# Evaluate Strategic Option

> This skill should be used when the user asks to "evaluate this strategic option," "should we make this move," "build the case for/against this deal," or has a major strategic decision (market entry, M&A, large capital commitment) that needs real-options framing rather than a binary go/no-go.

- Skill: `daddia/evaluate-strategic-option` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add daddia/evaluate-strategic-option`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/daddia/evaluate-strategic-option/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: daddia (https://skillmd.com/u/daddia)
- Updated: 2026-09-22
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/daddia/evaluate-strategic-option

---

# Evaluate Strategic Option

## When to use

Major strategic decisions needing staging, steelmanned case against, downside sizing, and pre-commitment kill criteria — not binary go/no-go.

## What this skill does not do

- **Does not evaluate vague topics** — requires committable decision with scope, scale, timing.
- **Does not soften case against for sponsors** — steelman is mandatory.
- **Does not pick winner when trade-offs unquantifiable** — say so.
- **Does not ship board-final without GATE.**

## Preconditions

| Input | If missing |
|---|---|
| Corporate-strategy + org profiles | `[PROVISIONAL]` balanced posture |
| Precise option statement | Ask once to narrow |

## Provisional mode

`[PROVISIONAL]` on risk posture; structured first pass if downside inputs missing.

## Trust spine

- **Strategic advice vs. support (mandatory):** Trade-offs and triggers; IC/board owns decision.
- Per trust-conventions for sourcing, assumptions, numbers, confidence, GATE.

## Workflow

### Step 1: State option precisely

Reject vague topics; require committable decision.

### Step 2: Staging checklist

If plausible: initial commitment, scale trigger, abandon trigger, learning objective. If not: say why.

### Step 3: Case for (brief)

3–5 bullets; tag unsourced claims.

### Step 4: Case against (steelman — mandatory)

Hardest assumption, cannibalization, timing illusion, integration load, comparable bias, reversibility, sponsor momentum — apply checklist.

### Step 5: Downside sizing + survivability test

Direct loss, opportunity cost, reputation, org strain. Survivable on failure: yes/no/unclear with evidence.

### Step 6: Kill criteria (pre-commitment)

Dated, specific; stage-1 vs full-program if staged.

### Step 7: Recommendation

Proceed staged | proceed in full | do not proceed — with confidence band.

## Output format

```
CONFIDENCE: [...]
LOAD-BEARING ASSUMPTIONS: [...]
OPTION: [precise decision]
CAN THIS BE STAGED: [...]
CASE FOR: [...]
CASE AGAINST (steelman): [...]
DOWNSIDE SIZING: [table]
SURVIVABLE ON FAILURE: [...]
KILL CRITERIA: [...]
RECOMMENDATION: [...]
```

## Worked example

**Input:** Acquire Company X at $Ym by Q3.

**Excerpt:** Staged: $Zm pilot with scale trigger on retention ≥X%; case against surfaces integration load on named function; kill criteria by date if metric below threshold; recommendation proceed staged `[review]`.

## Quality checks before delivering

- [ ] Committable option, not topic
- [ ] Staging checklist applied
- [ ] Steelman case against
- [ ] Survivability answered
- [ ] Kill criteria dated and specific

## Propose profile update

When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), **propose a profile update**: show the exact diff against `~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/corporate-strategy/CLAUDE.md` (org-wide facts go to `org-profile.md`), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only `/corporate-strategy:practice-setup` auto-applies a full profile write.

## Outputs

Follows plugin `CLAUDE.md` § Outputs. Next: IC memo, `synergy-stress-test`, or `exit-or-double-down`.