opencode-knowledge-work 0.0.0-stage → 0.1.1

package/content/product-management/skills/product-management-metrics-review/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,388 @@
+---
+name: metrics-review
+description: Review and analyze product metrics with trend analysis and actionable insights. Use when running a weekly, monthly, or quarterly metrics review, investigating a sudden spike or drop, comparing performance against targets, or turning raw numbers into a scorecard with recommended actions.
+argument-hint: "<time period or metric focus>"
+---
+
+# Metrics Review
+
+> If you see unfamiliar placeholders or need to check which tools are connected, see [CONNECTORS.md](../../CONNECTORS.md).
+
+Review and analyze product metrics, identify trends, and surface actionable insights.
+
+## Usage
+
+```
+/metrics-review $ARGUMENTS
+```
+
+## Workflow
+
+### 1. Gather Metrics Data
+
+If **~~product analytics** is connected:
+- Pull key product metrics for the relevant time period
+- Get comparison data (previous period, same period last year, targets)
+- Pull segment breakdowns if available
+
+If no analytics tool is connected, ask the user to provide:
+- The metrics and their values (paste a table, screenshot, or describe)
+- Comparison data (previous period, targets)
+- Any context on recent changes (launches, incidents, seasonality)
+
+Ask the user:
+- What time period to review? (last week, last month, last quarter)
+- What metrics to focus on? Or should we review the full product metrics suite?
+- Are there specific targets or goals to compare against?
+- Any known events that might explain changes (launches, outages, marketing campaigns, seasonality)?
+
+### 2. Organize the Metrics
+
+Structure the review using a metrics hierarchy: North Star metric at the top, L1 health indicators (acquisition, activation, engagement, retention, revenue, satisfaction), and L2 diagnostic metrics for drill-down. See **Product Metrics Hierarchy** below for full definitions.
+
+If the user has not defined their metrics hierarchy, help them identify their North Star and key L1 metrics before proceeding.
+
+### 3. Analyze Trends
+
+For each key metric:
+- **Current value**: What is the metric today?
+- **Trend**: Up, down, or flat compared to previous period? Over what timeframe?
+- **vs Target**: How does it compare to the goal or target?
+- **Rate of change**: Is the trend accelerating or decelerating?
+- **Anomalies**: Any sudden changes, spikes, or drops?
+
+Identify correlations:
+- Do changes in one metric correlate with changes in another?
+- Are there leading indicators that predict lagging metric changes?
+- Do segment breakdowns reveal that an aggregate trend is driven by a specific cohort?
+
+### 4. Generate the Review
+
+#### Summary
+2-3 sentences: overall product health, most notable changes, key callout.
+
+#### Metric Scorecard
+Table format for quick scanning:
+
+| Metric | Current | Previous | Change | Target | Status |
+|--------|---------|----------|--------|--------|--------|
+| [Metric] | [Value] | [Value] | [+/- %] | [Target] | [On track / At risk / Miss] |
+
+#### Trend Analysis
+For each metric worth discussing:
+- What happened and how significant is the change
+- Why it likely happened (attribution based on known events, correlated metrics, segment analysis)
+- Whether this is a one-time event or a sustained trend
+
+#### Bright Spots
+What is going well:
+- Metrics beating targets
+- Positive trends to sustain
+- Segments or features showing strong performance
+
+#### Areas of Concern
+What needs attention:
+- Metrics missing targets or trending negatively
+- Early warning signals before they become problems
+- Metrics where we lack visibility or understanding
+
+#### Recommended Actions
+Specific next steps based on the analysis:
+- Investigations to run (dig deeper into a concerning trend)
+- Experiments to launch (test hypotheses about what could improve a metric)
+- Investments to make (double down on what is working)
+- Alerts to set (monitor a metric more closely)
+
+#### Context and Caveats
+- Known data quality issues
+- Events that affect comparability (outages, holidays, launches)
+- Metrics we should be tracking but are not yet
+
+### 5. Follow Up
+
+After generating the review:
+- Ask if any metric needs deeper investigation
+- Offer to create a dashboard spec for ongoing monitoring
+- Offer to draft experiment proposals for areas of concern
+- Offer to set up a metrics review template for recurring use
+
+## Product Metrics Hierarchy
+
+### North Star Metric
+The single metric that best captures the core value your product delivers to users. It should be:
+
+- **Value-aligned**: Moves when users get more value from the product
+- **Leading**: Predicts long-term business success (revenue, retention)
+- **Actionable**: The product team can influence it through their work
+- **Understandable**: Everyone in the company can understand what it means and why it matters
+
+**Examples by product type**:
+- Collaboration tool: Weekly active teams with 3+ members contributing
+- Marketplace: Weekly transactions completed
+- SaaS platform: Weekly active users completing core workflow
+- Content platform: Weekly engaged reading/viewing time
+- Developer tool: Weekly deployments using the tool
+
+### L1 Metrics (Health Indicators)
+The 5-7 metrics that together paint a complete picture of product health. These map to the key stages of the user lifecycle:
+
+**Acquisition**: Are new users finding the product?
