---
name: 01-competitive-switch-reply
description: Run when a prospect or customer says they are choosing a free tool or an enterprise CRM instead. Trigger - \"run 01\" plus what they said.
---

# TASK 01 — COMPETITIVE SWITCH REPLY

## INPUT
What they said, verbatim if possible. Team size, what their
reps actually do all day if I told you, and whether they are
a prospect or an existing customer.

## PROCESS
1. Diagnose, one line to me: price, fit, or politics (a new
   exec brought their old stack). They get different replies.
2. Concede what is true. Free is genuinely free. The big one
   is genuinely deep. Fighting facts loses.
3. Ask the fit question: how much of the team's week is calls
   and follow-ups versus reports and admin? That answer,
   theirs not ours, decides the reply.
4. If they are the wrong fit for us, say so warmly, leave the
   door open, and stop selling.

## OUTPUT
- One line to me: the diagnosis.
- The reply: 90 words, one question, no feature list.

## RULES
- Never trash a competitor by name. Ever.
- Never discount to win a fit argument. Free wins on price by
  definition; fit is the only argument we have and the only
  one worth having.
- No switching-cost scare tactics.

## EDGE CASES
- Existing customer leaving: the reply's first job is to make
  leaving easy and classy. That is what gets remembered and
  what brings them back.
- Politics (new exec's old stack): do not fight it. Ask for
  the post-migration check-in, dated.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"If your team lives in dashboards, take the big one and
godspeed. If they live on the phone, that's us. Which is it?\"

---
name: 02-follow-up-sequence
description: Run when a deal or conversation has gone quiet. Trigger - \"run 02\" plus the thread and what was said before the silence.
---

# TASK 02 — FOLLOW-UP SEQUENCE

## INPUT
The thread or its substance: what they said before going
quiet, what was sent since, how long the silence, deal size
if it matters.

## PROCESS
1. Diagnose the silence, one line to me: deprioritized,
   blocked internally, ghosting, or genuinely gone. The
   sequence changes with the diagnosis.
2. Kill the bumps. If a \"just checking in\" was sent, name it
   as a receipt and never send another.
3. Build three touches. Each one either adds something — an
   answer to a question they actually asked, a relevant fact
   — or asks something real that moves the deal. Change
   channel at least once.
4. End with a real permission-to-close: closing the file is
   offered honestly, with the check-back logged.

## OUTPUT
TOUCH 1 (today, channel + text) / TOUCH 2 (+days, channel +
text) / TOUCH 3 (+days, the close-the-file email).
Each touch under 90 words.

## RULES
- No fake deadlines. No fake scarcity. No guilt. Banned
  outright, not discouraged.
- The breakup email is real. If they say close it, it gets
  closed and dated.
- Every touch survivable in a screenshot.

## EDGE CASES
- They said a date and the date passed: touch 1 references
  their date plainly, no reproach.
- The silence is 30+ days: skip to the close-the-file email
  and say why to me.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"Is this waiting on budget, or on priority? Either answer
helps me help you.\"

---
name: 03-post-from-a-take
description: Run when I have an opinion and the story behind it. Trigger - \"run 03\" plus the take and what happened.
---

# TASK 03 — POST FROM A TAKE

## INPUT
The opinion, and the real thing that prompted it — a call, a
customer email, a deal. Tell me if any detail identifies
someone.

## PROCESS
1. Strip anything that identifies a customer or a person.
   If the story does not survive that, say so and stop.
2. One idea. If I gave you three, pick the sharpest and tell
   me which two you parked.
3. Write it the way I talk: short lines, plain words, the
   opinion stated as an opinion, not dressed as data.

## OUTPUT
A post of 40-120 words. Last line is a statement or a real
question — never a CTA, never a link to us.

## RULES
- No invented numbers. If the story was good but carries no
  figure, it goes out without one.
- No subtweeting a competitor. The take stands on its own or
  it does not stand.
- No hook formula, no \"unpopular opinion\", no listicle
  unless it genuinely is a list.

## EDGE CASES
- The take is really about a person failing: rewrite it about
  the behaviour, so the person could read it comfortably.
- The take contradicts something I published before: say so
  to me, and if I still want it, the post owns the change of
  mind out loud.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"Your follow-up isn't annoying. Your follow-up is empty.
Those are different problems.\"

---
name: 04-pricing-pushback
description: Run when a prospect pushes on price. Trigger - \"run 04\" plus their pushback and my floor if I have one.
---

# TASK 04 — PRICING PUSHBACK

## INPUT
Their pushback, verbatim if possible. Team size, plan they
are looking at, my floor if I have given you one.

## PROCESS
1. Diagnose: budget reality, ritual, comparing to free, or
   value doubt. One line to me above the draft.
2. If they are comparing to free: do not defend the price.
   Go back to the fit question from task 01 — free wins on
   price by definition.
3. Otherwise hold with ONE reason tied to their workflow —
   the calling, the follow-up automation, the hours a week it
   returns — stated plainly, no ROI theatre.
4. Offer one thing that is not a discount, only from what I
   told you exists: annual timing, onboarding help, a slower
   ramp.
5. Write the walk-away, warm, held in reserve.

## OUTPUT
- One line to me: the diagnosis.
- The reply: 90 words.
- THE RESERVE: the walk-away line, marked \"only if they push
  again\".

## RULES
- If I gave a floor, nothing below it appears anywhere.
- If I gave no floor, ask BEFORE drafting. Hard stop.
- Never invent a discount, a promo, or a price change.
- No fake urgency around pricing. Ever.

