
-
-## Handoff
-The output of `$value-chain-analysis` acts as input for:
-- **Strategist / Mediator** — operational strategy, optimization program.
-- **`swot-analysis`** — advantages → S, inefficiencies → W.
-- **`competitive-analysis`** — benchmarking by activities.
-- **`unit-economics`** — costs per activity → margin structure.
-- **`porters-five-forces`** — procurement ↔ supplier power, service ↔ buyer power.
-
-Output format: consolidated table + linkages + TOP-3 advantages + TOP-3 optimizations + make-or-buy. When handing off — use `$handoff`.
-
-## Anti-patterns
-
-| Mistake | Why it hurts | How to do it right |
-|--------|-------------|---------------|
-| Analyzing only primary | Support activities often determine competitive advantage (R&D, HR) | All 9 activities: 5 primary + 4 support |
-| Costs without value | Unclear if costs are justified | Pair: Costs + Value → Efficiency Score |
-| Ignoring linkages | Optimizing one link may degrade another | Linkages: synergies and trade-offs between activities |
-| Vague phrasing | "Good marketing" gives no insights | Specifics: CAC = $X, conversion = Y%, NPS = Z |
-| No strategic context | Cost optimization vs differentiation — different focuses | Tie to strategy: what to optimize, what to reinforce |
-| No benchmarking | Unclear if metrics are good or bad | Compare with competitors and the industry |
-| Core Porter for SaaS w/o adapting | "Inbound logistics" makes no sense for SaaS | Adapt: Data ingestion, R&D, Onboarding, Growth, CS |
-| No Efficiency Score | Impossible to compare links objectively | Efficiency = Value / Costs; <1.0 = problem |
-| No make-or-buy | Missed outsourcing and focusing opportunities | Make (core), Buy (commodity), Partner (standard) |
-
-## Output Template
-
-```
-### Value Chain Analysis: [Organization / BU]
-**Industry:** [industry]  |  **Type:** [Traditional / Digital / SaaS]
-**Strategy:** [cost leadership / differentiation]  |  **Date:** [date]
-
----
-
-#### Framework Adaptation
-
-| Activity (Porter) | Adaptation for [business type] |
-|--------------|------------------------------|
-| Inbound Logistics | [Adapted name] |
-| Operations | [Adapted name] |
-| ... | ... |
-
----
-
-#### Consolidated Table
-
-**Primary Activities**
-
-| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
-|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
-| 1 | [Activity] | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
-
-**Support Activities**
-
-| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
-|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
-| 6 | [Activity] | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
-
-**Margin:** XX%
-
----
-
-#### Costs × Value Matrix
-
-| | Low Costs (1-2) | High Costs (3-5) |
-|--|:--------------------:|:---------------------:|
-| **High Value (4-5)** | 🟢 Invest: [activities] | 🟡 Maintain: [activities] |
-| **Low Value (1-3)** | ⚪ Outsourcing?: [activities] | 🔴 Optimize: [activities] |
-
----
-
-#### Linkages
-
-| Linkage | A → B | Description | Type |
-|-------|:-----:|----------|:---:|
-| [L1] | [Activity A] → [Activity B] | [Effect] | Synergy / Trade-off |
-
----
-
-#### Competitive Advantages (TOP-3)
-
-| # | Activity | Advantage | Sustainability | Proof | Source |
-|---|-----|-------------|:------------:|----------------|----------|
-| 1 | [Activity] | [Description] | High/Medium/Low | [Metric/fact] | [Source] |
-
----
-
-#### Optimization Zones (TOP-3)
-
-| # | Activity | Problem (Efficiency < 1.0) | Recommendation | Expected Effect |
-|---|-----|----------------------------|-------------|:----------------:|
-| 1 | [Activity] | [GAP] | [Action] | [Savings / Growth] |
-
----
-
-#### Make-or-Buy
-
-| Activity | Decision | Justification | Effect |
-|-----|:-------:|-------------|:------:|
-| [Activity] | Make / Buy / Partner | [Why] | [Result] |
-
----
-
-#### Strategic Recommendations
-[1-2 paragraphs: overall assessment of the chain, key advantages, growth zones, action plan]
-
----
-
-#### Sources and Assumptions
-
-| # | Fact / Assumption | Source | Date | Confidence |
-|---|-------------------|----------|------|:-------------:|
-| 1 | [Fact] | [Source] | [Date] | ✅ / ⚠️ / 🔮 |
-
-Legend: ✅ Verified (2+ sources) | ⚠️ Estimated (1 source) | 🔮 Assumed (expert estimate)
-```
+---
+name: value-chain-analysis
+description: Analysis of primary and support activities — costs, value added, competitive advantages
+---
+# Value Chain Analysis — Primary and Support Activities
+
+## When to use
+- When searching for **competitive advantages** — where the company creates the most value.
