design-protocol 1.0.0

package/skills/dp-storytell/references/delivery-tactics.md

@@ -0,0 +1,228 @@
+# Delivery Tactics — Live Presentation Mechanics
+
+Concrete tactics for delivering the presentation — pacing, handling difficult moments, Q&A, pre-wiring.
+
+---
+
+## Before the Meeting
+
+### Pre-wire every senior attendee
+Never surprise a senior person in the room. 48-72 hours before:
+
+1. **Map the room** — DACI (Decider, Approvers, Contributors, Informed) or RACI
+2. **1:1 with the Decider first** — walk the recommendation, listen for objections, adjust
+3. **1:1 with each Approver** — tailor to their concern:
+   - Finance → cost
+   - Engineering → feasibility
+   - Legal → risk
+   - Marketing → positioning
+4. **Handle the skeptic last** — either (a) incorporate their input, (b) get objection on record, or (c) get the Decider's air cover
+5. **Walk in with no unknown dissenters** — the meeting is for ratification
+
+The Amazon six-pager variant: replace the pitch meeting with 20 minutes of silent reading. Works only if the document is strong enough to stand alone.
+
+### Rehearse three versions
+- **30 seconds** — for elevator/hallway
+- **3 minutes** — if you're interrupted early
+- **30 minutes** — the full version
+
+Know which one lands when you get interrupted.
+
+### The scope contract
+Open every review with:
+> *"Today's decision is about [X]. Out of scope for today: [Y, Z]. Parking-lot anything else."*
+
+This is your shield against scope expansion. Point to it when "what about…" lands.
+
+---
+
+## Opening the Presentation
+
+### Don't do these
+- Apologize ("Sorry I didn't have time to…")
+- Announce the structure ("I'll start with context, then move to…")
+- Introduce yourself at length
+- Explain why they should care (earn it with the hook)
+
+### Do these
+- Start with a user quote, data point, or visual
+- Get to the ask within the first 60 seconds (exec) or 5 minutes (peer)
+- Use silence after the hook — let it land
+- Make eye contact with the Decider first
+
+### The throughline test (Chris Anderson)
+Before you start, ask: *"Can I encapsulate this talk in ≤15 words?"* If not, the talk is unfocused.
+
+---
+
+## During the Presentation
+
+### Pacing rules
+- **~150 words per minute** for live speech (slightly slower for complex content)
+- **Pause for 2-3 seconds** after key points — don't rush through them
+- **Slow down at transitions** — audience needs a beat to re-orient
+- **Speed up on process detail** — if it's not the point, move through it
+
+### Silence is a tool
+- After asking a question → let it hang; don't fill the air
+- After a key stat → let it land
+- When challenged → silence before responding buys thinking time
+
+### Voice modulation
+- Drop volume for weighty moments (counterintuitively, people lean in)
+- Raise pace for enthusiasm / momentum
+- Hit the keyword in each sentence with emphasis
+- Vary sentence length — long / short / long / short
+
+### Physical presence (in-person)
+- Stand for executive audiences; sit for peer reviews
+- Hands visible, not in pockets
+- Move with purpose (walk across the stage; don't pace)
+- Face the screen as little as possible
+
+---
+
+## Handling Difficult Moments
+
+### The Greever Response Process (for all hard feedback)
+
+1. **Listen** — let them finish. Don't interrupt even if they're wrong. Take notes.
+2. **Understand** — restate their concern in your words:
+   > *"So what I'm hearing is you're worried that X will cause Y. Is that right?"*
+   This confirms you heard, forces them to refine vague concerns, and buys you thinking time.
+3. **Respond** — tie your answer to:
+   - (a) The project goal
+   - (b) The user
+   - (c) A prior agreement or data point
+
+Never defend; redirect.
+
+### Handling skeptical stakeholders
+**Sign:** repeated "but what about…"
+**Tactic:** thank them, add to parking lot, continue. Address in Q&A: *"You asked about X — here's what we considered."*
+
+### Handling "I don't like blue"
+**Sign:** aesthetic opinion posed as professional critique
+**Tactic sequence:**
+1. Acknowledge without agreeing: "Got it, thanks for calling that out."
