---
title: "Storevine: Follow the Product"
description: "Follow Storevine through the complete PM lifecycle . from discovery to pivot decision."
generated: true
source: scripts/generate-showcase.py
tags:
  - Showcase
  - Storevine
---

> Series A, ~70 employees, ~15,000 merchants. Building **Campaigns** . native email marketing.
>
> **Prompt style:** Organized . structured context, references prior work, clear scope boundaries.

## Phase: Foundation

### Persona (Marketing Brief)

*Storevine Campaigns marketing persona for self-serve SMB merchant acquisition and competitive positioning against Shopify plus Klaviyo*

:::note[Prompt]
```text
/persona marketing brief

Quick marketing persona for Storevine Campaigns SMB acquisition.

Context:
- We're targeting Shopify + Klaviyo merchants who might consolidate
- Win-loss: 6/14 wins cited "too many tools"; 4/9 losses said "Klaviyo is good enough" [fictional]
- Need this for competitive landing page and acquisition email sequence
- Self-serve purchase, no committee, individual merchant decision

Prior work:
- Competitive analysis (Feb 2026): Shopify Email is template-first, Klaviyo is automation-first
- Interview synthesis: merchants describe "tool juggling tax" as real operational cost

Keep it brief, focused on acquisition messaging and objection handling.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Persona (Marketing Brief)</summary>

# Persona Dossier: Priya Sharma, The Merchant Who Pays the Tool-Juggling Tax (Marketing, Brief)

</details>

---

### Persona (Marketing Detailed)

*Storevine Campaigns committee-buying marketing persona for launch and enablement planning*

:::note[Prompt]
```text
/persona marketing detailed

Build a story-first marketing persona for Storevine Campaigns launch planning.

Context:
- Product: Storevine (B2B ecommerce platform)
- Feature: Campaigns native email/SMS re-engagement
- GTM issue: deals stall after initial interest when more stakeholders join
- Goal: improve launch narrative, objection handling, and sales enablement proof kits

Need output to include:
- trigger events and committee dynamics
- objection translation (what buyers say vs what they mean)
- message architecture and stage-by-stage guidance
- scenario tailoring for launch checklist, release notes, GTM planning, sales enablement
- explicit assumptions/confidence/evidence trail
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Persona (Marketing Detailed)</summary>

# Persona Dossier: Daniel Ng, The Internal Dealmaker (Marketing)

</details>

---

### Persona (Product Brief)

*Storevine Campaigns product persona for guided first-send onboarding and merchant activation*

:::note[Prompt]
```text
/persona product brief

Build a concise product persona for Storevine Campaigns first-send onboarding.

Context:
- Product: Storevine (B2B ecommerce platform)
- Feature: Campaigns native email builder
- Problem: 34% of merchants begin campaign setup but only 12% complete first send [fictional]
- Prior work: merchant interview synthesis identified setup complexity as top barrier for solo-operator merchants
- Target usage: sprint planning for guided first-campaign flow, user stories, edge cases

Output:
- Brief profile (concise, decision-usable)
- Clear decision posture
- Includes/excludes
- Scenario tailoring for hypothesis, user stories, edge cases
- Assumptions and evidence trail
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Persona (Product Brief)</summary>

# Persona Dossier: Luisa Moreno, The One-Woman Marketing Department (Product, Brief)

</details>

---

### Persona (Product Detailed)

*Storevine Campaigns product persona for multi-location merchant campaign management and audience segmentation*

:::note[Prompt]
```text
/persona product detailed

Build a detailed product persona for Storevine Campaigns multi-location merchant workflows.