+- When optimizing the **cost structure** — identifying inefficient links in the chain.
+- When making **make-or-buy** decisions — outsourcing, vertical integration, partnerships.
+- During **benchmarking** — comparing the value chain with competitors to identify gaps.
+
+## Input
+
+| Field | Required | Description |
+|------|:-----------:|----------|
+| Organization / BU | ✅ | Company or business unit for analysis |
+| Industry | ✅ | Industry context for benchmarking |
+| Business type | ✅ | Traditional (manufacturing/retail) / Digital (SaaS/platform) |
+| Product / service | ⬚ | Specific product for focused analysis |
+| Competitors for comparison | ⬚ | 1-3 competitors for benchmarking |
+| Financial data | ⬚ | Costs by activity (if available) |
+| Strategic goal | ⬚ | Cost optimization / differentiation / both |
+
+> If mandatory fields are not provided — **ask the user** before starting the analysis. Do not invent.
+
+## Data Sources
+1. Management accounting — costs by activity (ABC costing).
+2. Operational metrics — productivity, cycle time, quality by links.
+3. Customer data — satisfaction, NPS, complaints by touchpoints.
+4. Competitive analysis — benchmarks for key activities.
+5. Industry standards — best practices, average indicators.
+
+> Every fact — with source and date. Data older than 12 months — mark with ⚠️.
+
+### Connection with other skills
+| Skill | What we take | When to call |
+|------|-----------|----------------|
+| `competitive-analysis` | Competitor benchmarks by activity (steps 1-9) | To compare competitive position per activity |
+| `unit-economics` | Costs → margin structure, CAC from marketing (step 4) | To link the chain to unit economics |
+| `porters-five-forces` | Supplier power → Procurement (step 9), buyer power → Service (step 5) | If external forces impact chain links |
+| `swot-analysis` | Advantages → S, inefficiencies → W (step 11) | For integration into SWOT |
+| `web-research` | Industry benchmarks for costs and efficiency | If comparison data is missing |
+| `customer-journey-mapping` | Customer touchpoints → Marketing, Service (steps 4-5) | To link CX to chain links |
+
+## Framework Adaptation by Business Type
+
+| Activity (Porter) | Traditional Business | Digital / SaaS |
+|---------------------------|---------------------|----------------|
+| Inbound Logistics | Raw material receipt, warehousing | Data ingestion, API integrations, content procurement |
+| Operations | Manufacturing, assembly | Development (R&D), DevOps, deploy |
+| Outbound Logistics | Distribution, delivery | CDN, onboarding, provisioning |
+| Marketing & Sales | Advertising, channels, pricing | Growth, PLG, sales, partnerships |
+| Service | Warranty, repair, support | Customer Success, support, updates |
+| Infrastructure | Management, finance, legal | Management, finance, compliance |
+| HR | Hiring, training, motivation | Hiring, culture, remote |
+| Technological Development | R&D, innovation | Platform engineering, AI/ML |
+| Procurement | Purchasing, suppliers | Cloud vendors, API providers, SaaS tools |
+
+> For Digital/SaaS — use adapted activity names from the right column.
+
+## Protocol
+
+### Step 0 — Prepare Context
+1. Define the object of analysis and boundaries (whole company or specific BU / product).
+2. Determine business type: traditional or digital/SaaS (select adaptation).
+3. Record the strategic goal: cost leadership, differentiation, or both.
+4. Define the level of detail: aggregate (9 activities) or detailed (sub-activities).
+5. Gather available financial and operational data.
+
+### Step 1 — Inbound Logistics
+1. Identify key processes (adapt for business type).
+2. Assess costs and value added:
+
+   | Metric | Value | Benchmark | Source |
+   |---------|:--------:|:--------:|----------|
+   | Costs (% of total) | X% | X% | [Source] |
+   | Value added | [Description] | — | [Source] |
+   | Key efficiency metric | [KPI: cycle time, reliability] | [Benchmark] | [Source] |
+
+3. Scoring:
+   - **Costs (1-5):** 1 = minimal, 5 = excessive.
