# Mi Monitor Pestel Delta > Re-scan macro factors quarterly against a prior baseline — what moved, what broke, what entered the frame. Use when an artifact may be resting on something that is no longer true. - Skill: `productside/mi-monitor-pestel-delta` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 4 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add productside/mi-monitor-pestel-delta` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/productside/mi-monitor-pestel-delta/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - License: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0 - Author: Productside (https://skillmd.com/u/productside) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/productside/mi-monitor-pestel-delta --- # PESTEL Delta Monitor ## Purpose Re-scan the macro frame and report what moved. Political, economic, social, technological, environmental, legal — external forces only, none of them controllable. The first PESTEL is a baseline; **the value is entirely in the delta**. What moved, what broke, and what entered the frame that was not in it last quarter. The section that earns the run is **broken assumptions**: which prior artifact — a sizing model, an entry case, a roadmap bet, a pricing corridor — now rests on something that is no longer true. A macro scan that names no affected artifact has produced background reading. **A PESTEL where all six factors moved every quarter is not monitoring, it is horoscope writing.** "No material movement" is a valid and useful entry, and most quarters most factors will earn it. ## When to Use It Use it quarterly, after a baseline exists. Use it when a regulation enters consultation, a currency crosses a threshold, or a technology becomes table stakes. Use it before re-committing to a business case whose macro assumptions are a year old. Do not use it when: - **No baseline exists.** **Stop and say so.** Offer to run a baseline PESTEL first. A first pass wearing a delta's headers tells the reader everything moved when in fact nothing was compared — and it is the single most common failure of this run. - **The question is industry structure rather than macro conditions.** That is `mi-analyze-five-forces`. - **The question is competitor behavior.** That is `mi-watch-competitors`. - **You want a strategy.** PESTEL names external conditions. What to do about them belongs to Ansoff, sizing, or the roadmap. ## Input Require: - **a prior PESTEL baseline to diff against**, named — or an explicit acknowledgment that none exists - the market and geography in scope, at country level - the artifacts that rest on macro assumptions, so broken ones can be named Anything supplied in the invocation, attachments, a stored prior baseline, or earlier conversation counts as context already given. **Example invocation:** `Use $mi-monitor-pestel-delta on mid-market RevOps tooling, US and Germany, diffing against revops-pestel-2026-05-12.md.` ## Key Concepts **A delta needs a baseline, and the stop rule is absolute** — If no prior PESTEL exists in session or on file, say so and offer to run a baseline first. Do not run a first pass and label it a delta. This is the discipline's hardest rule to follow, because producing *something* feels more useful than producing a refusal — and a baseline mislabeled as a delta will be read as "six factors moved this quarter," which is alarming, wrong, and unfalsifiable. *Violation signal:* Every factor has a "was" state that appears nowhere in any prior document. **Each factor either moved materially or it did not** — Two entry types, and no third. "Moved" gets was, now, read, and what it changes. "No material movement" gets one line and nothing else. The one-line entry is not laziness; it is the filter working, and a report where it never appears has stopped filtering. *Violation signal:* Every factor entry is a paragraph, and none says a factor held steady. **Broken assumptions is the section that earns the run** — Name the prior artifact, the assumption inside it, and what is now true instead. A sizing model built on a wage trend that reversed, an entry case built on a regulatory regime that changed, a pricing corridor built on an exchange rate that moved. Without this section a PESTEL is a current-affairs summary with headings. *Violation signal:* The report describes macro movement and names no artifact affected by it. **New to the frame catches what was previously irrelevant** — A factor that did not matter last quarter and does now: a regulation entering consultation, a currency crossing a threshold that changes a pricing corridor, a technology becoming table stakes, an environmental disclosure regime reaching your customers' size band. These arrive without warning precisely because nobody was watching a factor that did not apply. *Violation signal:* The report only re-examines the factors the baseline already contained. **External and uncontrollable only** — If you can decide it, it is not a PESTEL factor. Your own pricing, roadmap, and hiring belong elsewhere. Competitor behavior belongs in the competitive watch. Mixing controllables in produces a document where the reader cannot tell what is weather and what is a choice. *Violation signal:* A factor entry describes something the company could change by deciding to. **Movement needs a threshold, not a direction** — This is the run's materiality threshold, and it is what separates a monitor from a newsfeed. "Interest rates rose" is a fact about the world. "Interest rates crossed the level at which our buyers' capex approvals require board sign-off" is a finding about your market. Material movement is movement past a threshold that matters to a named artifact; everything else is news. *Violation signal:* A factor is reported as moved because a number changed, with no threshold named. ## Guided Context Capture Follow [Guided Context Capture](../../reference/guided-context-capture.md). Open with: "This is a PESTEL delta — six factors diffed against the prior baseline, reporting only material movement, ending in broken assumptions and what is new to the frame. Forty-five to ninety minutes. If no baseline exists I will stop and offer to build one instead. Up to three setup questions. Choose **1. Guided**, **2. Context dump**, or **3. Best guess**." In Guided mode, ask one at a time, hard cap of three: 1. `PESTEL Setup Q1/3` — Is there a prior PESTEL to diff against? If not, I will stop rather than run a baseline in delta clothing. 