Context:
- Product: Storevine (B2B ecommerce platform)
- Feature: Campaigns v1.1 multi-location support
- Merchant segment: multi-location operators (11% of merchants, 38% of GMV) [fictional]
- Key challenges: cross-store audience segmentation, template consistency, per-store reporting
- Prior work: competitive analysis identified Shopify Markets and Klaviyo multi-list as key benchmarks
- Target artifacts: PRD requirements, edge-case coverage, dashboard instrumentation

Output requirements:
- Narrative-first, decision-usable
- Explicit tradeoffs and decision moments
- Cross-store workflow friction and collaboration patterns
- Scenario tailoring for PRD, edge cases, instrumentation spec, dashboard requirements
- Assumptions/confidence/evidence trail
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Persona (Product Detailed)</summary>

# Persona Dossier: Carlos Medina, The Multi-Store Operator Who Runs Marketing from a Spreadsheet (Product)

</details>

---

## Phase: Discover

### Competitive Analysis

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . email marketing competitive landscape for Campaigns*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/competitive-analysis

Scope: Email marketing tools available to ecommerce merchants . built-in vs.
third-party positioning. Informing Campaigns v1 scope and feature prioritization.

Our product: Storevine . B2B all-in-one ecommerce + web platform, Series A,
~18k active merchants [fictional]. Building Campaigns: native email marketing
with audience segmentation and automations.

Competitors: Shopify Email (built-in), Klaviyo (third-party, most-used by
merchants), Mailchimp (third-party, SMB standard), Campaign Monitor
(third-party, mid-market)

Segment: Small-to-mid-size ecommerce merchants (Storevine core segment).
Buyer: merchant owner/operator.

Feature matrix dimensions needed:
- Drag-and-drop email editor
- Pre-built templates
- Audience segmentation (purchase-based)
- Abandoned cart automation
- Welcome series automation
- Analytics (open rate, click rate, revenue attribution)
- List import (CSV)
- CAN-SPAM/GDPR compliance tools
- SMS campaigns

Also need: pricing comparison, positioning map (Platform Integration vs.
Feature Depth), deep dives per competitor, gaps and opportunities, and
strategic recommendations.

Audience: Growth PM, Eng Lead, Head of Product.
References: problem-statement (Q4 discovery), exit survey analysis.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Competitive Analysis</summary>

# Competitive Analysis: Email Marketing for Ecommerce Merchants

</details>

---

### Interview Synthesis

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . merchant email marketing interviews for Campaigns discovery*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/interview-synthesis

Research topic: Why do Storevine merchants use external email tools instead
of Storevine's built-in email features?

Context: Storevine all-in-one ecommerce + web platform, ~18k active merchants
[fictional]. Q4 exit survey: 22% of churned accounts cited "had to use a
separate email tool" [fictional]. Competitive analysis filed last week.

We interviewed 8 merchants. Mix of sizes, product categories, and email tool
usage. Interview format: 45-min video call, semi-structured.

Key topics: current email tool setup, how they chose it, what they use
Storevine's built-in tools for (if anything), what would need to be true
to switch, seasonal patterns.

Date range: Jan 12  -  Jan 28, 2026
Interviewer: UX researcher + growth PM
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Interview Synthesis</summary>

# Interview Synthesis: Why Merchants Use External Email Tools

</details>

---

### Stakeholder Summary

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns launch stakeholder map*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/stakeholder-summary

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Stage: PRD complete, moving to engineering kickoff

Stakeholders I've identified:

Internal:
- Growth PM (me) . owner
- Eng Lead (Platform) . aligned, participated in PRD review
- Design . in progress on Figma specs
- Legal . needs to review CAN-SPAM + GDPR section; not started yet
- Merchant Success . launch comms owners; engaged in discovery
- Storevine Marketing . dog-food use case; interested in using
  Campaigns for our own merchant communications

External:
- Power-user merchants (fashion/home segment) . 5-6 who joined
  discovery interviews; have expectations about the feature
- Klaviyo integration partner team . active Storevine integration;
  not sure how they'll react to a native competing feature

Need: influence/interest map, stakeholder profiles, communication
plan, and risk mitigation for Klaviyo and resistant stakeholders.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Stakeholder Summary</summary>

# Stakeholder Summary: Campaigns . Native Email Marketing

</details>

---

## Phase: Define

### Problem Statement

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns feature problem framing for engineering and design*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/problem-statement

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Stage: Define . establishing shared problem framing before PRD draft

