本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

outcome-vs-output

Audit a roadmap or backlog to distinguish outcomes from outputs. Use when the user says "outcome vs output", "escaping the build trap", "are we building the right things", "roadmap review", "feature factory", "output-driven team", "we keep shipping but nothing changes", or wants to shift focus from shipping features to delivering value - even if they don't explicitly say "outcome vs output".

qa-aman/claude-skills
インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル（1）

  • SKILL.md3.8 KB

SKILL.md（原文）

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Overview

Based on Escaping the Build Trap by Melissa Perri. The "build trap" is when teams measure success by features shipped instead of value delivered. Feature factories build a lot - and move metrics very little. Perri's framework: every item in your backlog should trace to a measurable outcome. If it can't, question whether it should be built at all.

The output/outcome distinction:

  • Output - something you ship ("we launched a dashboard")
  • Outcome - a change in user or business behavior ("users now self-serve 40% of support queries")

Outputs are inputs to outcomes. Shipping outputs that don't move outcomes is waste.

Workflow

Step 1: List the current roadmap or backlog items

Work from the actual list. Don't audit hypothetically.

Step 2: Classify each item

For each item, ask: "Is this an output or an outcome?"

  • Output: a feature, a page, a report, an integration, a tool
  • Outcome: a change in what users do or what the business achieves

Mark each: O (output) or OC (outcome).

Step 3: Link outputs to outcomes

For every output, complete this sentence: "If we build [output], we expect [user behavior change], which will result in [business metric change]."

If you can't complete the sentence, the output is not yet justified. Put it on hold.

Step 4: Identify orphaned outputs

Outputs with no traceable outcome are "orphaned." These are the build trap. Common sources:

  • Stakeholder requests with no user research behind them
  • "We should have this" features with no metric attached
  • Copy-what-competitors-have items

List all orphaned outputs. For each, decide: find the outcome it serves, reframe it, or remove it.

Step 5: Check outcome ownership

For each outcome on the roadmap: does a specific team own it? Outcomes without owners don't get achieved.

Step 6: Rewrite the roadmap in outcome language

Replace output-based roadmap items with outcome-based ones.

Before: "Q1: Launch user dashboard, Add CSV export, Rebuild notifications" After: "Q1: Users can self-serve progress tracking (currently requires support ticket)"

Step 7: Set a ratio target

Perri's guidance: a healthy team should spend 70%+ of capacity on outcome-driven work. Calculate the current ratio. If it's below 50%, the team is in the build trap.

Anti-Patterns

1. Relabeling outputs as outcomes Bad: "Our outcome is to launch the dashboard." Good: Launching is never an outcome. "Users track their own progress without contacting support" is an outcome.

2. Outcomes without baselines Bad: "Increase engagement." Good: "Increase weekly active usage from 2.1 to 3.5 sessions per user." Outcomes without baselines can't be measured, so they can never be achieved.

3. Too many outcomes Bad: 12 outcomes for a quarter across one team. Good: 1-3 outcomes per team. More than that means none will be achieved.

4. Measuring outputs as proof of outcomes Bad: "We shipped 14 features this quarter - great execution." Good: "We shipped 14 features. Did any of them move the metrics we cared about?"

Quality Checklist

  • Every roadmap item classified as output or outcome
  • Every output linked to an outcome via "if we build X, we expect Y"
  • Orphaned outputs identified and decision made (justify, reframe, or remove)
  • Every outcome has an owner
  • Roadmap rewritten in outcome language
  • Output-to-outcome ratio calculated and above 50%

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

ログインしてレビューを書く

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

11-star-framework

無料

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

ab-copy-writer

無料

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

acceptance-criteria-writer

無料

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

account-plan

無料

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

ad-campaign-writer

無料

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

api-design

無料

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する