Decision frameworks
Skill mfwarren/entrepreneur-claude-skills/skills/leadership/decision-frameworks
Production-ready entrepreneurship skills for Claude Code — marketing, sales, operations, finance, and leadership. 24 skills built by a founder, for founders.
npx -y skills add mfwarren/entrepreneur-claude-skills --skill decision-frameworksAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
SKILL.md
4.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Decision Frameworks
Structured decision-making for founders using reversibility analysis, weighted scoring, pre-mortems, and second-order thinking.
Purpose
Founders make hundreds of decisions a week. Most should be fast. Some need structure. This skill identifies which type of decision you're facing and applies the right framework to reach clarity — not perfection.
Workflow
Step 1: Classify the Decision
Ask the user to describe the decision, then classify it:
Type 1 (Irreversible / High-stakes):
- Hard or impossible to undo
- Large financial, team, or strategic impact
- Examples: Hiring a co-founder, taking funding, pivoting the business, signing a lease
- Treatment: Slow down. Use full framework. Get more data.
Type 2 (Reversible / Low-stakes):
- Easy to undo or change course
- Limited blast radius
- Examples: Choosing a tool, testing a marketing channel, pricing experiment
- Treatment: Decide fast. Run the experiment. Don't overthink.
Tell the user which type they're dealing with.
Step 2: Select Framework
For Type 1 decisions — use Weighted Scoring + Pre-mortem:
Weighted Scoring Matrix:
- List the options (2-5)
- Define criteria that matter (3-7 criteria)
- Weight each criterion (must sum to 100%)
- Score each option per criterion (1-10)
- Calculate weighted totals
| Criteria | Weight | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Criterion 1] | 30% | 7 (2.1) | 5 (1.5) | 8 (2.4) |
| [Criterion 2] | 25% | 6 (1.5) | 8 (2.0) | 4 (1.0) |
| ... | ||||
| Total | 100% | X.X | X.X | X.X |
Pre-mortem: After the scoring, run a pre-mortem on the top option:
- "It's 12 months from now and this decision was a disaster. What went wrong?"
- List 3-5 failure scenarios
- For each: How likely? How preventable? What's the mitigation?
For Type 2 decisions — use 10/10/10 + Regret Minimization:
10/10/10 Rule:
- How will I feel about this in 10 minutes?
- How will I feel in 10 months?
- How will I feel in 10 years?
Regret Minimization:
- "When I'm 80, will I regret NOT doing this more than doing it?"
- Bias toward action for reversible decisions
Step 3: Surface Second-Order Effects
For any decision, ask:
- "And then what?" (repeat 3 times)
- What does this make easier in the future?
- What does this make harder?
- What door does this open? What door does it close?
Step 4: Deliver the Recommendation
Structure:
- The decision: Restate clearly
- My recommendation: [Option X] because [reason]
- Confidence level: High / Medium / Low (and why)
- Biggest risk: [What could go wrong]
- Mitigation: [How to reduce that risk]
- Reversibility check: How hard is this to undo if it's wrong?
Output Format
## Decision: [Brief description]
### Classification
**Type:** [1 or 2] — [Irreversible/Reversible]
**Stakes:** [High/Medium/Low]
### Analysis
[Framework output — scoring matrix, pre-mortem, or 10/10/10]
### Second-Order Effects
- If yes: [consequence chain]
- If no: [consequence chain]
### Recommendation
**Go with:** [Option]
**Because:** [Core reason]
**Confidence:** [High/Medium/Low]
**Biggest risk:** [Risk]
**Mitigation:** [How to handle it]
**Reversibility:** [Easy/Hard to undo — timeframe]
Constraints
- Never make the decision for the user — present the analysis and recommendation, but it's their call
- Don't overanalyze Type 2 decisions — the cost of delay often exceeds the cost of a wrong choice
- Always include confidence level — don't present uncertain conclusions with false certainty
- Surface emotional factors ("What does your gut say?") alongside analytical ones
- If the user is stuck between two very close options, say so — sometimes the answer is "both are fine, just pick one"