Problem I want to articulate:
- ~68% of active merchants use an external email tool [fictional]
- Storevine's built-in email lacks purchase-based segmentation and
  revenue attribution . the two capabilities merchants cite most
- Q4 exit survey: 22% of churned merchants cited this as a primary
  cancellation reason [fictional]
- Competitive analysis filed last week: Shopify Email has already
  validated the built-in email model; Campaigns is behind

Prior work to integrate:
- Competitive analysis (Feb 2026): feature gap matrix vs. Shopify Email,
  Klaviyo, and Mailchimp; confirmed attribution is the primary v1
  differentiator opportunity
- Q4 exit survey data (internal): 22% churn cited email gaps [fictional]

Need: full problem statement with user impact, business context, success
criteria, constraints, and open questions. Audience: engineering lead,
design, legal, and head of product before PRD review.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Problem Statement</summary>

# Problem Statement: Merchants Require External Email Tools for Capabilities Storevine's Platform Should Provide

</details>

---

### Hypothesis

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v1 first-campaign guided flow hypothesis*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/hypothesis

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Stage: Post-discovery, pre-PRD finalization

Hypothesis I want to define:
- Non-adopter merchants (no active external email tool, <250 customers)
  are ~38% of our active base [fictional] and represented 3 of 8 merchant
  interview participants (P3, P6, and P8)
- Core belief: setup complexity is the barrier . not awareness or price
- Specific hypothesis: a guided first-campaign flow with product-seeded
  templates will drive first-send rate from ~12% [fictional] to ≥30%
  [fictional] within 60 days of GA

Prior work to reference:
- Merchant interview synthesis (Jan 12 - 28, 2026): P3, P6, and P8 described
  email as "too overwhelming to start" or perennially "on the list"
- Competitive analysis (Feb 2026): Shopify Email's template-first + free
  tier activation is their primary new-merchant onboarding lever
- Problem statement: email-related churn estimated at 4.8 pp [fictional]
  of overall 22% [fictional] annual merchant churn rate

Need: full hypothesis document with success metrics, validation approach,
pass/fail criteria, and risks. Will attach to PRD as primary testable belief.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Hypothesis</summary>

# Hypothesis: Pre-Populated Templates Drive First Campaign Sends for Non-Adopter Merchants

</details>

---

### Opportunity Tree

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . churn reduction opportunity tree for Campaigns Q2 sprint planning*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/opportunity-tree

Project: Campaigns . and broader platform churn reduction strategy
Stage: Pre-Q2 sprint planning . framing the opportunity space before
scope lock

Desired outcome: Reduce annual merchant churn from 22% [fictional] to
14% [fictional] by Q4 2026

Opportunities I've identified from discovery:
1. Merchants can't run email re-engagement without a separate external
   tool (Q4 exit survey: 22% churn [fictional]; 8 merchant interviews)
2. Merchants can't see what's driving revenue across their store
   (interview finding: "there's no way to see what's working" . P8)
3. Merchants are paying for Storevine + external tools and beginning to
   question whether the platform subscription is worth it

Prior work:
- Competitive analysis (Feb 2026): email is the most-cited capability gap
- Interview synthesis (Jan 2026): non-adopter segment and Klaviyo lock-in
- Stakeholder summary: Campaigns PRD moving to engineering kickoff soon

Need: full opportunity-solution tree with visual, solution options per
branch, prioritization, and experiments backlog for Q2 planning.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Opportunity Tree</summary>

# Opportunity Solution Tree: Reduce Annual Merchant Churn

</details>

---

### JTBD Canvas

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . merchant email and tool-stack job-to-be-done for Campaigns*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/jtbd-canvas

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Stage: Pre-PRD, grounding feature scope in JTBD framework before
engineering handoff

Job I want to map:
- The core job: merchant owner-operators "hiring" their ecommerce platform
  to run their business without managing a fragmented external tool stack
- Specific circumstance: merchant needs email re-engagement for existing
  customers but every tool they find requires a separate account, API
  setup, and data sync