## EDGE CASES
- They are genuinely too small for the price to make sense:
  say so honestly, point at what fits their stage, and leave
  the door open for when they grow.
- Annual vs monthly is the real issue: solve the cash-flow
  shape, not the price.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"Diagnosis: comparing to free. Don't defend $99 — ask the
fit question. If the answer is 'reports', we lose correctly.\"

---
name: 05-podcast-prep
description: Run before a podcast or interview. Trigger - \"run 05\" plus the show, host, audience and the angle they asked for.
---

# TASK 05 — PODCAST PREP

## INPUT
The show, the host, who listens, the angle they pitched, and
anything I have said on this topic before that you know of
from what I gave you.

## PROCESS
1. Pick the ONE thing to land. An interview that lands one
   idea beats one that visits nine.
2. Three stories from material I actually gave you — each
   tagged with the number it carries, or marked \"no number,
   tell it anyway\".
3. Two bridge lines for steering back when it drifts.
4. The DON'T SAY list: any figure I have not published, any
   customer name without permission.

## OUTPUT — one page
THE ONE THING / STORIES (3) / BRIDGES (2) / DON'T SAY (list).

## RULES
- The revenue line is \"bootstrapped past $50M\", exactly, or
  nothing. Never a fresher number, never a projection.
- No customer names without stated permission.
- Honest beats polished. A story where I looked stupid lands
  better than one where I looked smart — prefer it.

## EDGE CASES
- The host wants hot takes on competitors: the bridge is to
  principles, not products. Write that bridge line.
- The audience is not our buyer: the ONE thing becomes the
  idea, not the company. No pitch at all.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"DON'T SAY: anything that lets a headline read 'Close hits
$X' — you haven't published X.\"

---
name: 06-all-hands-note
description: Run when the weekly company note is due. Trigger - \"run 06\" plus what happened, the metric, and any decisions made.
---

# TASK 06 — ALL-HANDS NOTE

## INPUT
What happened this week, the metric I want shared with its
prior-period comparison, decisions made, and anything the
team should hear from me before they hear it elsewhere.

## PROCESS
1. If there is bad news, it goes in line one. A remote
   company runs on whether people trust the notes.
2. Decisions next: each with what was decided, who owns it,
   by when.
3. One metric, with last period next to it. A number without
   its comparison is decoration.
4. One shoutout, tied to a specific behaviour someone could
   copy — never \"great energy\".

## OUTPUT — 200 words max
LINE ONE (the real headline) / DECISIONS (owner + date each) /
THE METRIC (with comparison) / SHOUTOUT (behaviour, named).

## RULES
- Never bury a decision under culture talk.
- Never share a metric without its prior period.
- If nothing was decided this week, say that plainly — it is
  information too.

## EDGE CASES
- A hard call affecting people: the note names what was
  decided and why, and what happens next, in that order. No
  euphemisms.
- Great week everywhere: keep it the same length. Inflation
  in good weeks devalues the honest ones.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"DECIDED: we're killing the beta of X. Usage said no. [Owner]
closes it out by Fri Sep 12, migration note to the 40 teams
using it goes first.\"

---
name: 07-week-plan
description: Run Sunday night. Trigger - \"run 07\" plus calendar, live work, anything on fire. Reads on a phone.
---

# TASK 07 — WEEK PLAN

## INPUT
Calendar, live product decisions, customer commitments,
content plans, anything on fire.

## PROCESS
1. Three OUTCOMES, one from each: product, customers,
   content. If one side has nothing, name it and say why that
   is the risk.
2. What to decline or hand off, with the one-line script.
3. The thing I am avoiding. Derive it from what I pasted —
   the decision that has been \"next week\" for three weeks,
   the conversation not had.

## OUTPUT — half a page, phone-readable
THREE OUTCOMES (product / customers / content) /
DROP OR HAND OFF (item + script) /
THE AVOIDED THING (one line).

## RULES
- Outcomes state what is TRUE on Friday, not what I will do.
- A promise already made to a customer beats everything else
  in a collision.
- Maximum three. Say what you parked.

## EDGE CASES
- All-travel or all-podcast week: the product outcome becomes
  one decision made in writing, not shipping.
- Nothing urgent anywhere: point the week at the oldest open
  decision.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"AVOIDING: the pricing decision. It's been 'next week' for
three weeks and every sales call now carries a workaround.\"

---
name: 08-month-in-review
description: Run at month end, written to the whole company. Trigger - \"run 08\" plus the month's numbers and what actually happened.
---

# TASK 08 — MONTH IN REVIEW

## INPUT
The month's internal numbers as I gave them, what worked,
what did not, and what we are changing.

## PROCESS
1. Line one is the number or metric I chose to share, with
   last month beside it. No wind-up.
2. Two things that worked, specific enough that the behaviour
   can be repeated by someone who was not involved.
3. One thing that did not, with the honest cause — a
   decision, a bet, a miss. Never a person.
4. What we are changing because of it, with an owner.
5. One ask of the team, dated.

## OUTPUT — one page
THE NUMBER (with comparison) / WORKED (2) / DIDN'T (1,
honest) / CHANGING (owner) / THE ASK (1, dated).

## RULES
- Bootstrapped means the team is the board. Write it with the
  candour a good board deserves.
- No adjective a number could replace.
- The \"didn't\" section is the most-read paragraph. Never
  soften it into a learning-journey paragraph.

## EDGE CASES
- Rough month: same structure, same length. Line one is still
  the number. The ask becomes the recovery behaviour.
- Numbers I chose not to share internally this month: respect
  it, and never imply them by arithmetic.

## GOOD LOOKS LIKE
\"DIDN'T WORK: the outbound experiment. 214 emails, 3 replies,
0 demos. The list was the problem — we built it by industry
when our buyer is defined by workflow. Changing: [owner]
rebuilds it by tool-stack signals by Fri Sep 19.\"