+2. Convert taste to criteria: "Help me understand — is it the brand association, the contrast, the mood, or something else?"
+3. Tie back to agreed frame: "Our brand archetype is 'trusted institution' — blue tested highest for that in the brand study."
+4. Offer a test: "We can run this past 5 customers this week. If they react your way, we change it. Fair?"
+5. Escalation hatch: "This is a call I'd like to make with the product and brand leads aligned — can we put this on Thursday?"
+
+Never argue the merits of blue. Always convert taste to criteria.
+
+### Handling scope-expansion attacks
+**Sign:** "This is great, but what about [adjacent feature]?"
+
+**Five responses:**
+1. **Acknowledge + park:** "Great question — let me add to follow-ups. For this decision, can we stay focused on [ask]?"
+2. **Scope contract:** "Today's decision is about X. Out of scope: Y. Is your concern on that list?"
+3. **One-pager boundary:** "The one-pager deferred [A, B, C] to Phase 2. Is your concern on that list?"
+4. **Trade-off reframe:** "We can do that — adds 6 weeks and $X. Make that trade now, or ship and add in Q4?"
+5. **Yes, and later:** "Yes — on the roadmap for Phase 2. For today, can we approve Phase 1?"
+
+**Anti-pattern:** defending *why* you didn't do the adjacent thing. You will lose. Acknowledge, park, redirect.
+
+### Handling the silent room
+**Sign:** no one reacts after you present
+**Tactic:** ask a specific person a specific question. Not *"any thoughts?"* but:
+> *"Priya, from engineering's perspective, what's the riskiest part of this?"*
+
+Direct questions break the silence spiral.
+
+### Handling leadership override
+**Sign:** exec says "just do X" mid-presentation, overriding your proposal
+
+**Don't debate in the room.** Buy time:
+> *"Happy to explore that — can I take 24 hours to assess the trade-off and come back?"*
+
+Come back with evidence, not emotion.
+
+### Handling design-by-committee
+**Sign:** every stakeholder wants a tweak; none are individually critical
+
+**Force prioritization:**
+> *"We can do 3 of these before deadline. Which 3?"*
+
+If they refuse to prioritize, escalate to the Decider with the trade-off explicit.
+
+### Handling "I don't believe the data"
+**Sign:** stakeholder questions methodology to avoid the conclusion
+**Tactic:**
+1. Acknowledge the methodology concern as valid
+2. Present the limitation honestly: "You're right that N=6 is directional, not statistical"
+3. Triangulate with other data: support tickets, analytics funnel, competitive benchmark
+4. Offer: "If you want statistical confidence, we can run a 40-participant study. 3 weeks, $Y. Want to go?"
+
+Don't die on the methodology hill. Convert skepticism into a path forward.
+
+---
+
+## Q&A Handling
+
+### Structure your Q&A prep
+For each anticipated question, have:
+- **Crisp 1-3 sentence answer**
+- **Evidence to support** (stat, quote, prototype)
+- **Graceful deflection** if you don't know
+
+### The "I don't know" response
+Never bluff. Instead:
+> *"Great question — I want to give you a data-backed answer. Let me come back within 24 hours with specifics."*
+
+Then actually come back within 24 hours. Trust compounds.
+
+### The "bad question" redirect
+Sometimes a question is premised on a wrong assumption. Don't correct abrasively. Redirect:
+> *"I hear you asking [their framing]. What I think the underlying question is [better framing]. Let me address that."*
+
+### Closing Q&A
+Don't end with *"any other questions?"* (silence kills momentum). End with:
+> *"Last question — then I want to close with the ask."*
+
+Then reassert the ask in one sentence. Always close with the ask.