Research basis:
- 8 merchant interviews (Jan 12 - 28, 2026) . direct quotes available
- Competitive analysis (Feb 2026): Klaviyo used by ~40% of active
  merchants [fictional]; Mailchimp by ~20% [fictional]
- Q4 exit survey: 22% churn cited "had to use a separate email tool"
  [fictional]

Need: full JTBD canvas with functional, emotional, and social job layers,
competing solutions, hiring criteria, and product implications. Will
inform v1 feature prioritization and GA messaging strategy.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: JTBD Canvas</summary>

# Jobs to be Done Canvas: Run Email Marketing Without Leaving Storevine

</details>

---

## Phase: Develop

### Solution Brief

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns one-page solution brief for head of product review*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/solution-brief

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants

I need a one-page brief for a head of product review before engineering
kickoff. Full PRD already written and reviewed with engineering lead.
This brief is for executive context, not the build team.

Problem (3 sentences max):
- 68% of active merchants use external email tools [fictional]
- Built-in tools lack segmentation + attribution
- 22% churn cited email gaps as a top-3 reason [fictional]

Solution: native email within Storevine admin . no separate tool
subscription, no sync required

v1 features to include:
- Purchase-based audience segments (pre-built, seeded from Storevine data)
- Guided first-campaign flow (product-seeded templates)
- Revenue attribution (SendGrid webhook → order database)
- CAN-SPAM/GDPR compliance built in
- Abandoned cart automation

Success metrics, trade-offs (what we're NOT building), and top risks.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Solution Brief</summary>

# Solution Brief: Campaigns . Native Email Marketing for Storevine Merchants

</details>

---

### Spike Summary

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . revenue attribution feasibility spike for Campaigns v1*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/spike-summary

Spike: Revenue attribution feasibility . can SendGrid open/click webhooks
be linked to Storevine purchase events within v1 timeline?

Context:
- Revenue attribution is a launch-gate requirement (confirmed in interview
  synthesis and opportunity tree)
- Engineering ADR selected SendGrid for Campaigns email delivery
- Engineering Lead asked for a 1-week spike before sprint planning

What we investigated:
- SendGrid Event Webhook payload structure and custom data fields
- Whether Storevine's customer_id can survive the email→purchase journey
- POC: send a test campaign, receive webhook, match to staging order
- Attribution window design: real-time vs. deferred (7-day)

Need: full spike summary with findings, recommendation, and follow-up
items. Will share with PM and Engineering Lead to unblock sprint planning.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Spike Summary</summary>

# Spike Summary: Revenue Attribution via SendGrid Event Webhooks

</details>

---

### Architecture Decision Record

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . email sending infrastructure for Campaigns*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/adr

ADR for email sending infrastructure choice for Campaigns v1. We need to pick
the vendor before we start the backend build.

Context: Storevine currently sends transactional emails (order confirm, password
reset) through SendGrid on a shared IP. Campaigns will add broadcast marketing
email + 3 automated sequences (abandoned cart, welcome, re-engagement) at
projected volume of ~2M emails/month at launch [fictional], scaling to ~10M
at full merchant adoption [fictional].

Options we evaluated: SendGrid (upgrade to dedicated IP), AWS SES, Postmark,
Mailgun.

Key constraints:
- CAN-SPAM/GDPR compliance is a hard gate before launch
- Deliverability matters: one spam incident tanks merchant trust
- We have existing SendGrid integration (transactional)
- Cost matters but is secondary to deliverability reliability at this stage

Decision: SendGrid dedicated IP. Need this documented for the record.
Eng lead and growth PM are the deciders.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Architecture Decision Record</summary>

# ADR-007: Email Sending Infrastructure for Campaigns

</details>

---

### Design Rationale

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns audience selection UX design decision*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/design-rationale

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Decision: Audience selection UX for the campaign creation flow
Stage: Pre-sprint design review . finalizing Figma specs before engineering

Decision I need to document:
- We debated 3 audience selection approaches before the design review:
  A. Custom filter builder (SQL-like nested conditions, matches Klaviyo)
  B. Pre-built named segments only (curated list, no customization)
  C. Pre-built segments as default + custom filter as secondary option
- We chose Option C after design review with PM, design lead, and eng lead

