marketer-gq Stakeholder Readout Generator
Takes research findings and reframes them for specific stakeholder audiences.
When to Use
- After synthesis, before presenting findings
- When the same research needs to reach different audiences
- When translating research into language that drives action for a specific team
Required Input
- Research findings — A synthesis document, set of themes, or findings summary. The richer the input, the better the output.
- Target audience — Who is this readout for?
Audience Profiles
Product Managers
What they need: Decisions and priorities. Lead with: Actionable recommendations mapped to product decisions. Structure:
- What we learned (3-5 bullet summary)
- What this means for the roadmap (specific recommendations with evidence)
- What to build / change / stop (prioritized)
- Open questions that need more research
- Risk of inaction
Tone: Direct, decision-oriented. Connect every finding to a product implication.
Designers
What they need: User behavior, mental models, and pain points. Lead with: User journey moments and experience details. Structure:
- User mental models (how participants think about the problem space)
- Key pain points mapped to specific journey moments
- Workarounds participants have created (design inspiration lives here)
- Quotes that capture the emotional experience
- Design implications and opportunity areas
Tone: Empathetic, detail-rich. Preserve the human stories.
Leadership / Executives
What they need: Business impact and strategic implications. Lead with: The "so what" — why this matters to the business. Structure:
- Executive summary (3 sentences max)
- Business impact of key findings (revenue, retention, competitive position)
- Strategic recommendations (with confidence levels)
- Investment required vs. expected return
- Risks if findings are ignored
Tone: Concise, business-oriented. No jargon. Every finding connects to a metric or outcome they care about.
Cross-Functional Teams
What they need: Shared understanding and alignment. Lead with: The story — what participants experience and why it matters. Structure:
- Research context (why we did this, who we talked to)
- The participant story (narrative arc of the key findings)
- What each team should take away (engineering, design, marketing, support)
- Shared priorities and next steps
- How to dig deeper (where to find the full data)
Tone: Narrative, accessible. Avoid team-specific jargon.
Output Format
The output is structured content blocks — not a slide deck. Each block has a header, key points, and supporting evidence that can be dropped into any presentation format.
# Research Readout: [Study Name]
## Prepared for: [Audience]
### Context
- Study type: [methodology]
- Participants: [count and profile summary]
- Research period: [dates]
---
### [Section 1 — varies by audience]
**Key point:** [One clear statement]
**Evidence:**
- [Supporting data point or quote]
- [Supporting data point or quote]
**Implication:** [What this means for this audience specifically]
---
### [Section 2]
[Same structure]
---
### Recommendations
1. [Specific, actionable recommendation] — Confidence: High/Medium/Low
- Based on: [which findings support this]
2. [Recommendation]
3. [Recommendation]
### Open Questions
- [What we still don't know and how to find out]
### Appendix: Key Quotes
[5-8 most impactful participant quotes with context]
Reframing Guidelines
The same finding gets different framing depending on the audience. Here's how the same insight translates:
Finding: 8 of 12 participants abandoned onboarding at the integration step.
- For PMs: "The integration step is the primary drop-off point in onboarding. Recommend prioritizing a guided setup flow or reducing required integrations for first-time setup. Estimated impact: 15-20% improvement in activation rate based on the volume of drop-offs at this step."
- For Designers: "Participants hit a wall at the integration step. They described feeling 'overwhelmed by options' and 'not sure which ones I actually need.' Several tried to skip it entirely. The mental model mismatch is between 'I want to try the product' and 'the product wants me to commit to a full setup.'"
- For Leadership: "We're losing a significant portion of new signups at a single friction point in onboarding. The fix is scoped and high-confidence. Resolving it could meaningfully improve our trial-to-paid conversion."
Quality Checks
Before delivering a readout:
- The "so what" test — Every finding should answer "so what?" for the target audience. If a finding just states what happened without connecting it to what the audience should do or care about, it needs reframing.
- Evidence check — Every claim should trace back to specific data. No unsupported assertions.
- Jargon check — Review for research jargon that the target audience wouldn't use. Replace with their language.
- Action check — Does the readout make clear what should happen next? Findings without implications are just trivia.
Chaining with Other Skills
- Input from: research-synthesizer (synthesis document is the primary input)
- Output to: This is typically the end of the analysis chain. Output goes into presentations, documents, or Slack updates.