refactor: rename plan skill to marketing-plan
Avoids name collision with Claude Codes built-in Plan agent and matches existing repo naming patterns (marketing-ideas, audit-marketing). - Renames skills/plan/ to skills/marketing-plan/ - Updates name field and slash-command references in SKILL.md - Updates canonical example reference in example-olo.md - Updates VERSIONS.md row and changelog entry Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Corey Haines
@@ -0,0 +1,256 @@
|
||||
# Current State Rubric — 17-Section Scoring Lens
|
||||
|
||||
The `audit-marketing` skill (in the `cf-skills` repo, `conversionfactory/cf-skills`) scores a company against 17 sections. This rubric is the scoring lens for Section 3 of every marketing plan — whether or not a formal audit has been run.
|
||||
|
||||
## The two paths
|
||||
|
||||
**Path A — Formal audit run.** If `/audit-marketing {client-domain}` has been run, paste the scored output directly. Each of the 17 sections has a score (0–5) and findings. Section 3 of the plan uses this verbatim, with one addition: an interpretive "shape" paragraph after the table.
|
||||
|
||||
**Path B — Lens used, not formal audit.** If no audit has been run (common when fCMO has rich context from kickoff but a formal audit hasn't happened), use the rubric as a *lens* — score each of the 17 sections from available materials, mark "lens used, not formal audit" in the heading. Less rigorous but faster.
|
||||
|
||||
When to choose Path A: client engagement is starting from scratch, materials are sparse, founder wants a scored deliverable.
|
||||
When to choose Path B: rich materials exist, fCMO already has 30+ pages of context, time is short.
|
||||
|
||||
## The 17 sections (scored 0–5 each)
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Positioning
|
||||
**What's scored:** Clarity of category claim, differentiation, alignment across surfaces (homepage, app store, pitch deck, founder messaging).
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No positioning anywhere
|
||||
- 2 = Inconsistent across surfaces; team can't articulate it on demand
|
||||
- 4 = Clear, original, mostly consistent; minor surface gaps
|
||||
- 5 = Distinctive, category-defining, every surface aligned
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting — feeds every stage.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Customer research
|
||||
**What's scored:** Depth and recency of customer research, ICP clarity, voice-of-customer capture.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No formal research, only founder intuition
|
||||
- 2 = Some research but stale or one-off
|
||||
- 4 = Active research practice, customer language captured
|
||||
- 5 = Continuous research, customer language flows into copy / product / messaging
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting — feeds especially Acquisition (channel choice) and Activation (onboarding voice).
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Homepage
|
||||
**What's scored:** Headline clarity, voice alignment, conversion architecture, mobile experience.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = Generic / broken / off-brand
|
||||
- 2 = Functional but underperforming; voice mostly absent
|
||||
- 4 = Clear, voice-aligned, converting; minor optimization opportunities
|
||||
- 5 = Distinctive, converts strongly, fully voice-aligned
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Sales / product pages
|
||||
**What's scored:** Existence and quality of dedicated product / pricing / feature pages. Are SKUs documented? Is pricing scannable? Are upsells visible?
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No dedicated pages
|
||||
- 2 = Pages exist but are stale or off-voice
|
||||
- 4 = Quality pages for primary products; gaps on secondary
|
||||
- 5 = Every product, tier, and upsell has a high-converting page
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Revenue.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Conversion pages
|
||||
**What's scored:** Landing pages for specific campaigns, channels, or use cases. `/partner`, `/science`, `/ambassadors`, `/eye-mask` types of pages.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No conversion pages
|
||||
- 2 = One or two exist; rest of needed pages missing
|
||||
- 4 = Most needed conversion pages exist; quality is good
|
||||
- 5 = Full conversion page library, each high-converting
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Competitor comparison
|
||||
**What's scored:** Existence of "vs. {competitor}" pages, comparison content. Does the brand acknowledge alternatives, or pretend they don't exist?
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = Nothing — actively avoiding competitor mentions
|
||||
- 2 = Some content exists but is weak or hidden
|
||||
- 4 = Solid comparison pages for top 2–3 competitors
|
||||
- 5 = Comprehensive comparison library; SEO-targeted; high-converting
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition (consideration-stage SEO + sales enablement).