Context:
- Primary target segment: non-adopter merchants (no current email tool)
- Interview data: 3 of 8 merchants cited setup complexity as the barrier
- Figma link: [internal . Campaigns audience selection v3 spec]

Need: full design rationale document for the engineering handoff package.
Decision makers: Design Lead, Growth PM, Engineering Lead.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Design Rationale</summary>

# Design Rationale: Campaigns Audience Selection UX

</details>

---

## Phase: Deliver

### PRD

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns (built-in email marketing)*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/prd

Feature: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants

Context: Storevine all-in-one ecommerce + web builder, ~18k active merchants
[fictional]. See: competitive-analysis (filed last week), problem-statement
(Q4 discovery doc).

Discovery: Email marketing is a top-3 churn driver. Exit survey: 22% of churned
accounts in Q4 cited "had to use a separate email tool" as a primary reason
[fictional]. Power merchants patch with Klaviyo or Mailchimp; smaller merchants
skip email entirely because setup friction is too high.

Validated solution: Built-in Campaigns . broadcast email + basic audience
segmentation. Phase 1 email only, SMS deferred. Pre-built templates, audience
builder using order/tag data we already have. No custom HTML editor v1.

Success targets:
- 40% of active merchants send ≥1 campaign in first 90 days post-launch [fictional]
- Reduce email-churn contribution by 30% at 6 months [fictional]
- Campaigns becomes a net-new revenue line (paid tier above free send limit)

Scope locked with eng: v1 = broadcast email + 3 automations (abandoned cart,
welcome, re-engagement). No SMS, no A/B testing, no multi-step sequences.

Technical decisions already made:
- Sending via SendGrid (existing account)
- Audience builder queries existing customer/order tables . no new pipeline
- Legal review on CAN-SPAM + GDPR required before launch (not yet started)

Stakeholders: Growth PM (owner), Eng Lead (aligned), Design (in progress),
Legal (needs to review compliance section), Marketing (will dog-food).
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: PRD</summary>

# PRD: Storevine Campaigns

</details>

---

### User Stories

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns guided first-campaign flow user story*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/user-stories

Project: Campaigns . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Sprint: Q2 2026 Campaigns build (kickoff Mar 3, GA Apr 28)

Story I need:
  Guided first-campaign flow for non-adopter merchants

Who: Merchant with no active external email tool and no prior Storevine
     email sends (non-adopter segment, ~38% of active base [fictional])
What: Send their first email campaign using a pre-populated template seeded
      with their own products and a default audience
Why: Start driving repeat purchases without needing to figure out email
     marketing from scratch

Prior work to reference:
- Hypothesis: first-send rate target 12% → 30% [fictional] in 60 days
- Spike summary: SendGrid attribution via unique_args confirmed feasible
- Design rationale: pre-built named segments as default audience selection
- PRD: Campaigns v1 scope locked

Need: full user story with acceptance criteria (Given/When/Then),
design notes, technical notes, and dependencies. P0 priority.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: User Stories</summary>

# User Story: Guided First-Campaign Flow for Non-Adopter Merchants

</details>

---

### Edge Cases

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns campaign send flow edge cases*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/edge-cases

Feature: Campaigns . campaign creation and send flow
Sprint: Q2 2026 Campaigns build (GA Apr 28, 2026)

Key edge cases I want to cover:
- Input validation: subject line, email body, audience size, physical
  sender address (CAN-SPAM requirement)
- Boundary conditions: free tier send volume limit, min/max audience size
- Error states: network failure during send, SendGrid API errors
- Concurrency: double-click send, merchant edits in two browser tabs
- Integration failures: SendGrid unavailable, attribution webhook down

Related docs:
- User story US-CAM-001 (guided first-campaign flow)
- Spike summary: SendGrid attribution webhook confirmed
- Edge cases will be used for QA test plan and engineering handoff

