---
title: "Pivot Decision"
description: "Documents a strategic pivot or persevere decision with the evidence, analysis, and rationale. Use when evaluating whether to change direction on a product, feature, or strategy based on market feedback."
generated: true
source: scripts/generate-skill-pages.py
tags:
  - Iterate
  - reflection
---

:::note[Quick facts]
**Phase:** Iterate | **Version:** 2.0.0 | **Category:** reflection | **License:** Apache-2.0
:::

**Try it:** `/pivot-decision "Your context here"`

A pivot decision document captures the analysis and rationale behind a strategic direction change.or the decision to stay the course. Based on the Lean Startup concept of "pivot or persevere," this artifact ensures major strategic decisions are made with evidence, communicated clearly, and preserved for organizational learning.

## When to Use

- After significant validated learning suggests the current direction may not work
- At planned pivot-or-persevere checkpoints (e.g., after MVP launch)
- When key hypotheses have been invalidated by market feedback
- During strategy reviews when considering major direction changes
- When stakeholders are debating whether to change course

## How to Use

Use the `/pivot-decision` slash command:

```
/pivot-decision "Your context here"
```

Or reference the skill file directly: `skills/iterate-pivot-decision/SKILL.md`

## Instructions

When asked to document a pivot decision, follow these steps:

1. **Summarize Current State**
   Document what you're currently doing, how long you've been doing it, what you've invested, and what results you've achieved. This grounds the decision in reality.

2. **Present the Evidence**
   Compile all relevant data: metrics, user feedback, experiment results, market signals. Be comprehensive.include evidence that supports both staying and changing course.

3. **Review Hypotheses**
   Revisit the original hypotheses that justified the current direction. Which have been validated? Which have been invalidated? Which remain untested?

4. **Define Options**
   Articulate at least three options: persevere (continue current direction), and two or more distinct pivot options. Describe each option concretely.what would change?

5. **Analyze Each Option**
   Evaluate options against key criteria: market opportunity, competitive advantage, team capability, resource requirements, and risk. Use evidence, not opinions.

6. **Make the Decision**
   State the chosen direction clearly. Explain the rationale, acknowledging trade-offs. If the team disagrees, capture dissenting views.

7. **Plan Implementation**
   Outline what happens next: immediate actions, resource needs, success criteria for the new direction, and communication plan.

## Output Template

# Pivot Decision: [Product/Initiative Name]

## Overview

| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| **Decision Date** | [Date] |
| **Decision Maker(s)** | [Names and roles] |
| **Product/Initiative** | [Name] |
| **Time in Market** | [Duration since launch] |
| **Investment to Date** | [Time, money, resources] |

---

## Executive Summary

**Decision:** [Persevere / Pivot to X]

[2-3 sentence summary of the decision and primary rationale]

---

## Current State

### What We're Doing Now

[Description of current product/strategy/approach]

### Key Metrics

| Metric | Current | Target | Gap |
|--------|---------|--------|-----|
| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [+/-X%] |
| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [+/-X%] |
| [Metric 3] | [Value] | [Value] | [+/-X%] |
| [Metric 4] | [Value] | [Value] | [+/-X%] |

### Timeline of Events

| Date | Milestone | Outcome |
|------|-----------|---------|
| [Date] | [Event] | [Result] |
| [Date] | [Event] | [Result] |
| [Date] | [Event] | [Result] |

### Resources Invested

| Resource | Amount |
|----------|--------|
| Time | [X months] |
| Budget | [$X] |
| Team | [X people × Y months] |
| Opportunity cost | [What else we could have done] |

---

## Evidence Summary

### Data That Triggered This Evaluation

<!-- What signals suggested we should reconsider our direction? -->

1. [Evidence point 1]
2. [Evidence point 2]
3. [Evidence point 3]

### Customer/User Feedback

**What Users Are Saying:**
- "[Quote 1]" . [Source]
- "[Quote 2]" . [Source]
- "[Quote 3]" . [Source]

**User Behavior Patterns:**
- [Behavioral observation 1]
- [Behavioral observation 2]

### Market Signals

- [Market observation 1]
- [Market observation 2]
- [Competitive development]

### Internal Learnings

- [Learning 1]
- [Learning 2]

---

## Hypothesis Review

### Original Hypotheses

| Hypothesis | Status | Evidence |
|------------|--------|----------|
| [Hypothesis 1] | Validated / Invalidated / Untested | [Brief evidence] |
| [Hypothesis 2] | Validated / Invalidated / Untested | [Brief evidence] |
| [Hypothesis 3] | Validated / Invalidated / Untested | [Brief evidence] |
| [Hypothesis 4] | Validated / Invalidated / Untested | [Brief evidence] |