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Resources / content
|
||||
**What's scored:** Blog, knowledge base, science page, whitepapers, research, founder essays, podcast.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No content surface
|
||||
- 2 = Blog exists but is stale or thin
|
||||
- 4 = Active content production; multiple formats
|
||||
- 5 = Content is a moat — proprietary research, named pillars, daily volume
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Onboarding
|
||||
**What's scored:** New user onboarding (in-app + email). Time-to-value, completion rate, brand-voice alignment.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No onboarding flow
|
||||
- 2 = Onboarding exists but is broken, off-voice, or underperforming
|
||||
- 4 = Solid onboarding; clear bottlenecks identified
|
||||
- 5 = Tested, optimized, on-brand; activation rate at category top quartile
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Activation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 9. Email lifecycle
|
||||
**What's scored:** Existence and quality of lifecycle email programs. Welcome / onboarding / post-purchase / lapsed / win-back.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No lifecycle email
|
||||
- 2 = Some flows exist but drafted not live, or live but stale
|
||||
- 4 = Core flows live and performing; gaps on secondary flows
|
||||
- 5 = Full lifecycle live, segmented, performing above category benchmarks
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Retention (+ Activation for onboarding emails).
|
||||
|
||||
### 10. Sales material
|
||||
**What's scored:** Sales decks, one-pagers, demos, case studies, pricing sheets. (For B2B / hybrid companies — for pure D2C, this can be marked N/A or scored low without implication.)
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No sales material
|
||||
- 2 = Founder uses a deck but other material is thin
|
||||
- 4 = Solid sales kit; reps can self-serve content
|
||||
- 5 = Comprehensive material; updated quarterly; objection-handling library exists
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Revenue (B2B).
|
||||
|
||||
### 11. Messaging
|
||||
**What's scored:** Voice, tone, vocabulary, message hierarchy across surfaces. Is the brand voice documented, consistent, distinctive?
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No voice documented; surfaces inconsistent
|
||||
- 2 = Voice exists in founder's head but isn't operationalized
|
||||
- 4 = Documented voice; mostly consistent across surfaces
|
||||
- 5 = Distinctive voice; documented; every surface respects it; voice is a moat
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting.
|
||||
|
||||
### 12. Pricing
|
||||
**What's scored:** Pricing structure clarity, packaging logic, recent pressure-testing, listed vs. effective price reconciliation.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = Pricing not pressure-tested in over a year; unclear structure
|
||||
- 2 = Listed pricing exists but plan mix / discounting muddles the read
|
||||
- 4 = Clear pricing; recent tests; LTV math known
|
||||
- 5 = Pricing tested quarterly; packaging optimized; expansion levers known
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Revenue.
|
||||
|
||||
### 13. CRO (conversion rate optimization)
|
||||
**What's scored:** Test cadence, instrumentation, A/B history, statistical rigor.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No tests run; no instrumentation
|
||||
- 2 = Some ad-hoc tests; no statistical rigor
|
||||
- 4 = Regular test cadence; some wins
|
||||
- 5 = Continuous testing program; experimentation culture; documented wins
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Cross-cutting (most impactful at Activation + Revenue).
|
||||
|
||||
### 14. GTM launches
|
||||
**What's scored:** Quality of past launch executions. Product launches, feature launches, campaign launches.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No structured launches; "soft launches" only
|
||||
- 2 = Some launches but uneven execution
|
||||
- 4 = Solid recent launches; playbook exists
|
||||
- 5 = Repeatable launch motion; Product Hunt #1s; press coverage on demand
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition + Activation.
|
||||
|
||||
### 15. Ads (paid)
|
||||
**What's scored:** Paid acquisition state. Active campaigns, channels, CAC tracking, creative quality.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No paid acquisition
|
||||
- 2 = Some paid but unstructured / wasteful
|
||||
- 4 = Paid is firing across 2–3 channels with positive unit economics
|
||||
- 5 = Sophisticated paid stack; CAC/LTV understood; creative iterated weekly
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** For pre-seed clients with no paid budget, score this 0 *without* treating it as a weakness — it reflects the funding stage, not a marketing failure.
