# Sme Workshops

> [discovery-phase pack · evidence] Structured workshop sessions with the client's subject-matter experts when end users are unreachable. Captures their view of user pain, current process, edge cases, and existing workarounds — flagged as proxy evidence (lower weight than direct user data). Produces sme-notes/*.md.

- Skill: `stanislavnianko/sme-workshops` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add stanislavnianko/sme-workshops`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/stanislavnianko/sme-workshops/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Product & Planning
- Author: stanislavnianko (https://skillmd.com/u/stanislavnianko)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/stanislavnianko/sme-workshops

---


# SME Workshops

> Part of the **discovery-phase** skill pack · `evidence` group · reads `discovery-context.md` (run `profile-builder` first if missing).

Use when direct user access is blocked but the client has people who interact with the user daily — customer success, support, sales, ops, internal tool admins. Their view is **proxy** evidence: faster to access, lower fidelity than direct.

## Step 1 — Read discovery context

Read `discovery-context.md` (sections **1. Client → Decision-makers**, **4. Access & Data → Client SMEs**). If no SMEs listed there, ask the BA to list them now and update the context file.

If `discovery-context.md` is missing, ask the BA inline: "which client SMEs are accessible (names + roles, or 'none yet')?" — tag the output `[ASSUMED]`. Never block; recommend `profile-builder` for high-stakes work.

## Step 2 — Choose workshop format

| Goal | Format | Duration |
|---|---|---|
| Map a process end-to-end | 1:1 walk-through with the SME closest to the process | 60 min |
| Validate competing hypotheses | Small group (3-4 SMEs) facilitated debate | 90 min |
| Surface edge cases | Asynchronous prompt + 30-min sync | 30 min sync + 1 day async |
| Get pain frequency / severity ranking | Solo intake, then group calibration | 45 min solo + 30 min group |

## Step 3 — Pre-workshop prompts (sent 24h before)

Send the SME a 4-bullet brief:
1. The problem-canvas one-liner
2. "Bring a recent example (last 90 days) where this came up"
3. "List the 3 most painful touch-points you've heard about from users in the last quarter"
4. "What would 'fixed' look like to you, in user behavior, not feature names?"

## Step 4 — Workshop facilitation

- **Anchor on stories.** "Walk me through the last user who hit this." Same rule as user-interviews — past beats hypothetical.
- **Separate observation from speculation.** When the SME says "users feel X", probe: "How do you know? Did a user say it, or are you inferring?" Tag accordingly.
- **Get artifacts.** Screenshots, ticket numbers, recorded call links, internal docs. SMEs hoard these by default; ask explicitly.
- **End with disagreements.** "Where do you and your team disagree about this problem?" Internal disagreement = signal.

## Step 5 — Capture as proxy evidence

Write `./discovery/sme-notes/<initials>-<role>.md` per `./template.md`.

**Critical: tag every observation with confidence:**
- `[direct]` — SME quoted a specific user
- `[inferred]` — SME's interpretation
- `[anecdotal]` — single-case generalization
- `[disagreement]` — multiple SMEs disagree

This is what makes synthesis trustworthy when interviews aren't in the mix.

## Step 6 — Triangulation note

After 2+ SME workshops, write `./discovery/sme-notes/_triangulation.md`:
- What multiple SMEs agree on (raise confidence)
- What only one SME claims (lower confidence)
- What SMEs flatly disagree on (flag for follow-up)

## Output

- `./discovery/sme-notes/<initials>-<role>.md` per SME
- `./discovery/sme-notes/_triangulation.md` running

Append to `_log.md`: `[sme-workshops | YYYY-MM-DD] sme: <initials>; takeaway: <one-line>; confidence: <high/med/low>`.

## Anti-patterns

- **Treating SME insight as user insight.** It isn't. Every artifact downstream of this skill must visibly mark "proxy evidence". Synthesis weights it lower than direct interviews.
- **Letting one loud SME dominate.** Separate intakes first, calibrate second.
- **Skipping disagreements.** SME consensus is suspicious — they often work in the same building, share the same biases.
- **No artifacts collected.** A workshop without ticket/call references produces opinion, not evidence.