+   - **Value (1-5):** 1 = minimal, 5 = critical for the customer.
+   - **Efficiency Score = Value / Costs** (>1.0 = efficient, <1.0 = inefficient).
+4. Competitive position: Advantage / Parity / Disadvantage.
+
+### Step 2 — Operations
+Similar structure: processes → costs/value → scoring → competitive position.
+
+Key metrics: quality (defect rate), speed (cycle time), agility (time-to-market).
+
+### Step 3 — Outbound Logistics
+Key metrics: delivery speed, coverage, reliability, cost per unit.
+
+### Step 4 — Marketing & Sales
+Key metrics: CAC, ROAS, conversion, sales cycle length, brand awareness.
+
+> Link to `$unit-economics`: CAC from this link → unit economics.
+
+### Step 5 — Service
+Key metrics: NPS, CSAT, SLA compliance, time-to-resolution, retention impact.
+
+> Link to `$customer-journey-mapping`: touchpoints in retention/advocacy.
+
+### Steps 6-9 — Support Activities
+
+For each (Infrastructure, HR, Technological Development, Procurement) — similar structure:
+1. Key processes (adapted for business type).
+2. Costs (% of total) + value added.
+3. Scoring: Costs (1-5), Value (1-5), Efficiency Score.
+4. Competitive position.
+
+**For each support activity — define its contribution to primary ones:**
+
+| Support | Impacts primary | How |
+|----------------|---------------------|-----|
+| Infrastructure | All | Quality of management, planning, compliance |
+| HR | Operations, Service | Team quality → product and support quality |
+| Technological Development | Operations, Marketing | Innovations → differentiation, automation → costs |
+| Procurement | Inbound Logistics, Operations | Quality and cost of inputs |
+
+### Step 10 — Linkage Analysis
+1. Identify key dependencies between activities:
+
+   | Linkage | Activity A → Activity B | Description | Optimization Effect |
+   |-------|:-------------:|----------|-------------------|
+   | [L1] | Procurement → Operations | Input quality → defect rate | Better suppliers → -X% defects |
+   | [L2] | Operations → Service | Product quality → support load | Fewer bugs → -X% tickets |
+   | [L3] | HR → Marketing | Sales skills → conversion | Training → +X% win rate |
+
+2. Identify **trade-offs**: where optimizing one link degrades another.
+3. Identify **synergies**: where investments in one link improve several.
+
+### Step 11 — Consolidated Analysis and Scoring
+
+Compile all activities into a single table:
+
+| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
+|---|-----------------|:-----------:|:-------------:|:--------------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
+| 1 | Inbound Logistics | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
+
+**Define zones using the Costs × Value matrix:**
+
+| | Low Costs | High Costs |
+|--|:--------------:|:---------------:|
+| **High Value** | 🟢 Super-efficient → Invest | 🟡 Justified → Maintain |
+| **Low Value** | ⚪ Neutral → Outsourcing? | 🔴 Inefficient → Optimize |
+
+### Step 12 — Recommendations
+1. TOP-3 sources of competitive advantage (🟢 + 🟡 with high value).
+2. TOP-3 optimization zones (🔴 inefficient).
+3. Make-or-buy decisions:
+
+   | Activity | Decision | Justification | Expected Effect |
+   |-----------------|---------|-------------|:----------------:|
+   | [Activity] | Make / Buy / Partner | [Why] | [Savings / Value growth] |
+
+4. Action plan with priorities, owners, deadlines, and KPIs.
+
+## Example — B2B SaaS: HR Recruiting Automation Platform
+
+**Context:** HR-tech SaaS, 200 clients, $2.4M ARR, 45 employees, RF. Strategy: differentiation via AI.