|
||||
|
||||
### 16. SEO
|
||||
**What's scored:** Organic search performance. Domain rating, ranking keywords, organic traffic, content cluster strategy.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = No SEO; new domain or zero-authority
|
||||
- 2 = Some content but no strategy; ranks for brand only
|
||||
- 4 = Established content clusters; growing organic traffic; DR 25+
|
||||
- 5 = SEO is a moat; DR 40+; thousand+ ranking keywords; consistent content production
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||||
|
||||
### 17. Internationalization
|
||||
**What's scored:** Geographic expansion, language localization, region-specific pricing.
|
||||
|
||||
**Score guide:**
|
||||
- 0 = US/EN only; no international consideration
|
||||
- 2 = International users exist but aren't served (one language, one currency)
|
||||
- 4 = Multi-language, region-specific pricing, GTM playbook for new markets
|
||||
- 5 = International is a strength; multi-region revenue; localized GTM
|
||||
|
||||
**Maps to AARRR:** Acquisition.
|
||||
|
||||
**Note:** For most early-stage companies, internationalization scores 0–1 and that's appropriate. Don't penalize early-stage companies for not having international playbooks yet.
|
||||
|
||||
## How to compute the total + read the shape
|
||||
|
||||
**Total = sum of all 17 scores. Out of 85.**
|
||||
|
||||
The total matters less than the *shape*. After the scoring table, write a 2–4 sentence "shape interpretation":
|
||||
|
||||
> *"High in {strong sections}, low in {weak sections}. That shape is the gap the rest of the plan closes — Sections X (AARRR stage) is the longest because that's where the gap is widest."*
|
||||
|
||||
## Common shapes
|
||||
|
||||
### "Strong voice / messaging, weak distribution"
|
||||
- High: Positioning (#1), Customer research (#2), Messaging (#11)
|
||||
- Low: SEO (#16), Ads (#15), GTM launches (#14)
|
||||
- Translation: The founder is a strong storyteller but distribution hasn't caught up. Plan emphasizes Acquisition + paid layer prep.
|
||||
|
||||
### "Strong acquisition, weak conversion"
|
||||
- High: SEO (#16), Resources (#7), Ads (#15)
|
||||
- Low: Homepage (#3), Onboarding (#8), Conversion pages (#5), Pricing (#12)
|
||||
- Translation: Traffic comes in but doesn't convert. Plan emphasizes Activation + Revenue.
|
||||
|
||||
### "Strong conversion, weak retention"
|
||||
- High: Onboarding (#8), Homepage (#3), Pricing (#12)
|
||||
- Low: Email lifecycle (#9), CRO (#13)
|
||||
- Translation: Users sign up and pay but churn. Plan emphasizes Retention.
|
||||
|
||||
### "Strong product, weak everything-else"
|
||||
- High: only Positioning (#1) and Customer research (#2) — the founder knows the customer
|
||||
- Low: everything operational
|
||||
- Translation: Pre-marketing stage. Plan is foundation-heavy. First quarter is bedrock fixes.
|
||||
|
||||
### "Strong recent revenue, weak compounding"
|
||||
- High: Ads (#15), Sales material (#10), Pricing (#12)
|
||||
- Low: SEO (#16), Resources (#7), Referral mechanics
|
||||
- Translation: Performance marketing carries the business. Plan emphasizes building compounding channels before paid scales further.
|
||||
|
||||
## When scores are subjective
|
||||
|
||||
Some sections are easier to score from outside than others. Subjectivity tier:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Objective (data-driven):** SEO (#16), Ads (#15), Email lifecycle (#9), Onboarding (#8) — backed by analytics
|
||||
- **Semi-objective:** Pricing (#12), CRO (#13), Conversion pages (#5), Sales material (#10) — visible artifacts to evaluate
|
||||
- **Subjective (judgment call):** Positioning (#1), Messaging (#11), Customer research (#2), Resources (#7) — interpretive
|
||||
|
||||
For subjective sections, write the rationale into the "Note" column so the team can push back if they disagree.
|
||||
|
||||
## When the audit-marketing skill version is run
|
||||
|
||||
If the user runs `/audit-marketing {client-domain}` before or during the plan, use that output verbatim — don't redo the scoring. The Plan skill respects audit-marketing's outputs as the ground truth.
|
||||
|
||||
If the audit was run weeks ago and material has changed since (new shipped flows, new content live, etc.), note "rubric scored on YYYY-MM-DD; material has shifted since" and update any specific scores you have evidence for.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user