fix: sync all skill updates and new skills into plugin bundles
- Synced 97 existing skill SKILL.md files from skills/ to their plugin bundle copies - Added 7 new skills to plugin bundles: - seo-content-brief, media-pitch -> pm-gtm - tax-planning-checklist -> pm-finance - change-management-plan -> pm-hr - sales-forecasting-model -> pm-sales - workshop-facilitation-guide -> pm-operations - teaching-lesson-plan -> pm-cross Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
mohitagw15856
@@ -88,7 +88,10 @@ At end of [period]:
|
||||
- [Expansion opportunity] progressed to [stage]
|
||||
- Health score moved from [current] to [target]
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||||
- "Build an account plan for [customer]"
|
||||
- "Create a key account strategy for [account]"
|
||||
- "Help me plan my approach to renewing [account]"
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Relationship map identifies decision-makers, influencers, and any relationship gaps
|
||||
- [ ] Risks all have mitigation actions and named owners
|
||||
- [ ] Growth opportunities include estimated value (even roughly)
|
||||
- [ ] 90-day actions are specific (not "have a call" — what call, with whom, to achieve what)
|
||||
- [ ] Success criteria are measurable at the end of the planning period
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -91,6 +91,14 @@ This call is NOT successful if we only pitched and got "sounds interesting, send
|
||||
### Suggested Next Step
|
||||
"Based on what we discussed, the logical next step would be [specific]. Does [day/time] work?"
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Research summary includes recent news (last 90 days) — not just LinkedIn bio
|
||||
- [ ] Call hypothesis is written before the call (not post-rationalised after)
|
||||
- [ ] Discovery questions progress from context → pain → business impact → buying process
|
||||
- [ ] Success criteria define what "not successful" looks like (not just the ideal outcome)
|
||||
- [ ] A specific next step is proposed (not "let's stay in touch")
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||||
- "Prepare me for a discovery call with [company/contact]"
|
||||
- "Build a call brief for my meeting with [name] at [company]"
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -86,6 +86,14 @@ Writes commercial proposals that win business — structured around the prospect
|
||||
2. We will send contract and confirm kickoff
|
||||
3. [Any immediate action]
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] "Understanding Your Situation" reflects what was learned in discovery (not generic)
|
||||
- [ ] Outcomes are listed (not just deliverables or features)
|
||||
- [ ] "Not included" section is explicit to prevent scope disputes later
|
||||
- [ ] Next steps include a specific date and named action
|
||||
- [ ] "Valid until" date is included to create urgency
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||||
- "Write a proposal for [prospect] to [solve their problem]"
|
||||
- "Draft a statement of work for [project]"
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -73,6 +73,15 @@ When a prospect mentions [Competitor], say: "[Your positioning in one sentence]"
|
||||
We win when: [Scenario — e.g. customer prioritises outcome over price]
|
||||
We lose when: [Honest scenario — e.g. primary driver is lowest upfront cost]
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Competitor strengths are listed honestly (not minimised)
|
||||
- [ ] Differentiators have proof points (not just claims)
|
||||
- [ ] Objection responses are conversational (not scripted-sounding)
|
||||
- [ ] Landmine questions are natural and non-confrontational
|
||||
- [ ] "When we lose" is included and honest
|
||||
- [ ] Battlecard has a review date
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||||
- "Build a battlecard against [competitor]"
|
||||
- "Create a competitive cheat sheet for [competitor]"
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
name: sales-forecasting-model
|
||||
description: "Build a structured sales forecast framework for any business or team. Use when asked to build a sales forecast, create a revenue model, project pipeline, or build a bottom-up forecast. Produces a forecast methodology, pipeline model, scenario analysis, and assumption log."
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Sales Forecasting Model Skill
|
||||
|
||||
Produces a structured sales forecast framework — from pipeline conversion modelling to scenario analysis. Built for revenue and sales leaders who need a defensible forecast, not a spreadsheet guess.