+
+### Consolidated Table
+
+**Primary Activities:**
+
+| # | Activity (SaaS Adaptation) | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Effic. | Comp. | Action |
+|---|---------------------|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:------:|:-------:|----------|
+| 1 | Data ingestion / API | 5% | 2 | 3 | 1.5 | Parity | Maintain |
+| 2 | Development (R&D) | 35% | 4 | 5 | 1.25 | **Advantage** | Invest (AI) |
+| 3 | Onboarding / CDN | 8% | 3 | 4 | 1.33 | Advantage | Maintain (3-day deploy) |
+| 4 | Growth / Sales | 25% | 4 | 3 | 0.75 | **Disadvantage** | 🔴 Optimize |
+| 5 | Customer Success | 12% | 3 | 5 | 1.67 | Advantage | Invest (NPS 72) |
+
+**Support Activities:**
+
+| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Effic. | Comp. | Action |
+|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:------:|:-------:|----------|
+| 6 | Management / compliance | 5% | 2 | 2 | 1.0 | Parity | Maintain |
+| 7 | HR (hiring, culture) | 3% | 2 | 4 | 2.0 | 🟢 Super-effic | Invest |
+| 8 | Platform engineering | 5% | 3 | 5 | 1.67 | Advantage | Invest |
+| 9 | Cloud / API vendors | 2% | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | Parity | Maintain |
+
+**Margin:** 85% gross (Revenue $200K/mo − COGS $30K).
+
+### Linkages
+
+| Linkage | A → B | Effect | Trade-off / Synergy |
+|-------|:-----:|--------|:-------------------:|
+| R&D → Customer Success | Fewer bugs → -30% tickets | Synergy ✅ |
+| R&D → Growth/Sales | AI features → differentiation → +conversion | Synergy ✅ |
+| HR → R&D | Hiring quality → development speed | Synergy ✅ |
+| Growth/Sales → Customer Success | Aggressive sales → bad-fit clients → churn | Trade-off ⚠️ |
+
+### Competitive Advantages (TOP-3)
+
+| # | Activity | Advantage | Sustainability | Proof |
+|---|-----|-------------|:------------:|----------------|
+| 1 | R&D | AI personalization (only ones in RF market) | High (patent + team) | 3 ML engineers, patent pending |
+| 2 | Customer Success | NPS 72 vs industry 45 | Medium (copyable via processes) | Q1 2026 survey, N=180 |
+| 3 | Onboarding | 3-day deploy vs competitors' 2-4 weeks | Medium | CRM: last 20 deployments |
+
+### Optimization Zones (TOP-3)
+
+| # | Activity | Problem | Recommendation | Effect |
+|---|-----|---------|-------------|:------:|
+| 1 | Growth/Sales | Efficiency 0.75, CAC $1,450 (LinkedIn $2,500) | Reallocate budget: LinkedIn → Content/Referral | CAC → $1,100 (-24%) |
+| 2 | Growth/Sales | Sales team 3 ppl., bottleneck | Hire 2 SDRs + partner program | Pipeline ×2 |
+| 3 | Data ingestion | No 1C integration (30% drop-off) | Develop 1C integration | -30% drop-off |
+
+### Make-or-Buy
+
+| Activity | Decision | Justification | Effect |
+|-----|---------|-------------|:------:|
+| Cloud infrastructure | Buy (Yandex Cloud) | Not core competence, commodity | -15% vs on-premise |
+| AI/ML models | Make (in-house) | Core differentiator, cannot offload | Moat |
+| L1 Support | Partner (outsourced 50%) | Standard tickets, non-differentiating | -20% support costs |
+
+## Validation (Quality Gate)
+
+- [ ] All 5 primary activities analyzed (adapted for business type)
+- [ ] All 4 support activities analyzed
+- [ ] For each activity: costs (%), scoring (1-5 costs, 1-5 value), Efficiency Score
+- [ ] Competitive position defined per activity (Advantage / Parity / Disadvantage)
+- [ ] Linkages between activities analyzed: synergies and trade-offs
+- [ ] Costs × Value matrix filled, zones defined (🟢/🟡/⚪/🔴)
+- [ ] TOP-3 competitive advantages with sustainability and proofs
+- [ ] TOP-3 optimization zones with recommendations and expected effect
+- [ ] Make-or-buy decisions justified for key activities
+- [ ] Benchmarking conducted (against competitors or industry standards)
+- [ ] Data sources cited; data older than 12 mo marked ⚠️
+
+> If validation fails — iterate until it passes, do not hand off further.
+
+## Handoff
+The output of `$value-chain-analysis` acts as input for:
+- **Strategist / Mediator** — operational strategy, optimization program.
+- **`swot-analysis`** — advantages → S, inefficiencies → W.
+- **`competitive-analysis`** — benchmarking by activities.
+- **`unit-economics`** — costs per activity → margin structure.
+- **`porters-five-forces`** — procurement ↔ supplier power, service ↔ buyer power.