### Key Learnings from Validation

- [What we learned from validated hypotheses]
- [What we learned from invalidated hypotheses]

---

## Options Considered

### Option 1: Persevere (Stay the Course)

**Description:** [What continuing current direction looks like]

**What Changes:** [Adjustments to current approach]

**Rationale for Considering:**
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

**Risks:**
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]

**Resource Requirements:** [What it takes to continue]

---

### Option 2: [Pivot Type . e.g., Customer Segment Pivot]

**Description:** [What this pivot looks like]

**What Changes:**
- [Change 1]
- [Change 2]

**Rationale for Considering:**
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

**Risks:**
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]

**Resource Requirements:** [What this pivot requires]

---

### Option 3: [Pivot Type . e.g., Platform Pivot]

**Description:** [What this pivot looks like]

**What Changes:**
- [Change 1]
- [Change 2]

**Rationale for Considering:**
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

**Risks:**
- [Risk 1]
- [Risk 2]

**Resource Requirements:** [What this pivot requires]

---

## Analysis

### Evaluation Criteria

| Criterion | Weight | Definition |
|-----------|--------|------------|
| Market Opportunity | [High/Med/Low] | [How we evaluate] |
| Competitive Advantage | [High/Med/Low] | [How we evaluate] |
| Team Capability | [High/Med/Low] | [How we evaluate] |
| Resource Requirements | [High/Med/Low] | [How we evaluate] |
| Risk Level | [High/Med/Low] | [How we evaluate] |

### Options Comparison

| Criterion | Persevere | Pivot Option 2 | Pivot Option 3 |
|-----------|-----------|----------------|----------------|
| Market Opportunity | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
| Competitive Advantage | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
| Team Capability | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
| Resource Requirements | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
| Risk Level | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
| **Overall** | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |

---

## Decision

### Chosen Direction: [Option Name]

**Decision Statement:**
[Clear statement of what we're doing]

### Rationale

[Detailed explanation of why this option was chosen over alternatives]

### Trade-offs Accepted

| Trade-off | Impact | Why Acceptable |
|-----------|--------|----------------|
| [Trade-off 1] | [Impact] | [Justification] |
| [Trade-off 2] | [Impact] | [Justification] |

### Dissenting Views

<!-- Capture disagreement for the record -->

[Who disagreed and their reasoning]

---

## Implementation Plan

### Immediate Actions (Next 30 Days)

| Action | Owner | Due Date |
|--------|-------|----------|
| [Action 1] | [Name] | [Date] |
| [Action 2] | [Name] | [Date] |
| [Action 3] | [Name] | [Date] |

### Resource Requirements

| Resource | Current | Needed | Gap |
|----------|---------|--------|-----|
| Budget | [X] | [Y] | [Z] |
| Headcount | [X] | [Y] | [Z] |
| Technology | [X] | [Y] | [Z] |

### Success Criteria

**How we'll know if this is working:**

| Metric | 30-Day Target | 90-Day Target |
|--------|---------------|---------------|
| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Metric 3] | [Value] | [Value] |

### Checkpoint Schedule

| Date | Checkpoint | Decision Point |
|------|------------|----------------|
| [Date] | [30-day review] | [What we'll evaluate] |
| [Date] | [90-day review] | [What we'll evaluate] |

---

## Communication Plan

### Internal Communication

| Audience | Message | Channel | When |
|----------|---------|---------|------|
| [Team] | [Key message] | [How] | [When] |
| [Leadership] | [Key message] | [How] | [When] |
| [Broader org] | [Key message] | [How] | [When] |

### External Communication

| Audience | Message | Channel | When |
|----------|---------|---------|------|
| [Customers] | [Key message] | [How] | [When] |
| [Partners] | [Key message] | [How] | [When] |

---

## Appendix

### Supporting Documents

- [Link to detailed analysis]
- [Link to customer research]
- [Link to financial model]