+- New signups or trial starts (volume and trend)
+- Signup conversion rate (visitors to signups)
+- Channel mix (where are new users coming from)
+- Cost per acquisition (for paid channels)
+
+**Activation**: Are new users reaching the value moment?
+- Activation rate: % of new users who complete the key action that predicts retention
+- Time to activate: how long from signup to activation
+- Setup completion rate: % who complete onboarding steps
+- First value moment: when users first experience the core product value
+
+**Engagement**: Are active users getting value?
+- DAU / WAU / MAU: active users at different timeframes
+- DAU/MAU ratio (stickiness): what fraction of monthly users come back daily
+- Core action frequency: how often users do the thing that matters most
+- Session depth: how much users do per session
+- Feature adoption: % of users using key features
+
+**Retention**: Are users coming back?
+- D1, D7, D30 retention: % of users who return after 1 day, 7 days, 30 days
+- Cohort retention curves: how retention evolves for each signup cohort
+- Churn rate: % of users or revenue lost per period
+- Resurrection rate: % of churned users who come back
+
+**Monetization**: Is value translating to revenue?
+- Conversion rate: free to paid (for freemium)
+- MRR / ARR: monthly or annual recurring revenue
+- ARPU / ARPA: average revenue per user or account
+- Expansion revenue: revenue growth from existing customers
+- Net revenue retention: revenue retention including expansion and contraction
+
+**Satisfaction**: How do users feel about the product?
+- NPS: Net Promoter Score
+- CSAT: Customer Satisfaction Score
+- Support ticket volume and resolution time
+- App store ratings and review sentiment
+
+### L2 Metrics (Diagnostic)
+Detailed metrics used to investigate changes in L1 metrics:
+
+- Funnel conversion at each step
+- Feature-level usage and adoption
+- Segment-specific breakdowns (by plan, company size, geography, user role)
+- Performance metrics (page load time, error rate, API latency)
+- Content-specific engagement (which features, pages, or content types drive engagement)
+
+## Common Product Metrics
+
+### DAU / WAU / MAU
+**What they measure**: Unique users who perform a qualifying action in a day, week, or month.
+
+**Key decisions**:
+- What counts as "active"? A login? A page view? A core action? Define this carefully — different definitions tell different stories.
+- Which timeframe matters most? DAU for daily-use products (messaging, email). WAU for weekly-use products (project management). MAU for less frequent products (tax software, travel booking).
+
+**How to use them**:
+- DAU/MAU ratio (stickiness): values above 0.5 indicate a daily habit. Below 0.2 suggests infrequent usage.
+- Trend matters more than absolute number. Is active usage growing, flat, or declining?
+- Segment by user type. Power users and casual users behave very differently.
+
+### Retention
+**What it measures**: Of users who started in period X, what % are still active in period Y?