+
+---
+
+## After the Meeting
+
+### Follow-up within 24 hours
+- **Send the artifact** — deck, 1-pager, or recording
+- **Capture the decision** — what was decided, deferred, rejected; attendees
+- **Assign owners** — who does what next, by when
+- **Address "I'll get back to you" items** — don't let them age
+
+### Measure if the presentation worked
+Define upfront what success looks like:
+- Decision made? (best)
+- Follow-up meeting scheduled? (acceptable)
+- New concerns surfaced but no decision? (need new evidence)
+- Proposal rejected? (learn why; iterate)
+
+Without a success criterion, you'll never improve your presentation skill.
+
+---
+
+## Anti-Patterns to Avoid
+
+1. **Reading slides** — audience can read; they came for your analysis
+2. **Apologizing mid-presentation** — undermines credibility
+3. **Running live prototypes to execs** — they break; use static + clip
+4. **Over-rehearsed delivery** — sounds like a commercial; disengages audience
+5. **Hiding the ask** — never end with "any questions?"; always reassert the ask
+6. **Over-qualifying** — "maybe," "might," "possibly" = signals you're not ready
+7. **Fighting the facilitator** — time-box is your friend; fighting it kills credibility
+8. **Responding to "I don't like it" emotionally** — always convert to criteria
+9. **Burying a metric** — lead with the number; support with method
+10. **Ignoring the room's energy** — if they've moved on, move with them
+
+---
+
+## The 10-Second Test
+
+Before delivering, apply:
+> *If I only had 10 seconds with this audience, what single sentence would I say?*
+
+If you can't answer, the presentation isn't ready.
+That sentence is your opening and your closing.

package/skills/dp-storytell/references/narrative-frameworks.md

@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
+# Narrative Frameworks — Full Reference
+
+Twelve frameworks for structuring a design story, with exact structures and design-work examples. Use with the quick-selector in SKILL.md.
+
+---
+
+## 1. SCR — Situation, Complication, Resolution (McKinsey)
+
+### Structure
+- **Situation** — the stable context everyone agrees on
+- **Complication** — what changed, what's at risk, what's painful
+- **Resolution** — what we propose and why it works
+
+### Best use
+Executive pitches, design proposals, consulting engagements. Crisp, decision-oriented, minimum setup.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Situation:** Our trial-to-paid conversion has been stable at 23% for 4 quarters.
+> **Complication:** New research shows 40% of abandoners leave at step 3 of onboarding — a step introduced in last year's refactor.
+> **Resolution:** Remove step 3's unasked-for configuration; move sample-data generation to first use. Expect +4 pts conversion within a quarter.
+
+---
+
+## 2. NABC — Need, Approach, Benefits, Competition (SRI International)
+
+### Structure
+- **Need** — a clear customer/user need
+- **Approach** — how you'll address it
+- **Benefits per Cost** — quantified value relative to effort
+- **Competition** — why your approach wins vs. alternatives
+
+### Best use
+Design proposals where resources are being allocated; innovation pitches; feature sell-ins.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Need:** B2B buyers need to compare 5+ enterprise options; current comparison table hides critical differentiators.
+> **Approach:** Side-by-side comparison view with user-customizable columns, sourced from a structured feature catalog.
+> **Benefits/Cost:** 3 engineer-months; projected +8% pipeline velocity (based on competitive benchmark); estimated $1.2M ARR lift.
+> **Competition:** Competitors offer static tables; our dynamic approach is a defensible differentiator.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Minto Pyramid Principle (Barbara Minto, 1967)
+
+### Structure
+- **Top: governing thought** — one sentence; the recommendation
+- **Middle: supporting points** — typically 3, MECE (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive)
+- **Bottom: detail / evidence**
+
+Intro uses **SCQA** (Situation → Complication → Question → Answer). Each level answers "why?" or "how?" from the level above.
+
+### Best use
+Written memos, executive one-pagers, board decks, any time the reader is senior and scanning.
+
+### Design-work example
+```
+GOVERNING THOUGHT
+Ship the redesigned checkout (single-page variant) in Q3 — expect +1.8 pts conversion and −22% support tickets.
+
+SUPPORTING POINT 1: Users struggle with the current multi-step flow.