+
+Output format: consolidated table + linkages + TOP-3 advantages + TOP-3 optimizations + make-or-buy. When handing off — use `$handoff`.
+
+## Anti-patterns
+
+| Mistake | Why it hurts | How to do it right |
+|--------|-------------|---------------|
+| Analyzing only primary | Support activities often determine competitive advantage (R&D, HR) | All 9 activities: 5 primary + 4 support |
+| Costs without value | Unclear if costs are justified | Pair: Costs + Value → Efficiency Score |
+| Ignoring linkages | Optimizing one link may degrade another | Linkages: synergies and trade-offs between activities |
+| Vague phrasing | "Good marketing" gives no insights | Specifics: CAC = $X, conversion = Y%, NPS = Z |
+| No strategic context | Cost optimization vs differentiation — different focuses | Tie to strategy: what to optimize, what to reinforce |
+| No benchmarking | Unclear if metrics are good or bad | Compare with competitors and the industry |
+| Core Porter for SaaS w/o adapting | "Inbound logistics" makes no sense for SaaS | Adapt: Data ingestion, R&D, Onboarding, Growth, CS |
+| No Efficiency Score | Impossible to compare links objectively | Efficiency = Value / Costs; <1.0 = problem |
+| No make-or-buy | Missed outsourcing and focusing opportunities | Make (core), Buy (commodity), Partner (standard) |
+
+## Output Template
+
+```
+### Value Chain Analysis: [Organization / BU]
+**Industry:** [industry]  |  **Type:** [Traditional / Digital / SaaS]
+**Strategy:** [cost leadership / differentiation]  |  **Date:** [date]
+
+---
+
+#### Framework Adaptation
+
+| Activity (Porter) | Adaptation for [business type] |
+|--------------|------------------------------|
+| Inbound Logistics | [Adapted name] |
+| Operations | [Adapted name] |
+| ... | ... |
+
+---
+
+#### Consolidated Table
+
+**Primary Activities**
+
+| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
+|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
+| 1 | [Activity] | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
+
+**Support Activities**
+
+| # | Activity | Costs (%) | Costs (1-5) | Value (1-5) | Efficiency | Comp. Position | Action |
+|---|-----|:-----------:|:-----------:|:-----------:|:----------:|:---------------:|----------|
+| 6 | [Activity] | X% | X | X | X.X | Adv./Parity/Disadv. | [Action] |
+
+**Margin:** XX%
+
+---
+
+#### Costs × Value Matrix
+
+| | Low Costs (1-2) | High Costs (3-5) |
+|--|:--------------------:|:---------------------:|
+| **High Value (4-5)** | 🟢 Invest: [activities] | 🟡 Maintain: [activities] |
+| **Low Value (1-3)** | ⚪ Outsourcing?: [activities] | 🔴 Optimize: [activities] |
+
+---
+
+#### Linkages
+
+| Linkage | A → B | Description | Type |
+|-------|:-----:|----------|:---:|
+| [L1] | [Activity A] → [Activity B] | [Effect] | Synergy / Trade-off |
+
+---
+
+#### Competitive Advantages (TOP-3)
+
+| # | Activity | Advantage | Sustainability | Proof | Source |
+|---|-----|-------------|:------------:|----------------|----------|
+| 1 | [Activity] | [Description] | High/Medium/Low | [Metric/fact] | [Source] |
+
+---
+
+#### Optimization Zones (TOP-3)
+
+| # | Activity | Problem (Efficiency < 1.0) | Recommendation | Expected Effect |
+|---|-----|----------------------------|-------------|:----------------:|
+| 1 | [Activity] | [GAP] | [Action] | [Savings / Growth] |
+
+---
+
+#### Make-or-Buy
+
+| Activity | Decision | Justification | Effect |
+|-----|:-------:|-------------|:------:|
+| [Activity] | Make / Buy / Partner | [Why] | [Result] |
+
+---
+
+#### Strategic Recommendations
+[1-2 paragraphs: overall assessment of the chain, key advantages, growth zones, action plan]
+
+---
+
+#### Sources and Assumptions
+
+| # | Fact / Assumption | Source | Date | Confidence |
+|---|-------------------|----------|------|:-------------:|
+| 1 | [Fact] | [Source] | [Date] | ✅ / ⚠️ / 🔮 |
+
+Legend: ✅ Verified (2+ sources) | ⚠️ Estimated (1 source) | 🔮 Assumed (expert estimate)
+```