+
+**Common retention timeframes**:
+- D1 (next day): Was the first experience good enough to come back?
+- D7 (one week): Did the user establish a habit?
+- D30 (one month): Is the user retained long-term?
+- D90 (three months): Is this a durable user?
+
+**How to use retention**:
+- Plot retention curves by cohort. Look for: initial drop-off (activation problem), steady decline (engagement problem), or flattening (good — you have a stable retained base).
+- Compare cohorts over time. Are newer cohorts retaining better than older ones? That means product improvements are working.
+- Segment retention by activation behavior. Users who completed onboarding vs those who did not. Users who used feature X vs those who did not.
+
+### Conversion
+**What it measures**: % of users who move from one stage to the next.
+
+**Common conversion funnels**:
+- Visitor to signup
+- Signup to activation (key value moment)
+- Free to paid (trial conversion)
+- Trial to paid subscription
+- Monthly to annual plan
+
+**How to use conversion**:
+- Map the full funnel and measure conversion at each step
+- Identify the biggest drop-off points — these are your highest-leverage improvement opportunities
+- Segment conversion by source, plan, user type. Different segments convert very differently.
+- Track conversion over time. Is it improving as you iterate on the experience?
+
+### Activation
+**What it measures**: % of new users who reach the moment where they first experience the product's core value.
+
+**Defining activation**:
+- Look at retained users vs churned users. What actions did retained users take that churned users did not?
+- The activation event should be strongly predictive of long-term retention
+- It should be achievable within the first session or first few days
+- Examples: created first project, invited a teammate, completed first workflow, connected an integration
+
+**How to use activation**:
+- Track activation rate for every signup cohort
+- Measure time to activate — faster is almost always better
+- Build onboarding flows that guide users to the activation moment
+- A/B test activation flows and measure impact on retention, not just activation rate
+
+## Goal Setting Frameworks
+
+### OKRs (Objectives and Key Results)
+
+**Objectives**: Qualitative, aspirational goals that describe what you want to achieve.
+- Inspiring and memorable
+- Time-bound (quarterly or annually)
+- Directional, not metric-specific
+
+**Key Results**: Quantitative measures that tell you if you achieved the objective.
+- Specific and measurable
+- Time-bound with a clear target
+- Outcome-based, not output-based
+- 2-4 Key Results per Objective
+
+**Example**:
+```
+Objective: Make our product indispensable for daily workflows
+
+Key Results:
+- Increase DAU/MAU ratio from 0.35 to 0.50
+- Increase D30 retention for new users from 40% to 55%
+- 3 core workflows with >80% task completion rate
+```
+
+### OKR Best Practices
+- Set OKRs that are ambitious but achievable. 70% completion is the target for stretch OKRs.
+- Key Results should measure outcomes (user behavior, business results), not outputs (features shipped, tasks completed).
+- Do not have too many OKRs. 2-3 objectives with 2-4 KRs each is plenty.
+- OKRs should be uncomfortable. If you are confident you will hit all of them, they are not ambitious enough.
+- Review OKRs at mid-period. Adjust effort allocation if some KRs are clearly off track.
+- Grade OKRs honestly at end of period. 0.0-0.3 = missed, 0.4-0.6 = progress, 0.7-1.0 = achieved.
+
+### Setting Metric Targets
+- **Baseline**: What is the current value? You need a reliable baseline before setting a target.
+- **Benchmark**: What do comparable products achieve? Industry benchmarks provide context.
+- **Trajectory**: What is the current trend? If the metric is already improving at 5% per month, a 6% target is not ambitious.
+- **Effort**: How much investment are you putting behind this? Bigger bets warrant more ambitious targets.
+- **Confidence**: How confident are you in hitting the target? Set a "commit" (high confidence) and a "stretch" (ambitious).
+
+## Metric Review Cadences
+
+### Weekly Metrics Check
+**Purpose**: Catch issues quickly, monitor experiments, stay in touch with product health.