Need: full edge cases document with error messages, recovery paths, and
QA test scenarios (P1/P2/P3).
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Edge Cases</summary>

# Edge Cases: Campaigns Campaign Send Flow

</details>

---

### Launch Checklist

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v1 GA launch checklist*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/launch-checklist

Feature: Campaigns v1.0 . native email marketing for Storevine merchants
Launch date: April 28, 2026
Launch type: Major Release
Launch owner: Growth PM

Key compliance and infrastructure requirements:
- Legal sign-off on CAN-SPAM + GDPR required before any production send
- DMARC/SPF/DKIM sender authentication required for Gmail/Yahoo inbox
  delivery (enforced by Google and Yahoo since 2024)
- SendGrid dedicated IP warm-up plan needed before full-volume sends
- Feature flag rollout: start at 10% of merchants [fictional], scale
  to 100% over 2 weeks based on send failure rates

Stakeholders:
- Engineering Lead (Platform Squad)
- Merchant Success (launch comms + support)
- Legal (CAN-SPAM/GDPR review)
- Storevine Marketing (announcement + dog-food)

Key risks from stakeholder summary:
- Legal review not started; hard gate on compliance sign-off
- Klaviyo partner team needs 48-hour advance notice before GA announcement
- Power-user merchant beta cohort expectations may exceed v1 scope

Need: full pre-launch checklist with go/no-go criteria, rollback plan,
and check-in schedule.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Launch Checklist</summary>

# Launch Checklist: Campaigns v1.0 GA

</details>

---

### Release Notes

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v1.0 GA merchant-facing release notes*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/release-notes

Product: Storevine
Release: Campaigns v1.0 . native email marketing, GA on Apr 28, 2026
Audience: All active Storevine merchants

What's new:
- Campaigns: native email marketing, built into the Storevine admin
- Purchase-based audience segments (pre-built, seeded from Storevine data)
- Guided first-campaign flow (product-seeded templates, no setup required)
- Revenue attribution (see which emails drove which purchases)
- Abandoned cart automation (pre-configured, activates in one click)
- CAN-SPAM/GDPR compliance automatic in every send

Known issues / limitations to document:
- A/B testing not in v1 (coming in v2)
- EU merchant access delayed (GDPR consent flow in v1.1)
- Klaviyo migration tooling not available (planned v2)

Tone: merchant-benefit-first; plain language; not feature-spec language.
Audience is small-business owners, not developers.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Release Notes</summary>

# Storevine Campaigns v1.0

**Release Date:** April 28, 2026

</details>

---

## Phase: Measure

### Experiment Design

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns guided first-campaign flow A/B experiment design*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/experiment-design

Project: Campaigns . Campaigns guided first-campaign flow
Experiment: Does the guided first-campaign flow increase first-send rate
            for non-adopter merchants?

Hypothesis (from Define phase doc):
- We believe pre-populated templates for non-adopter merchants (<250
  customers [fictional], no external email tool) will drive first-send
  rate from 12% [fictional] to ≥30% [fictional] within 60 days of GA

Variants:
- Control: Standard Campaigns creation flow (blank template editor,
  named segment library, no pre-population)
- Treatment: Guided first-campaign flow (product-seeded template,
  audience defaulted to "Customers who purchased in the last 90 days")

Sample: ~6,800 eligible non-adopter merchants [fictional]; need enough
  per variant to detect a 8 pp improvement with 80% power

Run period: April 28  -  June 27, 2026 (60 days from GA)

Need: full experiment design with sample size calculation, success
criteria, risks, and implementation notes.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Experiment Design</summary>

# Experiment Design: Guided First-Campaign Flow for Non-Adopter Merchants

</details>

---

### Instrumentation Spec

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns send flow and first-campaign flow analytics instrumentation*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/instrumentation-spec

Feature: Campaigns . campaign send flow + guided first-campaign flow
Analytics platform: Amplitude

Events I need to instrument:
1. campaign_created . merchant saves a campaign draft
2. campaign_sent . merchant sends a campaign
3. first_send_completed . merchant sends their FIRST campaign ever
   (milestone event for the non-adopter hypothesis)
4. attribution_recorded . a purchase is linked to a campaign click
   within the 7-day attribution window

Prior work:
- Experiment design: A/B test using first_send_completed as primary metric
- Spike summary: SendGrid webhook attribution confirmed; unique_args
  includes campaign_id, merchant_id, recipient_customer_id

PII note: Subscriber email addresses must NOT be sent to Amplitude.
Only customer_id (pseudonymous internal identifier).