### Pivot Type Reference

<!-- For context on pivot types -->

Common pivot types (Lean Startup):
- **Zoom-in Pivot:** Single feature becomes the whole product
- **Zoom-out Pivot:** Product becomes a feature of larger product
- **Customer Segment Pivot:** Same product, different customer
- **Customer Need Pivot:** Same customer, different problem
- **Platform Pivot:** Change from application to platform or vice versa
- **Business Architecture Pivot:** High margin/low volume ↔ low margin/high volume
- **Value Capture Pivot:** Change how you monetize
- **Engine of Growth Pivot:** Viral ↔ paid ↔ sticky
- **Channel Pivot:** Change distribution mechanism
- **Technology Pivot:** Same solution, different technology

---

*Decision documented on [date]. Review scheduled for [date].*

## Example Output

<details>
<summary>Pivot Decision: FitTrack App</summary>

# Pivot Decision: FitTrack App

## Overview

| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| **Decision Date** | January 14, 2026 |
| **Decision Maker(s)** | Sarah Kim (CEO), Michael Chen (CPO), Lisa Park (CTO) |
| **Product/Initiative** | FitTrack - Personal Fitness Tracking App |
| **Time in Market** | 8 months (launched May 2025) |
| **Investment to Date** | $1.2M seed funding, 18 months development, 6 FTEs |

---

## Executive Summary

**Decision:** Pivot to B2B Enterprise Wellness (Customer Segment Pivot)

After 8 months in market, our B2C fitness app has achieved 5,000 users but only 2% paid conversion, well below the 8% needed for sustainability. User interviews revealed strong interest from corporate wellness buyers, with 3 companies already asking about enterprise licensing. We're pivoting from B2C consumer to B2B enterprise wellness, targeting HR departments at companies with 500+ employees.

---

## Current State

### What We're Doing Now

FitTrack is a B2C mobile app that helps individuals track workouts, nutrition, and sleep. We monetize through a freemium model: free basic tracking, $9.99/month premium for advanced analytics and coaching. Our target customer is health-conscious individuals aged 25-45.

### Key Metrics

| Metric | Current | Target | Gap |
|--------|---------|--------|-----|
| Total Users | 5,200 | 50,000 | -90% |
| Paid Conversion | 2.1% | 8% | -74% |
| Monthly Revenue | $1,100 | $25,000 | -96% |
| 30-Day Retention | 18% | 40% | -55% |
| CAC | $12 | $8 | +50% |

### Timeline of Events

| Date | Milestone | Outcome |
|------|-----------|---------|
| May 2025 | App Store launch | 500 downloads first week |
| July 2025 | Paid tier launch | 1.8% conversion |
| Sept 2025 | Marketing push | CAC increased, conversion flat |
| Nov 2025 | Added social features | Slight retention improvement |
| Dec 2025 | 3 enterprise inquiries received | Unexpected inbound interest |
| Jan 2026 | Pivot evaluation | This document |

### Resources Invested

| Resource | Amount |
|----------|--------|
| Time | 18 months (10 months dev, 8 months in market) |
| Budget | $1.2M of $1.5M seed funding |
| Team | 6 people × 18 months |
| Opportunity cost | Could have tested B2B earlier based on signals |

---

## Evidence Summary

### Data That Triggered This Evaluation

1. **Conversion rate stuck at 2%** despite multiple pricing tests, feature additions, and marketing campaigns. The B2C fitness app market is brutally competitive.

2. **Three unsolicited enterprise inquiries** in Q4 from HR leaders who found our app and wanted to license it for their companies. We weren't pursuing this market.

3. **User interviews revealed job context**: When we asked converted users why they paid, 60% mentioned their employer either reimbursed it or they wished they would. The "fitness-conscious individual" is often a "wellness-benefit-seeking employee."

4. **Competitive analysis**: Direct B2C competitors (MyFitnessPal, Strava) have massive scale advantages. B2B wellness (Wellable, Virgin Pulse) is more fragmented with higher switching costs.

### Customer/User Feedback

**What Users Are Saying:**
- "I'd use this more if my company offered it as a benefit" . User interview, P7
- "My HR team is always looking for wellness solutions. You should talk to them." . User interview, P12
- "The app is good, but I have too many fitness apps already. If work paid for it, that'd change things." . User interview, P3

**What Enterprise Buyers Are Saying:**
- "We spend $400/employee on wellness benefits and have no idea if they work. Your analytics could show ROI." . Inbound inquiry, HR Director at 800-person company
- "Our current vendor is enterprise software from 2010. Your UX is 10 years better." . Inbound inquiry, Wellness Coordinator

**User Behavior Patterns:**
- Power users (top 10%) often share app to colleagues.word of mouth within companies
- Highest engagement on Monday mornings.suggests workplace wellness routines
- Most churned users cite "too many apps" as reason.commodity market problem