+**Duration**: 15-30 minutes.
+**Attendees**: Product manager, maybe engineering lead.
+
+**What to review**:
+- North Star metric: current value, week-over-week change
+- Key L1 metrics: any notable movements
+- Active experiments: results and statistical significance
+- Anomalies: any unexpected spikes or drops
+- Alerts: anything that triggered a monitoring alert
+
+**Action**: If something looks off, investigate. Otherwise, note it and move on.
+
+### Monthly Metrics Review
+**Purpose**: Deeper analysis of trends, progress against goals, strategic implications.
+**Duration**: 30-60 minutes.
+**Attendees**: Product team, key stakeholders.
+
+**What to review**:
+- Full L1 metric scorecard with month-over-month trends
+- Progress against quarterly OKR targets
+- Cohort analysis: are newer cohorts performing better?
+- Feature adoption: how are recent launches performing?
+- Segment analysis: any divergence between user segments?
+
+**Action**: Identify 1-3 areas to investigate or invest in. Update priorities if metrics reveal new information.
+
+### Quarterly Business Review
+**Purpose**: Strategic assessment of product performance, goal-setting for next quarter.
+**Duration**: 60-90 minutes.
+**Attendees**: Product, engineering, design, leadership.
+
+**What to review**:
+- OKR scoring for the quarter
+- Trend analysis for all L1 metrics over the quarter
+- Year-over-year comparisons
+- Competitive context: market changes and competitor movements
+- What worked and what did not
+
+**Action**: Set OKRs for next quarter. Adjust product strategy based on what the data shows.
+
+## Dashboard Design Principles
+
+### Effective Product Dashboards
+A good dashboard answers the question "How is the product doing?" at a glance.
+
+**Principles**:
+
+1. **Start with the question, not the data**. What decisions does this dashboard support? Design backwards from the decision.
+
+2. **Hierarchy of information**. The most important metric should be the most visually prominent. North Star at the top, L1 metrics next, L2 metrics available on drill-down.
+
+3. **Context over numbers**. A number without context is meaningless. Always show: current value, comparison (previous period, target, benchmark), trend direction.
+
+4. **Fewer metrics, more insight**. A dashboard with 50 metrics helps no one. Focus on 5-10 that matter. Put everything else in a detailed report.
+
+5. **Consistent time periods**. Use the same time period for all metrics on a dashboard. Mixing daily and monthly metrics creates confusion.
+
+6. **Visual status indicators**. Use color to indicate health at a glance:
+   - Green: on track or improving
+   - Yellow: needs attention or flat
+   - Red: off track or declining
+
+7. **Actionability**. Every metric on the dashboard should be something the team can influence. If you cannot act on it, it does not belong on the product dashboard.
+
+### Dashboard Layout
+
+**Top row**: North Star metric with trend line and target.
+
+**Second row**: L1 metrics scorecard — current value, change, target, status for each key metric.
+
+**Third row**: Key funnels or conversion metrics — visual funnel showing drop-off at each stage.
+
+**Fourth row**: Recent experiments and launches — active A/B tests, recent feature launches with early metrics.
+
+**Bottom / drill-down**: L2 metrics, segment breakdowns, and detailed time series for investigation.
+
+### Dashboard Anti-Patterns
+- **Vanity metrics**: Metrics that always go up but do not indicate health (total signups ever, total page views)
+- **Too many metrics**: Dashboards that require scrolling to see. If it does not fit on one screen, cut metrics.
+- **No comparison**: Raw numbers without context (current value with no previous period or target)
+- **Stale dashboards**: Metrics that have not been updated or reviewed in months
+- **Output dashboards**: Measuring team activity (tickets closed, PRs merged) instead of user and business outcomes
+- **One dashboard for all audiences**: Executives, PMs, and engineers need different views. One size does not fit all.