Need: full instrumentation spec with event definitions, properties,
PII handling, implementation notes, and QA testing checklist.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Instrumentation Spec</summary>

# Instrumentation Spec: Campaigns Send Flow and First-Campaign Flow

</details>

---

### Dashboard Requirements

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns adoption and revenue analytics dashboard requirements*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/dashboard-requirements

Dashboard: Campaigns adoption and revenue . post-GA monitoring
Audience: Growth PM (daily), Merchant Success (weekly), Head of Product
          (monthly board prep)

Key questions to answer:
1. Are non-adopter merchants sending their first campaign?
   (primary hypothesis metric: first-send rate, 60-day window)
2. Is Campaigns driving measurable revenue for merchants?
   (7-day attributed revenue per campaign send)
3. Is the email-related churn rate declining since GA?
   (churn cohort analysis: merchants with and without Campaigns sends)

Metrics needed:
- First-send rate (60-day, non-adopter segment)
- Campaigns-attributed revenue (7-day window, rolling)
- Active Campaigns merchants (sent ≥1 campaign in last 30 days)
- Churn rate by Campaigns usage cohort
- Send failure rate and unsubscribe rate (guardrails)

Analytics platform: Amplitude (events) + Storevine order DB (revenue)

Need: full dashboard requirements doc with metric definitions,
visualizations, filters, data sources, and acceptance criteria.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Dashboard Requirements</summary>

# Dashboard Requirements: Campaigns Adoption and Revenue

</details>

---

### Experiment Results

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns guided first-campaign flow A/B test results*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/experiment-results

Experiment: Campaigns guided first-campaign flow A/B test
Ran: April 28  -  June 27, 2026 (60 days from GA)

Results:
- Control (blank canvas): 13.4% first-send rate, N=1,204 merchants [fictional]
- Treatment (guided flow): 31.7% first-send rate, N=1,198 merchants [fictional]
- p < 0.001, statistically significant

Secondary metrics:
- Median time to first send: 43 min (control) vs. 12 min (treatment) [fictional]
- Second campaign rate (90 days): 9.1% control vs. 22.8% treatment [fictional]

Guardrail metrics all within acceptable range.

Segment finding: treatment effect strongest in fashion/home merchants
(38.2% vs. 14.6% control) [fictional]; weakest in specialty food (24.1%
vs. 11.8% control) [fictional]

Decision: ship the guided flow as default. Need full results document
for stakeholder review and decision record.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Experiment Results</summary>

# Experiment Results: Campaigns Guided First-Campaign Flow A/B Test

</details>

---

## Phase: Iterate

### Retrospective

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v1.0 build sprint retrospective*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/retrospective

Sprint: Campaigns v1.0 build sprint + GA week
Period: February 3  -  May 5, 2026 [fictional]
Date held: May 7, 2026
Format: Start / Stop / Continue
Duration: 90 minutes [fictional]

Team: Growth PM, Engineering Lead, Backend Engineer,
      Design Lead, Merchant Success Lead, QA Lead

What went well:
- Beta merchant FAQ (23 questions → 10 FAQ + 15 canned responses)
  [fictional] . reduced GA-week ticket volume significantly
- Instrumentation spec process caught subscriber email PII gap
  before GA
- Feature flag rollout (10%→100%) worked; zero rollback events

What to improve:
- Legal review started 3 weeks before GA instead of 6 weeks;
  created compliance copy crunch that delayed marketing content
- DMARC/SPF/DKIM setup: estimated 1 day, took 5 business days
  [fictional]; DNS propagation not in the timeline
- Klaviyo partner notice email sent 2 days late (no clear owner)