+  Evidence: 4 of 6 participants failed task; 40% drop-off at step 3.
+
+SUPPORTING POINT 2: Industry benchmark favors single-page.
+  Evidence: Baymard 2024 benchmark; 3 top-5 competitors single-page.
+
+SUPPORTING POINT 3: Internal cost model supports the investment.
+  Evidence: $X projected ARR lift vs. $Y engineering cost; payback < 6 months.
+```
+
+---
+
+## 4. STAR — Situation, Task, Action, Result
+
+### Structure
+- **Situation** — context
+- **Task** — what needed doing
+- **Action** — what you/team did
+- **Result** — outcome, measured
+
+### Best use
+Case studies, retrospectives, postmortems, portfolio presentations, behavioral interviews.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Situation:** Enterprise onboarding took 6 weeks average, driving CS cost and delaying time-to-value.
+> **Task:** Cut onboarding time to under 2 weeks without reducing feature adoption.
+> **Action:** Research + 3 design iterations + progressive-disclosure pattern + self-service checklist.
+> **Result:** 11-day average (down from 42); support tickets during onboarding down 61%; NPS at 30-day up 18 pts.
+
+---
+
+## 5. 3-Act Structure
+
+### Structure
+- **Act 1 — Setup** — world, protagonist, inciting incident
+- **Act 2 — Confrontation** — obstacles, stakes rise, low point
+- **Act 3 — Resolution** — climax, new state
+
+### Best use
+Longer presentations (30+ min), strategic pivots, change-management narratives, keynote-style talks.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Act 1:** Our users love our product. But last year, we lost 12% of our enterprise segment to a competitor who shipped faster.
+> **Act 2:** We tried to match their pace with more designers — it didn't work. Features shipped but quality dropped, NPS fell, churn accelerated. We were on a path to lose the rest.
+> **Act 3:** We invested in a design system. 18 months in, ship velocity doubled, design debt is tracked and shrinking, and NPS recovered. Here's the next phase.
+
+---
+
+## 6. Pixar Story Spine
+
+### Structure
+- Once upon a time…
+- Every day…
+- Until one day…
+- Because of that…
+- Because of that…
+- Until finally…
+- And ever since then…
+
+### Best use
+Warm, narrative-heavy presentations; user journey walkthroughs; research readouts with high emotional content.
+
+### Design-work example
+> Once upon a time, a small team shipped a product users loved.
+> Every day, more users signed up, usage grew, and the product gained features.
+> Until one day, a user named Priya spent 20 minutes trying to do a task that should've taken 2.
+> Because of that, she gave up and called support — one of 800 tickets that week about the same screen.
+> Because of that, we pulled the screen into research and discovered three converging failures.
+> Until finally, we redesigned it with progressive disclosure, and weekly tickets dropped 82%.
+> And ever since then, the screen is our most-praised example of "how to grow a product without growing complexity."
+
+---
+
+## 7. Hero's Journey (Joseph Campbell, simplified)
+
+### Structure (3-stage simplified)
+- **Call to Adventure** — the protagonist's ordinary world is disrupted
+- **Trials** — they face obstacles, gain allies and skills
+- **Return with Elixir** — they return transformed, with something to share
+
+### Best use
+Longform narrative — keynotes, company-all-hands, change narratives, case studies with personal arc.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Call:** Our design team was drowning in review cycles; every decision required six meetings.
+> **Trials:** We tried templates — too rigid. We tried async — too slow. We tried office hours — still didn't scale.
+> **Return:** We built a critique protocol modeled on writing workshops: pre-read, silent observation, structured feedback, decision owner. Review cycles dropped 70%. We're sharing the protocol at the conference next month.
+
+---
+
+## 8. Dan Harmon's Story Circle (8 steps)
+
+### Structure
+1. A character is in a zone of comfort
+2. But they want something
+3. They enter an unfamiliar situation
+4. Adapt to it
+5. Get what they wanted
+6. Pay a heavy price
+7. Return to their familiar situation
+8. Having changed
+
+### Best use
+Rich user-journey stories; customer success narratives with transformation arc.