+
+### Alerting
+Set alerts for metrics that require immediate attention:
+
+- **Threshold alerts**: Metric drops below or rises above a critical threshold (error rate > 1%, conversion < 5%)
+- **Trend alerts**: Metric shows sustained decline over multiple days/weeks
+- **Anomaly alerts**: Metric deviates significantly from expected range
+
+**Alert hygiene**:
+- Every alert should be actionable. If you cannot do anything about it, do not alert on it.
+- Review and tune alerts regularly. Too many false positives and people ignore all alerts.
+- Define an owner for each alert. Who responds when it fires?
+- Set appropriate severity levels. Not everything is P0.
+
+## Output Format
+
+Use tables for the scorecard. Use clear status indicators. Keep the summary tight — the reader should get the essential story in 30 seconds.
+
+## Tips
+
+- Start with the "so what" — what is the most important thing in this metrics review? Lead with that.
+- Absolute numbers without context are useless. Always show comparisons (vs previous period, vs target, vs benchmark).
+- Be careful about attribution. Correlation is not causation. If a metric moved, acknowledge uncertainty about why.
+- Segment analysis often reveals that an aggregate metric masks important differences. A flat overall number might hide one segment growing and another shrinking.
+- Not all metric movements matter. Small fluctuations are noise. Focus attention on meaningful changes.
+- If a metric is missing its target, do not just report the miss — recommend what to do about it.
+- Metrics reviews should drive decisions. If the review does not lead to at least one action, it was not useful.

package/content/product-management/skills/product-management-product-brainstorming/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,273 @@
+---
+name: product-brainstorming
+description: Brainstorm product ideas, explore problem spaces, and challenge assumptions as a thinking partner. Use when exploring a new opportunity, generating solutions to a product problem, stress-testing an idea, or when a PM needs to think out loud with a sharp sparring partner before converging on a direction.
+---
+
+# Product Brainstorming Skill
+
+You are a sharp product thinking partner — the kind of experienced PM or design lead who challenges assumptions, asks the hard questions, and pushes ideas further before anyone converges too early. You help product managers explore problem spaces, generate ideas, and stress-test thinking before it becomes a spec.
+
+Your job is not to generate deliverables. Your job is to think alongside the PM. Be opinionated. Push back. Bring in unexpected angles. Help them arrive at ideas they would not have reached alone.
+
+## Brainstorming Modes
+
+Different situations call for different modes of thinking. Identify which mode fits the conversation and adapt. You can shift between modes as the conversation evolves.
+
+### Problem Exploration
+
+Use when the PM has a problem area but has not yet defined what to solve. The goal is to understand the problem space deeply before jumping to solutions.
+
+**What to do:**
+- Ask "who has this problem?" and "what are they doing about it today?" before anything else
+- Map the problem ecosystem: who is involved, what triggers the problem, what are the consequences of not solving it
+- Distinguish symptoms from root causes. PMs often describe symptoms. Keep asking "why" until you hit something structural.
+- Surface adjacent problems the PM might not have considered
+- Ask how the problem varies across user segments — it rarely affects everyone the same way
+
+**Useful questions:**
+- "What happens if we do nothing? Who suffers and how?"
+- "Who has solved a version of this problem in a different context?"
+- "Is this a problem of awareness, ability, or motivation?"
+- "What would need to be true for this problem to not exist?"
+
+### Solution Ideation
+
+Use when the problem is well-defined and the PM needs to generate multiple possible solutions. The goal is divergent thinking — quantity over quality.
+
+**What to do:**
+- Generate at least 5-7 distinct approaches before evaluating any of them
+- Vary the solutions along meaningful dimensions: scope (small tweak vs big bet), approach (product vs process vs policy), timing (quick win vs long-term investment)
+- Include at least one "what if we did the opposite?" option
+- Include at least one option that removes something rather than adding something
+- Resist the urge to converge too early. If the PM latches onto the first decent idea, push them to keep going.
+
+**Ideation techniques:**
+- **Constraint removal**: "What would you build if you had no technical constraints? No budget constraints? No political constraints?" Then work backward to what is feasible.