### Market Signals

- Corporate wellness market: $56B globally, growing 7% annually
- Post-COVID: Employers competing for talent via wellness benefits
- HR buyers increasingly have budget authority for wellness tools
- Enterprise wellness has 3-5 year contracts (sticky revenue)

### Internal Learnings

- Our analytics dashboard is more sophisticated than we realized.enterprise buyers loved it
- We underestimated how much we compete with free (Apple Health, Google Fit) in B2C
- The team has more B2B experience than B2C (3 of 6 came from enterprise SaaS)

---

## Hypothesis Review

### Original Hypotheses

| Hypothesis | Status | Evidence |
|------------|--------|----------|
| Health-conscious 25-45 year olds will pay $10/mo for premium fitness tracking | Invalidated | 2% conversion despite targeting; market saturated with free options |
| Social features will drive retention | Partially Invalidated | Minor lift (18% → 22% retention), not enough to change trajectory |
| We can achieve $8 CAC through organic + content marketing | Invalidated | CAC stuck at $12; paid channels even worse ($18) |
| Premium analytics differentiate us from free alternatives | Validated | Users who convert cite analytics as reason; enterprise buyers excited by this |

### Key Learnings from Validation

- Analytics capability is real and valued.just by wrong customer segment
- B2C fitness is a commodity market with winner-take-all dynamics
- Corporate buyers have budget and willingness to pay for wellness
- Our team's B2B DNA may be better suited to enterprise selling

---

## Options Considered

### Option 1: Persevere (Stay B2C Course)

**Description:** Continue B2C focus. Double down on marketing, add more viral features, explore influencer partnerships, and try to break through conversion ceiling.

**What Changes:**
- Hire growth marketer to optimize funnel
- Build more social/viral features
- Explore additional monetization (ads, affiliate)

**Rationale for Considering:**
- We have some users who love the product
- Pivoting means wasted B2C investment
- B2C success could be massive scale if it works

**Risks:**
- Continuing to burn cash on a market that may not work
- 3-6 more months of runway ($300K) needed to know
- Team morale already suffering from flat metrics

**Resource Requirements:** $300K additional runway, 3-6 months

---

### Option 2: Pivot to B2B Enterprise Wellness (Customer Segment Pivot)

**Description:** Reposition FitTrack as an enterprise wellness platform. Target HR departments at companies with 500+ employees. Shift from freemium to enterprise licensing ($3-5/employee/month).

**What Changes:**
- Add admin dashboard for HR buyers
- Build team analytics and reporting
- Enterprise SSO and security features
- Hire 1-2 B2B sales/partnerships roles
- Remove B2C freemium focus

**Rationale for Considering:**
- Inbound demand already exists (3 inquiries)
- Higher contract values ($50-200K/year vs $120/user/year)
- Longer retention cycles (3-year contracts)
- Better competitive position (fragmented market, inferior UX)

**Risks:**
- Longer sales cycles (3-6 months enterprise)
- Need to build sales capability
- May lose current B2C users
- Compliance requirements (SOC 2, GDPR)

**Resource Requirements:** $150K for MVP enterprise features, 2-3 months to market

---

### Option 3: Pivot to Platform/API (Technology Pivot)

**Description:** Stop being an app. Become the analytics layer that other fitness apps and devices integrate with. License our analytics engine to Apple Health, Garmin, etc.

**What Changes:**
- Sunset consumer app
- Build API-first platform
- Partner with device manufacturers
- B2B2C model

**Rationale for Considering:**
- Our analytics are genuinely good
- Avoids both B2C competition and B2B sales complexity
- Potential massive scale through partnerships

**Risks:**
- Long partnership cycles with big tech
- No existing relationships with potential partners
- Commoditization risk if analytics become table stakes
- Requires different team skills

**Resource Requirements:** $400K, 6-9 months, uncertain outcome

---

## Analysis

### Evaluation Criteria

| Criterion | Weight | Definition |
|-----------|--------|------------|
| Market Opportunity | High | Size and growth of addressable market |
| Competitive Advantage | High | Our defensibility and differentiation |
| Team Capability | Medium | Alignment with team skills and experience |
| Resource Requirements | Medium | Cash and time needed |
| Risk Level | Medium | Likelihood of failure |

