Pivot

/pivot

Read brain/problem.md, brain/believers/index.md, brain/interviews/, brain/decisions.md, brain/pivots.md (if exists). Run query_evidence() for relevant signals.

When to invoke

Founder is considering changing direction. Triggers:

• Believer density <30% after 5+ interviews
• Retention curve approaching zero
• Multiple "this isn't quite my problem" signals
• Founder explicitly says "I'm thinking about pivoting"

Step 1 — Surface what's actually wrong

Before naming a pivot type, name the failure. Read brain/ and ask:

• What did the original hypothesis predict?
• What did the evidence show?
• Where exactly did they diverge?

If the founder hasn't done a /problem refresh recently, suggest it before pivoting. Often the "pivot" is just a refinement.

Step 2 — Walk through the 10 canonical pivot types

For each, ask: "Does this match what your evidence is telling you?" Cite brain entries as you go.

1. Zoom-in pivot — A single feature becomes the whole product. Evidence pattern: users love ONE thing, ignore the rest.
2. Zoom-out pivot — The whole product becomes a single feature of something larger. Evidence pattern: users want it as part of an existing workflow, not standalone.
3. Customer segment pivot — Same product/problem, different customer. Evidence: wrong people responding well to right solution.
4. Customer need pivot — Same customer, different problem. Evidence: customer engaged but not on the pain you targeted.
5. Platform pivot — Application ↔ platform. Evidence: developers want APIs, or customers want a turnkey app.
6. Business architecture pivot — B2B ↔ B2C, or high-margin/low-volume ↔ low-margin/high-volume. Evidence: monetization model mismatch with how the segment buys.
7. Value capture pivot — Different monetization model. Evidence: willingness-to-pay exists but not for the model you priced.
8. Engine of growth pivot — Sticky / viral / paid (the three canonical growth engines). Evidence: growth working through a different mechanism than designed for.
9. Channel pivot — Same product, different distribution. Evidence: customers prefer to buy/discover differently than you offer.
10. Technology pivot — Same customer/problem, different tech. Evidence: you can deliver the same value cheaper/faster/better with new tech.

Step 3 — Kill criteria for the OLD hypothesis (non-negotiable)

Before any pivot, force the founder to write down:

• What was the original hypothesis?
• What evidence proved it wrong (cite specific interview / metrics)?
• Why are we sure it's wrong, not just early?

Pivots without explicit kill criteria are noise. Refuse to log the pivot until these are written down.

Step 4 — New hypothesis with falsification

The pivot is a NEW hypothesis. It needs:

• Specific customer segment
• Specific pain
• Falsification criteria (what would prove THIS wrong)

Run /problem on the new hypothesis. Don't auto-overwrite the old one — preserve history. Old problem.md becomes part of the pivot log.

Step 5 — Log to brain/pivots.md

Append:

## <date> — <pivot type>: <one-liner>

### Old hypothesis (killed)
<copy of brain/problem.md before pivot>

### Kill criteria met
- <specific evidence — interview ref, metric, quote>
- <...>

### Pivot type (Ries)
<one of 10>

### New hypothesis
<see brain/problem.md as of this date>

### What carries over
- Believers willing to follow: <names>
- Evidence still relevant: <ref>

### What we lose
- <ref>

### Reasoning
<one paragraph — what we learned, what we believe now, what we'll watch>

Anti-pattern to call out

If founder wants to pivot every 2 weeks: this is thrash, not pivoting. Surface brain/pivots.md history. "You've pivoted twice in 8 weeks. The problem is probably not the hypothesis — it's that you're not running long enough experiments to learn from any of them. Either let this one run another 4 weeks, or admit it's not the hypothesis you're rejecting — it's the discomfort of a hypothesis without quick wins."

Why this exists

A pivot is a structured course correction designed to test a new fundamental hypothesis about the product, strategy, and engine of growth.

Most founders pivot in panic. This skill makes pivots structured, evidence-driven, and historical — the brain remembers every old hypothesis and why it was killed. Future-you reads pivots.md and sees the trail of validated learning, not just the latest narrative.

It's only a pivot if you can articulate what was wrong. Otherwise it's a fresh start — which is fine, just call it that.