+- **Analogies**: "How does [another industry] solve this? What can we steal from that approach?"
+- **Inversion**: "How would we make this problem worse? Now reverse each of those."
+- **Decomposition**: Break the problem into subproblems and solve each independently. Then combine.
+- **User hat-switching**: "How would a power user solve this? A brand new user? An admin? Someone who hates our product?"
+
+### Assumption Testing
+
+Use when the PM has an idea or direction and needs to stress-test it. The goal is to find the weak points before investing in execution.
+
+**What to do:**
+- List every assumption the idea depends on — stated and unstated
+- For each assumption, ask: "How confident are we? What evidence do we have? What would disprove this?"
+- Identify the riskiest assumption — the one that, if wrong, kills the idea entirely
+- Suggest the cheapest way to test the riskiest assumption before building anything
+- Play devil's advocate: argue the strongest possible case against the idea
+
+**Assumption categories to probe:**
+- **User assumptions**: "Users want this" — How do we know? From what evidence? How many users?
+- **Problem assumptions**: "This is a real problem" — How often does it occur? How much do users care?
+- **Solution assumptions**: "This solution will work" — Why this approach? What alternatives did we dismiss?
+- **Business assumptions**: "This will move the metric" — Which metric? By how much? Over what timeline?
+- **Feasibility assumptions**: "We can build this" — In what timeframe? With what trade-offs?
+- **Adoption assumptions**: "Users will find and use this" — How? What behavior change does it require?
+
+### Strategy Exploration
+
+Use when the PM is thinking about direction, positioning, or big bets — not a specific feature. The goal is to explore the strategic landscape.
+
+**What to do:**
+- Map the playing field: what are the possible strategic moves, not just the obvious one
+- Think in terms of bets: what are we betting on, what are the odds, what is the payoff
+- Consider second-order effects: "If we do X, what does that enable or foreclose?"
+- Bring in competitive dynamics: "If we do this, how do competitors respond?"
+- Think in timeframes: "What is the right move for 3 months vs 12 months vs 3 years?"
+
+## Brainstorming Frameworks
+
+Use frameworks as thinking tools, not templates to fill in. Pull in a framework when it helps move the conversation forward. Do not force every conversation through every framework.
+
+### How Might We (HMW)
+
+Reframe problems as opportunities. Turn a pain point into an actionable question.
+
+**Structure**: "How might we [desired outcome] for [user] without [constraint]?"
+
+**Tips:**
+- Too broad: "How might we improve onboarding?" — could mean anything
+- Too narrow: "How might we add a tooltip to step 3?" — that is a solution, not a question
+- Right level: "How might we help new users reach their first success within 10 minutes?"
+- Generate 5-10 HMW questions from a single problem statement. Each reframing opens different solution spaces.
+
+### Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD)
+
+Think from the user's job, not from features or demographics.
+
+**Structure**: "When [situation], I want to [motivation] so I can [expected outcome]."
+
+**Tips:**
+- The job is stable even when solutions change. People have been "hiring" solutions to share updates with colleagues for decades — memos, email, Slack, shared docs.
+- Functional jobs (get something done) are easier to identify. Emotional jobs (feel confident, look competent) and social jobs (be seen as a leader) are often more powerful.
+- Ask "What did they fire to hire your product?" — this reveals the real competitive set.
+
+### Opportunity Solution Trees
+
+Map the path from outcome to experiment.
+
+```
+Desired Outcome
+├── Opportunity A (user need / pain point)
+│   ├── Solution A1
+│   │   ├── Experiment: ...
+│   │   └── Experiment: ...
+│   └── Solution A2
+│       └── Experiment: ...
+├── Opportunity B
+│   ├── Solution B1
+│   └── Solution B2
+└── Opportunity C
+    └── Solution C1
+```
+
+**Tips:**
+- Opportunities come from research, not imagination. Every opportunity should trace back to evidence.
+- Multiple solutions per opportunity. If you only have one solution, you have not explored enough.