### Options Comparison

| Criterion | Persevere (B2C) | B2B Enterprise | Platform/API |
|-----------|-----------------|----------------|--------------|
| Market Opportunity | Low (saturated) | High ($56B, growing) | Medium (uncertain) |
| Competitive Advantage | Low (commodity) | High (UX, analytics) | Medium (commoditization risk) |
| Team Capability | Medium (learning) | High (B2B DNA) | Low (no partnerships exp) |
| Resource Requirements | Medium ($300K) | Low ($150K) | High ($400K) |
| Risk Level | High (flat metrics) | Medium (new sales) | Very High (uncertain) |
| **Overall** | 2/5 | 4/5 | 2.5/5 |

---

## Decision

### Chosen Direction: Pivot to B2B Enterprise Wellness

**Decision Statement:**
FitTrack will pivot from B2C consumer fitness app to B2B enterprise wellness platform, targeting HR departments at companies with 500+ employees. We will sunset B2C marketing, build enterprise features, and hire B2B sales capability.

### Rationale

1. **Evidence of demand:** We have 3 inbound enterprise inquiries without trying. This is the strongest market signal we've received.

2. **Better unit economics:** Enterprise contracts ($50-200K) are 400-1600x higher LTV than B2C ($120/year). Even with longer sales cycles, the math works better.

3. **Team-market fit:** Our team has B2B DNA. Three of six team members have enterprise SaaS backgrounds. We've been fighting against our strengths.

4. **Competitive positioning:** B2B wellness is fragmented with legacy UX. Our consumer-grade design is a genuine differentiator. In B2C, we're one of hundreds of "good enough" apps.

5. **Resource efficiency:** B2B pivot requires $150K and 2-3 months.our most capital-efficient option.

### Trade-offs Accepted

| Trade-off | Impact | Why Acceptable |
|-----------|--------|----------------|
| Lose 5,000 B2C users | Community we built, brand awareness | Users weren't converting; sunk cost fallacy otherwise |
| Longer sales cycles | Cash flow delays 3-6 months | Enterprise contracts have upfront payments; VC can bridge if needed |
| Need to learn enterprise sales | New capability to build | Team has transferable skills; can hire experienced seller |
| Compliance requirements | Time and cost for SOC 2, etc. | Enterprise willingness to pay covers these costs |

### Dissenting Views

**Michael (CPO):** Concerned about abandoning B2C entirely. Suggested maintaining a small B2C presence for brand awareness and potential B2B2C. Decision: We'll keep the app available but stop active B2C investment. Enterprise employees can still use it individually.

---

## Implementation Plan

### Immediate Actions (Next 30 Days)

| Action | Owner | Due Date |
|--------|-------|----------|
| Contact 3 inbound enterprise leads | Sarah (CEO) | Jan 17 |
| Scope admin dashboard MVP | Michael (CPO) | Jan 21 |
| Draft enterprise pricing model | Sarah + Michael | Jan 21 |
| Pause B2C marketing spend | Lisa (CTO) | Jan 15 |
| Begin SOC 2 readiness assessment | Lisa | Jan 28 |
| Create enterprise sales one-pager | Sarah | Jan 21 |
| Post B2B account executive job listing | Sarah | Jan 24 |

### Resource Requirements

| Resource | Current | Needed | Gap |
|----------|---------|--------|-----|
| Runway | $300K (8 months) | $300K (12 months) | Bridge round or faster revenue |
| Headcount | 6 | 7-8 (add sales) | Hire 1-2 in Q1 |
| Technology | B2C app | Enterprise features | $150K development |

### Success Criteria

**How we'll know if this is working:**

| Metric | 30-Day Target | 90-Day Target |
|--------|---------------|---------------|
| Enterprise pipeline | 5 qualified opportunities | 15 qualified opportunities |
| Signed LOIs/pilots | 1 | 3 |
| Contract revenue (signed) | $0 | $75K ARR |
| Pilot feedback score | N/A | 4+/5 |

### Checkpoint Schedule

| Date | Checkpoint | Decision Point |
|------|------------|----------------|
| Feb 14 | 30-day review | Do we have pipeline? Continue or reconsider? |
| Apr 14 | 90-day review | Do we have contracts? Scale or iterate? |

---

## Communication Plan

### Internal Communication

| Audience | Message | Channel | When |
|----------|---------|---------|------|
| Full team | Pivot decision and rationale | All-hands meeting | Jan 15 |
| Board | Pivot strategy and funding needs | Board deck + call | Jan 17 |
| Advisors | Strategy shift, ask for B2B intros | Individual emails | Jan 20 |

