pestel-delta-monitor
Quarterly re-scan of a prior PESTEL analysis. Use when checking which macro factors moved, which assumptions broke, and what's new — turning PESTEL from a workshop artifact into a radar.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills /tmp/pestel-delta-monitor && cp -r /tmp/pestel-delta-monitor/skills/pestel-delta-monitor ~/.claude/skills/pestel-delta-monitorSKILL.md
# PESTEL Delta Monitor ## Purpose Refresh a PESTEL analysis by diffing each factor — Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, Legal — against the prior run and reporting **material movement only**: **search plan → factor-by-factor diff → broken assumptions → new entrants to the frame → next-step options.** Macro factors move slowly, which is exactly why teams stop looking; the value of a cadence is catching the two factors that moved, not re-debating the twenty that didn't. Diffing also reveals which baseline entries were live assumptions versus furniture — **broken assumptions are the real output.** ## Input **Works best with:** the prior PESTEL analysis (pasted or attached) and the product/market scope it covered — this skill *requires* a baseline to diff against. **Also useful:** any events since the last run you already suspect matter — they get checked first. Input supplied inline with the invocation — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended `ARGUMENTS:` line — counts as answers already given. Use it against the question budget; don't re-ask. **Arriving empty-handed?** This is the one investigation skill with a hard prerequisite: with no baseline, it recommends running [`pestel-analysis`](../pestel-analysis/SKILL.md) first and stops — there is nothing to diff. (That referral *is* the empty-handed path: you leave knowing exactly what to do first.) **Example invocation:** `PESTEL delta against the attached Q1 analysis — scope is our EU payments product; I suspect the new AI liability directive matters.` ## Key Concepts - **Governing protocol:** honors the [`autonomous-investigation`](../autonomous-investigation/SKILL.md) contract — question budget of 2, search-plan gate, Fact/Inference/Assumption labels, Just Enough Mode, stable schema, 4-option Final Step. Disciplines: GEOINT/DEMOINT statistics plus FININT regulatory sources (see [`intelligence-collection-disciplines`](../intelligence-collection-disciplines/SKILL.md)); this is the annual/quarterly layer of the fusion cadence. - **Materiality for macro factors:** regulation passed *or credibly proposed*, macro indicators crossing thresholds your baseline named, technology maturation with adoption evidence, social signals with data behind them. "No material movement" per factor is a valid and *common* result — a quiet quarter reported honestly keeps the radar trusted. - **Broken assumptions are the headline.** A baseline entry now contradicted by evidence outranks ten new observations, because strategy was built on it. The diff exists to find these. - **Assumptions vs. furniture.** Entries that never move and touch no decision were furniture — flag them for retirement at the next baseline refresh rather than re-scanning them forever. - **Scope changes break diffs.** New market, pivot, fundamentally different business context → redo the full PESTEL; never diff across a scope change. - **Do-not-invent list:** regulations, statistics, dates, events. Real URLs and dates on everything — invented regulation is this domain's signature fabrication risk. ## Application 1. **Check the prerequisite.** No prior PESTEL → recommend [`pestel-analysis`](../pestel-analysis/SKILL.md) and stop. Scope changed since the baseline → recommend a fresh full analysis and stop. 2. **Credit inline context**, then ask only the unanswered questions (max 2): 1. Prior PESTEL to paste? 2. Any events since then you already suspect matter? 3. **Read the prior analysis fully; diff factor by factor** — the baseline document is the diff target, not your general knowledge of the macro environment. 4. **Show the 3-bullet search plan** — which factor categories get active searching this cycle (suspected events first), source types (government and regulatory sources, central-bank and statistical data, credible news, industry bodies, standards organizations), fact/inference separation. Continue unless revised. 5. **Emit the schema below exactly.** ### Output schema (do not reorder) ~~~markdown # PESTEL Delta Report ## 1. Run Header **Scope (from prior analysis):** | **Prior analysis date:** | **This run date:** ## 2. Factor-by-Factor Delta For each of P / E / S / T / E / L: ### [Factor]: [moved / no material movement] - **What moved:** [1-2 bullets, labeled, cited — only if moved] - **Prior assumption affected:** [which entry from the baseline] - **Reading:** [Inference — implication for the product scope] Keep "no material movement" factors to a single line each. ## 3. Broken Assumptions - [Baseline entries now contradicted by evidence — the run's most important section; cited] ## 4. New to the Frame - [Factors absent from the baseline that now warrant a slot] ## 5. So What? - **3** implications for strategy or roadmap - **2** factors to watch closely next cycle - **3** assumptions to validate Each bullet: label, confidence, URL where relevant. ~~~ A copy/paste fill-in version of this schema, with quality checks, lives in [`template.md`](template.md). ### Final Step (offer exactly 4 options) 1. Update the baseline PESTEL with these deltas (new baseline) 2. Deep-dive the most consequential moved factor 3. Trace the broken assumptions into roadmap or OKR impact 4. Set next cycle's watch priorities Accept `1`, `2`, `3`, `4`, `1 and 2`, `Verbose Mode`, or a custom path. ## Examples **A factor that moved, traced to its assumption (fictional):** > ### Legal: moved > - **What moved:** the data-residency provision cleared committee with an 18-month compliance > window — **Fact** ([legislature record, URL, date]) > - **Prior assumption affected:** baseline entry L2 assumed "no residency mandate before 2028," > which justified deferring the regional storage architecture > - **Reading:** the deferral logic is dead — **Inference**: the architecture decision moves from > someday to next two roadmap quarters, and compliance becomes a sales asset in regulated verticals > b
Evaluate acquisition channels using unit economics, customer quality, and scalability. Use when deciding whether to scale, test, or kill a growth channel.
Design multi-agent AI workflows with clear boundaries, handoffs, and monitoring. Use when a complex PM task should run as parallel specialized agents instead of one linear process.
Assess whether your product work is AI-first or AI-shaped. Use when evaluating AI maturity and choosing the next team capability to build.
Understand the PM-to-Director transition through altitude and horizon thinking. Use when diagnosing scope, time-horizon, or leadership-level gaps.
Map evidence-backed growth options across the Ansoff Matrix with risk-rated sequencing. Use when the question is where the next tranche of growth comes from, and at what risk.
The protocol behind every investigation skill. Use when AI research must proceed without you: search-plan gate, Fact/Inference/Assumption labels, confidence stacking, diffable outputs.
Research and draft a competitive battle card from public evidence — every claim labeled and sourced. Use when a rep needs a field-action card, not a research report.
Diagnose SaaS business health across growth, retention, efficiency, and capital. Use when preparing a business review or prioritizing urgent fixes.