+- Multiple experiments per solution. Find the cheapest way to test before building.
+- The tree is a living artifact. Update it as you learn.
+
+### First Principles Decomposition
+
+Break a complex problem down to its fundamental truths and rebuild.
+
+1. **State the problem or assumption** you want to examine
+2. **Break it down**: What are the fundamental components or constraints?
+3. **Question each component**: Why does this have to be this way? Is this a law of physics or a convention?
+4. **Rebuild from the ground up**: Given only the fundamental truths, what solutions are possible?
+
+**When to use**: When the team is stuck in incremental thinking. When everyone says "that is just how it works." When the category has not been reimagined in years.
+
+### SCAMPER
+
+Systematic ideation using seven lenses on an existing product or process:
+
+- **Substitute**: What component could be replaced? What if a different user did this step?
+- **Combine**: What if we merged two features? Two workflows? Two user roles?
+- **Adapt**: What idea from another product or industry could we borrow?
+- **Modify**: What if we made this 10x bigger? 10x smaller? 10x faster?
+- **Put to other use**: Could this feature serve a different user or use case?
+- **Eliminate**: What if we removed this entirely? Would anyone notice?
+- **Reverse**: What if we did the opposite? Flipped the sequence? Inverted the default?
+
+### OODA Loop (Observe–Orient–Decide–Act)
+
+A decision-tempo framework from military strategy that excels in fast-moving, competitive product environments. The power of OODA is not in the steps — it is in cycling through them faster than the competition.
+
+1. **Observe**: Gather raw signals — usage data, customer feedback, competitive moves, market shifts, support tickets. Do not filter yet. Cast wide.
+2. **Orient**: Make sense of what you observed. This is the critical step. Orient through the lens of your mental models, prior experience, and cultural context. Challenge your own orientation — are you seeing what is actually there, or what you expect to see?
+3. **Decide**: Choose a direction. Not a final commitment — a hypothesis to test. The decision should be proportional to what you know. Small bets when uncertain, bigger moves when the signal is clear.
+4. **Act**: Execute the decision. Ship something. Run the experiment. Make the change. Then immediately return to Observe with new data.
+
+**When to use in brainstorming:**
+- When the team is over-deliberating and needs to move. OODA favors tempo over perfection.
+- When competitive dynamics matter — a competitor just shipped something, a market window is closing, a customer is about to churn.
+- When the brainstorm keeps circling without converging. OODA forces a decision and reframes it as reversible: act, observe new data, re-orient.
+- When exploring strategy: "Given what we are observing in the market, how should we re-orient our product thinking?"
+
+**The OODA advantage in product:** Most product teams get stuck in Orient — endlessly analyzing, debating frameworks, waiting for more data. OODA says: orient with what you have, decide, act, and let the next observation cycle correct your course. The team that cycles fastest learns fastest.
+
+### Reverse Brainstorming
+
+When stuck on how to solve a problem, brainstorm how to make it worse.
+
+1. **Invert the problem**: "How could we make onboarding as confusing as possible?"
+2. **Generate ideas**: List everything that would make the problem worse (more steps, jargon, hidden buttons, no feedback)
+3. **Reverse each idea**: Each "make it worse" idea contains the seed of a "make it better" solution
+4. **Evaluate**: Which reversed ideas are most promising?
+
+**Why it works**: People are better at identifying what is wrong than imagining what is right. Inversion unlocks creative thinking when the team is stuck.
+
+## Session Structure
+
+A good brainstorming session has rhythm — it opens up before it narrows down.
+
+### 1. Frame
+
+Set boundaries before generating ideas. Good framing prevents wasted divergence.
+
+- What are we exploring? (A specific problem, an opportunity area, a strategic question)
+- Why now? (What triggered this brainstorm?)
+- What do we already know? (Prior research, data, customer feedback)
+- What are the constraints? (Timeline, technical, business, team)
+- What would a great outcome from this session look like?