+
+---
+
+## 9. Freytag's Pyramid (classical, 5-act)
+
+### Structure
+- **Exposition** — setup
+- **Rising Action** — complications build
+- **Climax** — turning point
+- **Falling Action** — consequences unfold
+- **Resolution** — new equilibrium
+
+### Best use
+Emotionally weighty presentations; cultural or strategic shifts; retrospectives on painful incidents.
+
+---
+
+## 10. Problem-Agitate-Solve (PAS)
+
+### Structure
+- **Problem** — name the pain
+- **Agitate** — make the pain feel immediate and costly
+- **Solve** — present the relief
+
+### Best use
+Marketing-adjacent presentations; sell-ins; pitches where urgency needs to be manufactured honestly. Use sparingly — easy to slip into fear-mongering.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Problem:** 40% of users abandon at step 3.
+> **Agitate:** That's 12,000 people a week who reach our product, decide it's not worth it, and leave forever. Every week. That's $4M in ARR walking away annually.
+> **Solve:** Here's what 4 weeks of research and 2 weeks of redesign recovers.
+
+---
+
+## 11. Before / During / After
+
+### Structure
+- **Before** — state of the world before the work
+- **During** — what happened, what was learned
+- **After** — new state, measured
+
+### Best use
+Research readouts; case studies; retrospectives; design-system adoption stories.
+
+### Design-work example
+> **Before:** 6 designers, 5 different button styles, inconsistent accessibility. Velocity: 3 features/quarter.
+> **During:** 4 months of design-system foundation work — token architecture, component library, accessibility audit, migration playbook.
+> **After:** 1 token system, 1 component library, WCAG 2.1 AA baseline. Velocity: 9 features/quarter.
+
+---
+
+## 12. Pyramid Principle meets Heath's SUCCESs
+
+Every story must pass the **SUCCESs test** (Chip & Dan Heath, *Made to Stick*):
+- **Simple** — one core idea, ruthlessly curated
+- **Unexpected** — breaks a pattern
+- **Concrete** — specific users, real quotes, actual screens
+- **Credible** — research / data / prototype backing
+- **Emotional** — audience feels something
+- **Story** — narrative arc, not a bullet list
+
+### Common failures
+- Long-winded → fails Simple
+- Predictable → fails Unexpected
+- Abstract ("users") → fails Concrete
+- Opinion-only → fails Credible
+- Detached → fails Emotional
+- Feature-list → fails Story
+
+---
+
+## Framework Selection Quick Reference
+
+| Purpose | Framework | Why |
+|---|---|---|
+| Pitch to exec | SCR + Minto | Fast, decision-oriented |
+| Research readout | Before/During/After or Problem-Insight-Recommendation | Evidence-heavy |
+| Design proposal | NABC | Forces quantified value |
+| Case study | STAR | Outcome-measured |
+| Change narrative | 3-Act | Arc carries emotion |
+| Longform keynote | Hero's Journey or Story Circle | Journey-based |
+| Research with empathy | Pixar Story Spine | Warm, human |
+| Strategic pivot | Freytag's Pyramid | Dramatic weight |
+| Sell-in / urgency | PAS | Manufactured tension (careful) |
+| Executive memo | Minto Pyramid | Scannable, MECE |
+
+---
+
+## Meta-Rules Across All Frameworks
+
+1. **Audience is the hero.** You are the mentor (Yoda, not Luke). — Duarte
+2. **Every talk has a throughline.** One sentence that connects every element; if a section doesn't serve it, cut it. — Anderson
+3. **Show, don't tell.** Prototypes > screenshots > bullet lists. — Duarte, Anderson
+4. **Oscillate between "what is" and "what could be."** Tension sustains attention. — Duarte
+5. **End on New Bliss.** The future state *if the audience acts*. Never end flat. — Duarte
+6. **Seed a STAR moment.** One repeatable, memorable beat somewhere in the middle. — Duarte