|
||||
|
||||
## Required Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
Ask the user for these if not provided:
|
||||
- **Business type** (SaaS / Transactional / Services / Marketplace)
|
||||
- **Forecast period** (monthly / quarterly / annual)
|
||||
- **Sales motion** (inbound / outbound / channel / PLG / mixed)
|
||||
- **Current pipeline data** (number of deals, stages, values — rough is fine)
|
||||
- **Historical conversion rates** (if available — otherwise model will flag as assumption)
|
||||
- **Average deal size and sales cycle length**
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Structure
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Sales Forecast: [Team / Business] — [Period]
|
||||
|
||||
**Forecast type:** [Bottom-up pipeline / Top-down quota / Capacity-based / Hybrid]
|
||||
**Period:** [Month / Quarter / Year]
|
||||
**Created:** [Date]
|
||||
**Forecast owner:** [Name]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Forecast Methodology
|
||||
|
||||
**Chosen approach:** [Bottom-up / Top-down / Hybrid] — and why for this context.
|
||||
|
||||
Bottom-up (recommended when pipeline data exists):
|
||||
> Start from real deals in the pipeline. Apply stage-by-stage conversion rates. Sum to a revenue number.
|
||||
|
||||
Top-down (useful for planning, not for calling a number):
|
||||
> Start from market or quota. Work backwards to activity targets.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Pipeline Stage Model
|
||||
|
||||
Define the sales stages and the expected conversion rate between each:
|
||||
|
||||
| Stage | Description | % of deals that advance | Avg time in stage |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Prospect | Identified, not contacted | — | — |
|
||||
| Qualified | Discovery done, confirmed fit | [X%] | [N days] |
|
||||
| Proposal | Proposal sent | [X%] | [N days] |
|
||||
| Negotiation | Commercial terms being agreed | [X%] | [N days] |
|
||||
| Closed Won | Contract signed | [X%] | — |
|
||||
|
||||
**Overall pipeline conversion rate:** [X%] (Qualified → Closed Won)
|
||||
**Average sales cycle:** [N days from Qualified to Close]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Current Pipeline Snapshot
|
||||
|
||||
| Stage | Number of deals | Total value | Expected close (weighted) |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Qualified | [N] | £[X] | £[X × conversion %] |
|
||||
| Proposal | [N] | £[X] | £[X × conversion %] |
|
||||
| Negotiation | [N] | £[X] | £[X × conversion %] |
|
||||
| **Total** | | **£[X]** | **£[weighted total]** |
|
||||
|
||||
**Coverage ratio:** [Weighted pipeline ÷ target = X×]
|
||||
*Rule of thumb: 3× pipeline coverage is needed for confident forecast; 2× is tight; below 1.5× is at risk.*
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Scenario Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
| Scenario | Assumption | Revenue | Probability |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Upside | All Negotiation + top 50% of Proposal close | £[X] | [%] |
|
||||
| Base | Weighted pipeline conversion at historical rates | £[X] | [%] |
|
||||
| Downside | Conversion rates drop 20% from historical | £[X] | [%] |
|
||||
|
||||
**Committed forecast:** £[X] — [The number the forecast owner is willing to call. Between base and downside.]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Key Assumptions Log
|
||||
|
||||
Every forecast is a set of assumptions. Name them explicitly so they can be updated:
|
||||
|
||||
| Assumption | Value | Confidence | Source | Last updated |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Avg deal size | £[X] | High/Med/Low | [Last N deals] | [Date] |
|
||||
| Sales cycle | [N days] | | | |
|
||||
| Close rate from Proposal | [X%] | | | |
|
||||
| Seasonal factor | [e.g. Q4 +20%] | | | |
|
||||
| Churn/contraction | [X% of ARR at risk] | | | |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Activity-Based Sanity Check
|
||||
|
||||
Work backwards from the forecast to check if the required activity is achievable:
|
||||
|
||||
To hit £[target]:
|
||||
- Deals needed to close: [N] (target ÷ avg deal size)
|
||||
- Qualified pipeline needed (at current conversion): [N deals or £value]
|
||||
- Discovery calls needed per week to build that pipeline: [N]
|
||||
- Outreach needed per week (at [X%] meeting rate): [N]
|
||||
|
||||
**Does the team have capacity to generate this?** [Yes / No — flag if not]
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Checks
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Forecast methodology is stated (not just a number)
|
||||
- [ ] Stage conversion rates are based on historical data or flagged as assumptions
|
||||
- [ ] Coverage ratio is calculated
|
||||
- [ ] Three scenarios are modelled (not just one number)
|
||||
- [ ] Assumption log is explicit and dated
|
||||
- [ ] Activity sanity check confirms the forecast is achievable with current capacity
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Trigger Phrases
|
||||
|
||||
- "Build a sales forecast for [period]"
|
||||
- "Create a pipeline model for [team/business]"
|
||||
- "Help me build a bottom-up revenue forecast"
|
||||
- "What is our forecast for Q[N] based on current pipeline?"
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user