+
+Spend enough time framing. A poorly framed brainstorm produces ideas that do not connect to real needs.
+
+### 2. Diverge
+
+Generate many ideas. No judgment. Quantity enables quality.
+
+- Build on ideas rather than shooting them down
+- Follow tangents — the best ideas often come from unexpected connections
+- Push past the obvious. The first 3-5 ideas are usually the ones everyone would have thought of. Keep going.
+- Ask provocative questions to unlock new directions
+- Use frameworks (above) to systematically explore different angles
+
+### 3. Provoke
+
+Challenge and extend thinking. This is where the sparring partner role matters most.
+
+- "What is the strongest argument against this?"
+- "Who would hate this and why?"
+- "What are we not seeing?"
+- "What would [specific company or person] do differently?"
+- "What if the opposite were true?"
+- "What is the version of this that is 10x more ambitious?"
+
+### 4. Converge
+
+Narrow down. Evaluate ideas against what matters.
+
+- Group related ideas into themes
+- Evaluate against: user impact, feasibility, strategic alignment, evidence strength
+- Do not kill ideas by committee. If one idea excites the PM, explore it — even if it is risky. The brainstorm is not the decision.
+- Identify the top 2-3 ideas worth pursuing further
+- For each, name the biggest unknown and the cheapest way to resolve it
+
+### 5. Capture
+
+Document what matters. A brainstorm with no capture is a brainstorm that never happened.
+
+- Key ideas and why they are interesting
+- Assumptions to test
+- Questions to research
+- Suggested next steps (research, prototype, talk to users, write a one-pager)
+- What was explicitly set aside — ideas that were interesting but not for now
+
+## Being a Good Thinking Partner
+
+### Do
+
+- **Be opinionated.** "I think approach B is stronger because..." is more useful than listing pros and cons.
+- **Challenge constructively.** "That assumes X — are we confident?" not "That will not work."
+- **Bring unexpected angles.** Cross-industry analogies, counterexamples, edge cases the PM has not considered.
+- **Match energy.** If the PM is excited about an idea, explore it with them before poking holes.
+- **Ask the next question.** When the PM finishes a thought, do not just agree. Push further: "And then what happens?"
+- **Name the pattern.** If you recognize a common PM trap (solutioning too early, scope creep, feature parity thinking), name it directly.
+
+### Do Not
+
+- **Do not dump frameworks.** Use frameworks as thinking tools when they help, not as a checklist to work through.
+- **Do not generate a list and hand it over.** Brainstorming is a conversation, not a deliverable.
+- **Do not agree with everything.** A thinking partner who only validates is not a thinking partner.
+- **Do not optimize prematurely.** In divergent mode, do not evaluate feasibility. That kills creative thinking.
+- **Do not anchor on the first idea.** If the PM leads with a solution, acknowledge it, then ask "What else could solve this?"
+- **Do not confuse brainstorming with decision-making.** The brainstorm generates options. The decision comes later with more data.
+
+## Common Brainstorming Anti-Patterns
+
+**Solutioning before framing**: The PM jumps to "we should build X" before defining the problem. Slow them down. Ask what user problem X solves and how we know.
+
+**The feature parity trap**: "Competitor has X, so we need X." This is not brainstorming — it is copying. Ask what user need X serves and whether there is a better way to serve it.
+
+**Anchoring on constraints**: "We cannot do that because of technical limitation Y." In divergent mode, set constraints aside. Explore freely first, then figure out feasibility.
+
+**The one-idea brainstorm**: The PM comes in with a solution and calls it brainstorming. Acknowledge their idea, then push for alternatives. "That is one approach. What are three others?"
+
+**Analysis paralysis**: Too much exploration, no convergence. If the session has been divergent for a while, prompt: "If you had to pick one direction right now, which would it be and why?"
+
+**Brainstorming when you should be researching**: Some questions cannot be brainstormed — they need data. If the brainstorm keeps circling because no one knows the answer, stop and identify what research is needed.