Previous retro actions to review (Sprint 7 retro):
- Add QA Lead to kickoff sessions . Complete
- Define escalation path for blocker tickets . In Progress
- Document infrastructure prerequisites for launches . Not Started

Need: full sprint retrospective with action items.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Retrospective</summary>

# Retrospective: Campaigns v1.0 Build Sprint

</details>

---

### Lessons Log

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . lesson learned from the Campaigns guided first-campaign flow A/B test*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/lessons-log

Lesson from: Campaigns guided first-campaign flow A/B test
Experiment ran: April 28  -  June 27, 2026 (60 days from GA)
Decision: Ship guided flow as default for all non-adopter merchants

Primary finding:
- Control: 34.2% opened flow, 39.2% of openers clicked Send [fictional]
- Treatment: 35.8% opened flow, 88.5% of openers clicked Send [fictional]
- Flow entry rate was nearly IDENTICAL between variants
- All of the treatment advantage was in completion rate, not flow entry

What surprised us: We expected the guided UX structure (progress
indicator, step sequencing, explicit prompts) to be the mechanism.
Funnel analysis shows the treatment advantage is concentrated at the
template and subject line step . content pre-population, not UX
scaffolding, is doing the work.

Lesson type: Success Pattern / Strategy
Need: structured lessons log entry for the team knowledge base.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Lessons Log</summary>

# Content Quality, Not UX Scaffolding, Is the Non-Adopter Activation Mechanism

</details>

---

### Refinement Notes

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v1.1 sprint refinement session*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/refinement-notes

Session: Campaigns v1.1 refinement
Date: July 22, 2026, 10:00 AM, 60 minutes
Sprint preparing for: Sprint 12 . Campaigns v1.1
Facilitator: Growth PM

Stories on the agenda:
1. CAM-088: EU merchant GDPR consent data model
2. CAM-089: Per-campaign open rate and click rate analytics
3. CAM-090: Follow-on experiment . 3 vs. 5 products in guided template
4. CAM-091: Abandoned cart email trigger

Key constraints:
- Legal has not yet signed off on the EU consent model (CAM-088)
- Backend Engineer flagged ambiguity on the open rate denominator
  (CAM-089): Amplitude delivered-event count vs. SendGrid recipient count
- CAM-091 may need to be split . scope spans 4 engineering domains

Need: full refinement notes for Sprint 12 planning.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Refinement Notes</summary>

# Refinement Notes: July 22, 2026

</details>

---

### Pivot Decision

*Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v2.0 persevere decision after guided flow validation*

:::note[Prompt]
```
/pivot-decision

Product: Campaigns . post-GA persevere/pivot evaluation
Evaluation date: July 22, 2026 (12 weeks post-GA)

Situation: Campaigns GA succeeded. Guided flow A/B test: 31.7% vs.
13.4% first-send rate [fictional], shipped as default July 10.
BUT: Klaviyo-migrated merchants sending at 23% [fictional] monthly .
far below the ~60% [fictional] predicted from their Klaviyo history.
Three migrated merchants submitted tickets citing missing advanced
segmentation and scheduling. Migrator churn tracking at 18% [fictional].

Question: Should Campaigns v2.0 resources pivot to serve Klaviyo-
migrated merchants, or persevere on non-adopter activation?

Options I need evaluated:
1. Persevere . continue non-adopter activation (77% of segment
   unconverted [fictional])
2. Customer Segment Pivot . redirect to Klaviyo-migrated merchants
3. Platform Pivot . open Campaigns as an API for third-party email
   tool integration

Need: full pivot decision document with analysis and rationale.
```

---
:::

<details>
<summary>Full output: Pivot Decision</summary>

# Pivot Decision: Campaigns v2.0 Roadmap Direction

</details>

---

*28 artifacts generated across the full PM lifecycle.*

---

**Explore other journeys:**

- [Brainshelf (Consumer PKM App)](brainshelf.md)
- [Workbench (Enterprise Collaboration)](workbench.md)