2. `PESTEL Setup Q2/3` — Which market and countries, at country level? 3. `PESTEL Setup Q3/3` — Which artifacts rest on macro assumptions — a sizing model, an entry case, a pricing corridor? **Best guess is the expected mode for scheduled runs.** Use the stored baseline, the stored scope, and the stored artifact list; name each assumption and proceed. In **Context dump** mode, treat a pasted prior PESTEL as the baseline. On silence: stored baseline, stored scope, quarterly window. If no baseline is found, stop and say so — that refusal is the correct scheduled output. ## What It Produces Complete the [PESTEL Delta Report](template.md), written to the schema in `reference/monitors.md`: - run header: **prior baseline named**, window covered, scope, sources swept - factor-by-factor delta: each factor **moved** (was/now/read/what it changes) or **no material movement** (one line) - **broken assumptions**, each naming the artifact it breaks - **new to the frame** - so-what, assumptions to validate, Final Step block ## Workflow 1. **State web access in one line.** Without it, say so and do not reconstruct prior macro states from memory. 2. **Check for a baseline. If none exists, stop.** Say so plainly and offer to run a baseline PESTEL instead. Do not proceed. 3. **Name the baseline and the window in the header.** 4. **Take each factor in turn** — political, economic, social, technological, environmental, legal — and ask whether it moved past a threshold that matters to a named artifact. 5. **Write "moved" entries in was/now format** with both sources and dates, plus the read and what it changes. 6. **Write "no material movement" entries in one line** and move on. Expect most factors to be here most quarters. 7. **Work the broken assumptions.** For each artifact resting on macro conditions, check whether its assumption still holds. Name the artifact, the assumption, and what is now true. 8. **Scan for new to the frame** — factors that did not apply last quarter and do now. 9. **Write the so-what,** tied to artifacts rather than to themes. 10. **Store under the naming convention** so the next run can diff against this one. ## Human Decision Gate Present the broken assumptions first, then the factor deltas. Highlight: - which artifacts now rest on something untrue - which factors are new to the frame - how many factors reported no material movement — a healthy run has several - what the next quarter should watch Use an Adaptive Decision Ladder: `Revisit the artifacts with broken assumptions`, `Add the new factor to the standing scope`, `Re-baseline — too much has changed to diff`, or `Other (specify)`. ## Evidence and Attribution Rules - Label every read **Fact**, **Inference** (chain shown), or **Assumption** (basis stated). - **Do not invent:** regulations, effective dates, consultation stages, economic figures, exchange rates, or policy positions. Macro claims reach investment memos and legal reviews, where they are checked by people who know. - Every "moved" entry carries a prior source and a current source, both dated. - Distinguish a regulation *proposed* from one *in consultation*, *adopted*, and *in force*. These are four different states with different timelines and are routinely collapsed. - Name the threshold that makes movement material. - Report factors that did not move. Silence about a factor is indistinguishable from not checking it. ## Common Failure Modes - Running a baseline and labeling it a delta - Reporting all six factors as moved every quarter - Describing macro movement with no artifact named - Collapsing "proposed" and "in force" into "coming" - Including controllables — your own pricing, roadmap, or hiring - Reporting a number changing with no threshold that matters - Omitting "new to the frame," so a newly relevant factor stays invisible - Failing to store the run, so the next quarter has nothing to diff ## Assets and Examples - [PESTEL Delta Report template](template.md) - [Synthetic worked example](examples/worked-example.md) - [Weak example](examples/weak-example.md) ## Final Step ```text ## Final Step 1. Revisit the artifacts with broken assumptions (Recommended) 2. Add the new factor to the standing monitoring scope 3. Keep the quarterly cadence so the next run is a diff 4. Re-baseline if too much has changed to diff meaningfully Reply with `1`, `2`, `3`, `4`, `1 and 3`, `Verbose Mode`, or a custom path. ``` ## Sources - [Monitors: the PESTEL delta and its stop rule](../../reference/monitors.md) - [The act layer: PESTEL discipline rules](../../reference/frameworks.md) - [Regional overlays: regulatory environments by geography](../../reference/regional-overlays.md) - [Competitive research compendium and runnable prompts](https://github.com/Productside/Productside-Market-Intelligence-Skills) - [SCIP Code of Ethics](https://www.scip.org/page/CodeofEthics)