# Foundation Sprint Basics: [Initiative name] (Day 1 Morning)

<!-- The four foundational choices for the initiative, captured as one coherent strategic frame. The team and Decider sign off on this as a bundle before Day 1 afternoon Differentiation begins. -->

## Target Customer Statement

> [A specific, named customer archetype with markers. Not a vague segment. The team should be able to recognize this person.]

Specific markers: [demographic, behavioral, contextual signals that make the archetype concrete].

Note-and-vote outcome: [N of M votes for this customer over [count] alternatives. Decider supervote confirmed / overrode top vote because [rationale].]

## Important Problem Statement

> ["The customer currently [does X], and the pain is [Y]." Single sentence framing the painful-enough problem.]

Why this is painful enough to matter:

- [Concrete evidence of pain: time lost, money spent, frustration, abandoned alternatives, switching behavior.]
- [Why the customer would leave their current behavior (including doing nothing) for a better solution.]
- [Behavioral signals from prior customer research that confirm the pain.]

## Team Advantage Inventory

| Advantage | Evidence | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| [Specific advantage, not generic] | [Concrete evidence, not "we're passionate"] | [Capability / Insight / Relationship / Data / Distribution / Timing] |
| [Specific advantage] | [Concrete evidence] | [Type] |
| [Specific advantage] | [Concrete evidence] | [Type] |

Note-and-vote outcome: team selected [top advantage] and [second advantage] as the two advantages worth committing to.

## Competitor and Alternative Map

| Competitor / Alternative | What customers use it for | Why people leave (or stay) |
|---|---|---|
| **[Direct competitor 1]** | [primary use] | [why leave or stay] |
| **[Direct competitor 2]** | [primary use] | [why leave or stay] |
| **[Substitute workflow]** | [primary use] | [why leave or stay] |
| **[Manual workaround]** | [primary use] | [why leave or stay] |
| **[Internal tool or DIY]** | [primary use] | [why leave or stay] |
| **Do nothing** | [why doing nothing is a valid choice for some customers] | [the reasons inertia wins] |

"Do nothing" is the strongest alternative for many customer segments. The team explicitly considers it before evaluating against named competitors.

## Note-and-Vote Trace (Decisions Made This Morning)

| Decision | Options considered | Vote distribution | Decider supervote |
|---|---|---|---|
| Target customer | [list] | [counts per option] | [Decider's call; rationale if non-obvious] |
| Important problem | [list] | [counts per option] | [Decider's call; rationale] |
| Top 2 advantages | [list] | [multi-vote counts] | [Decider's confirmed pair] |
| Strongest alternative to beat | [list] | [counts per option] | [Decider's call] |

## Decider Checkpoint

**Decider sign-off required before Day 1 afternoon (Differentiation) begins.**

- [ ] Decider confirms target customer statement is specific enough to design for.
- [ ] Decider confirms important problem is painful enough to drive switching from current alternatives (including "do nothing").
- [ ] Decider commits to the top 2 advantages as the bets the team will build on.
- [ ] Decider confirms the strongest alternative to beat (often "do nothing," sometimes a named competitor).
- [ ] Decider signs off on the bundled artifact as a coherent strategic frame: the customer, problem, advantages, and alternatives compose into one story.

**Signed:** [Decider name, role], [ISO date and local time]
