본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

program-management

Plans and drives cross-functional programs to delivery — scope, sequencing, dependencies, status, risk, and the escalations that keep work moving. Use this to run a multi-team initiative, recover a program that is slipping, build a delivery plan with dependencies, structure status reporting, or diagnose why cross-team work keeps missing dates.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md3.0 KB
  • references/sources.md1.3 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Program management

Programs fail at the seams between teams, not inside them. The job is the seams.

Set up

  • One outcome, stated as a business result with a date. Programs with several equal objectives have none.
  • A named accountable owner — one person, not a committee. The program manager drives; the owner decides.
  • Scope written as inclusions and exclusions. The exclusions do the work; unwritten exclusions return as assumptions.
  • Dependencies mapped and agreed by the teams that owe them, with dates they have actually committed to. A dependency in your plan that the owning team has not agreed to is a wish.

Sequencing

Order by dependency and risk, not by team convenience. Front-load the things that could invalidate the plan — the technical unknown, the vendor decision, the approval that might not come. Discovering in month four that the plan was impossible is the characteristic program failure.

Build in slack at integration points, not at the end. End-loaded buffer gets consumed early and silently.

Status that is worth reading

Three things, every time: are we on track for the date, what changed since last time, and what decision or unblock is needed. Everything else is appendix.

Track status against committed dates, not effort. "80% complete" is not information; "the integration is done, the migration starts Monday, the sign-off is the risk" is.

Escalate early and specifically. An escalation naming the decision needed and the date it is needed by gets resolved; a general statement of concern gets acknowledged and nothing happens.

When it slips

Establish whether it is a scope problem, a capacity problem, or a dependency problem — the remedies are entirely different and applying the wrong one makes it worse.

Then present options with consequences: cut scope (name what), extend (say by how much and what else is affected), or add capacity (which rarely helps late, and often hurts).

Re-baseline once, visibly, rather than slipping a week at a time. Serial small slips destroy credibility far faster than one honest reset.

Sources

references/sources.md in this skill lists the outside authorities that settle the questions here — what each one is authoritative for, and what you may do with it. Check them before answering on anything they cover, and cite what you used. Most are free to read and not free to reproduce; the use note on each is binding.

Never

  • Report green on a program with an unresolved blocker.
  • Accept a dependency date the owning team has not confirmed.
  • Add people to a late program and assume it accelerates.

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Designs and audits who can reach what — authentication, authorization models, privileged access, service credentials, and joiner-mover-leaver process. Use this to design a permissions model, run an access review, reduce standing privilege, handle offboarding, set up SSO or MFA, manage service and machine credentials, or diagnose why permissions have sprawled.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Concentrates marketing and sales effort on a named set of accounts rather than on volume — qualifying whether the model fits your economics at all, building the account list and the buying group inside each, tiering effort against account value, coordinating so the account experiences one campaign rather than several, and measuring account progression instead of leads. Use this to decide whether to run an account-based program, build one, or work out why an existing one produces activity and no pipeline.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Gets new users from signup to first real value — signup flow, onboarding, time-to-value, and the early experience that determines whether someone becomes a user or a lapsed account. Use this to design or fix signup and onboarding, diagnose why signups do not convert to active use, reduce time-to-value, or decide what a new user must accomplish first.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Designs orchestrator-and-subagent hierarchies for a repository — splitting agents by exclusive write surface, pairing every producer with an independent auditor, and enforcing the split with a script that runs in CI. Use this whenever the user wants to set up, expand, audit, or fix a multi-agent or subagent structure for a codebase; asks how to divide work between agents; wants agent charters, roles, or a surface map written; or is hitting agents that collide on the same files, review their own work, or drift from their remit. Also use when sizing a roster or deciding whether a new agent is justified.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Governs models and AI systems in production — intended use, evaluation, monitoring, human oversight, documentation, and the decision to deploy or retire. Use this before deploying a model or AI feature, when defining evaluation criteria, when a model's behavior has drifted, when assessing AI risk or regulatory exposure, or when deciding whether an AI system is fit for a consequential decision.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Produces executive-level research — market sizing, competitor mapping, trend analysis, and strategic intelligence — grounded in cited sources with the confidence in each claim made explicit. Use this to analyze a market or industry, map competitors, evaluate a market-entry or build-versus-buy decision, produce a research brief, or assemble evidence for a decision. Also use when comparing options that need a structured, evidence-based verdict rather than an opinion.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

cbrock84/headcount2.1천2026년 10월 19일 업데이트

cbrock84의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고