### External Communication

| Audience | Message | Channel | When |
|----------|---------|---------|------|
| B2C users | "We're focusing on helping companies..." | In-app + email | Jan 22 |
| Inbound leads | "We're building this.let's talk" | Personal outreach | Jan 17 |
| Tech press | Not yet | N/A | After first contract |

---

## Appendix

### Supporting Documents

- Enterprise market sizing analysis (internal doc)
- User interview synthesis (enterprise quotes) (internal doc)
- Competitive analysis: B2B wellness (internal doc)
- SOC 2 readiness checklist (security doc)

### Pivot Type Reference

**This is a Customer Segment Pivot:** Same core product (fitness tracking + analytics), different customer (enterprises vs. individuals). This is one of the lower-risk pivot types because it leverages existing product capabilities.

Other pivot types considered but rejected:
- **Platform Pivot:** Too resource-intensive, uncertain outcome
- **Value Capture Pivot:** Tried different pricing in B2C, didn't work
- **Zoom-in Pivot:** Analytics alone aren't compelling without the tracking

---

*Decision documented on January 14, 2026. 30-day review scheduled for February 14, 2026.*

</details>

## Real-World Examples

See this skill applied to three different product contexts:

<details>
<summary>Storevine (B2B): Storevine B2B ecommerce platform . Campaigns v2.0 persevere decision after guided flow validation</summary>

**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.
```

---

**Output:**

# Pivot Decision: Campaigns v2.0 Roadmap Direction

</details>

<details>
<summary>Brainshelf (Consumer): Brainshelf consumer PKM app . post-experiment persevere decision for Resurface</summary>

**Prompt:**

```
/pivot-decision

post-experiment pivot decision for resurface. a/b test showed +5.3pp
lift in 7-day return rate, p=0.008 [fictional]. all guardrails passed.

recommending: persevere . ship to all eligible users, invest in v2.

alternatives considered:
1. persevere: ship email digest, iterate on relevance and cadence
2. pivot to push notifications: replace email with mobile push as the
   trigger mechanism
3. pivot to in-app resurfacing: replace email with in-app notification
   card (deferred from the original opportunity tree as solution 1B)

need the formal decision doc for marco. decision date: april 11, 2026.
```

---

**Output:**

# Pivot Decision: Resurface . Post-Experiment Evaluation

</details>

<details>
<summary>Workbench (Enterprise): "Workbench enterprise collaboration platform: Blueprints customer segment pivot decision"</summary>

**Prompt:**

```
/pivot-decision

I need a formal pivot-decision document for the exec team. Here's the situation:

**Current state:**
- Blueprints GA launched April 28, 2026; 320/500 accounts active [fictional]
- Time-to-approved: 2.4 days [fictional] (on target)
- But adoption is uneven: 68% of active Blueprints come from ops/compliance teams [fictional]; 8% from engineering [fictional]; 24% from other departments [fictional]
- Sales pipeline: 6 of 8 stalled deals ($1.8M ARR [fictional]) are in regulated industries waiting for compliance-specific features (audit trail export, regulatory template library, compliance officer role)

**Options:**
1. Persevere: Continue horizontal strategy; invest equally across all department use cases
2. Customer segment pivot: Narrow focus to ops/compliance teams in regulated industries; defer engineering templates to v2
3. Hybrid: Ship the compliance features that unblock the $1.8M pipeline, but keep the horizontal template system

**My recommendation:** Option 2 (customer segment pivot). The data is clear that ops/compliance is where the product-market fit is strongest. Engineering teams need fundamentally different features (code review integration, CI/CD hooks, Jira-native workflow) that would take 6+ months to build. Narrowing focus now lets us win the compliance segment, hit the 650-account target [fictional], and return to engineering in v2 with dedicated investment.

**Key concern from Sandra C.:** She worries that narrowing the segment limits the TAM for Series C fundraising. Mei-Lin T. counters that regulated-industry compliance is a $4.2B TAM [fictional] and growing.

Please generate the full pivot-decision document.
```

**Output:**

# Pivot Decision: Workbench Blueprints Customer Segment Focus

</details>

## Quality Checklist

Before finalizing, verify:

- [ ] Current state includes honest assessment of results
- [ ] Evidence is comprehensive, not cherry-picked
- [ ] Multiple options are analyzed fairly
- [ ] Decision rationale is clear and evidence-based
- [ ] Implementation plan is actionable
- [ ] Dissenting views are captured

## Output Format

Use the template in `references/TEMPLATE.md` to structure the output.
