enterprise-strategist

어떤 스킬인가요?

This skill should be used when the user asks about enterprise strategy, corporate strategy, business unit strategy, portfolio prioritization, strategic roadmap, growth strategy, diversification, operating model, capability map, strategic initiative, enterprise transformation, board strategy, scenario planning, or competitive positioning at enterprise level. Guides corporate and BU strategy, portfolio prioritization, growth and diversification, market positioning, operating model and capabilities, transformation roadmaps, M&A/partnership/divestiture framing (strategy—not legal DD), scenarios, executive alignment, and KPI trees—not product backlog or program RAID (technical-program-manager), financial models only (financial-analyst), contracts (commercial-counsel), cloud or system architecture alone (enterprise-cloud-architect, senior-system-architecture), or consulting workshops without enterprise portfolio scope (business-consultant).

설치 방법

프로젝트 폴더에서 아래 명령어를 실행하고, 설치할 에이전트를 선택하세요.

설치 명령을 직접 실행해야 적용됩니다. 지원 에이전트와 필요한 권한·라이선스는 제작자의 안내를 확인하세요.

스킬 원문 파일

# Corporate portfolio and prioritization

## Table of contents

1. [Portfolio mapping](#portfolio-mapping)
2. [Prioritization lenses](#prioritization-lenses)
3. [Invest sustain harvest divest](#invest-sustain-harvest-divest)
4. [Initiative prioritization](#initiative-prioritization)
5. [Capital and capacity allocation](#capital-and-capacity-allocation)
6. [Common pitfalls](#common-pitfalls)

## Portfolio mapping

Build a **business portfolio view** (not only IT projects):

| Dimension | Examples |
|---|---|
| Business unit / segment | Divisions, brands, geographies |
| Product line | Core, adjacency, experimental |
| Customer segment | Enterprise, mid-market, consumer |
| Strategic theme | Growth, efficiency, resilience, compliance |

Plot each cell on at least two axes—for example:

- **Market attractiveness** vs **competitive position** (classic portfolio matrix)
- **Strategic fit** vs **economic performance**
- **Option value** vs **execution risk** (for early bets)

Document data sources and vintage; stale market data invalidates portfolio calls.

## Prioritization lenses

Use multiple lenses; leadership should see where lenses disagree:

1. **Strategic fit** — alignment to pillars and where-to-play
2. **Economic return** — NPV, ROIC, payback (coordinate with finance)
3. **Risk** — regulatory, concentration, execution, reputational
4. **Optionality** — learning, platform, ecosystem lock-in
5. **Feasibility** — talent, tech debt, change capacity
6. **Urgency** — competitive window, contract cliff, covenant

## Invest sustain harvest divest

| Posture | Meaning | Typical actions |
|---|---|---|
| Invest | Fund growth, capability build, M&A | Increase capex/opex, acquisitions |
| Sustain | Defend share, optimize margin | Efficiency programs, selective R&D |
| Harvest | Maximize cash, limit reinvestment | Price/mix, cost takeout, capex freeze |
| Divest | Exit or spin | Sale, spin-off, shutdown with run-off plan |

Every BU or major product line should have an explicit posture and rationale. Avoid "invest everywhere"—state trade-offs and what is **not** funded.

## Initiative prioritization

Separate **strategic initiatives** from BAU and from **product backlog**:

```
Initiative → strategic outcome → owner (exec sponsor) → value wave → dependencies → kill criteria
```

Scoring template (weighted 1–5):

| Criterion | Weight (example) |
|---|---|
| Strategic alignment | 25% |
| Value at stake | 25% |
| Time to value | 15% |
| Risk-adjusted feasibility | 20% |
| Dependency load (inverse) | 15% |

Publish **top N** initiatives for the planning horizon; park the rest with explicit deferral reasons.

## Capital and capacity allocation

Tie portfolio decisions to:

- **Capital** — capex, M&A budget, transformation fund
- **People** — critical roles, change saturation by BU
- **Attention** — exec committee time, SteerCo slots

Reconcile portfolio moves with **financial constraints** (leverage, covenants, dividend policy)—escalate to CFO narrative, not spreadsheet ownership.

## Common pitfalls

- Treating all projects as strategic because they have executive sponsors
- Ignoring **technical and org debt** that blocks value realization
- Portfolio review without **exit criteria** for failed bets
- Confusing revenue size with strategic importance (large but low-growth cash cows vs small high-option bets)

# Enterprise strategist scope

## Table of contents

1. [Role definition](#role-definition)
2. [Strategy levels](#strategy-levels)
3. [Typical deliverables](#typical-deliverables)
4. [Inputs and stakeholders](#inputs-and-stakeholders)
5. [Boundaries vs adjacent roles](#boundaries-vs-adjacent-roles)
6. [Quality bar](#quality-bar)

## Role definition

Enterprise strategy answers **where the organization competes**, **how it wins**, and **what must change** across businesses, geographies, and functions—at horizons of 1–5+ years. Work is decision-oriented for CEOs, BU presidents, boards, and executive committees—not sprint planning for a single product team.

## Strategy levels

| Level | Focus | Typical owner |
|---|---|---|
| Corporate | Portfolio, capital allocation, group synergies, governance | CEO / Corp dev / CSO |
| Business unit | P&L growth, share, segment focus, BU operating model | BU president / GM |
| Enterprise function | Enabling capabilities (tech, ops, finance) as strategic enablers | Functional EVP |
| Initiative | Transformation program with measurable value waves | Sponsor + program lead |

Clarify which level the user needs before deep analysis. Corporate choices constrain BU strategy; BU strategies must roll up to portfolio logic.

## Typical deliverables

- Strategic pillars and narrative (3–5 pillars max for exec recall)
- Where-to-play / how-to-win (or equivalent) one-pager per BU
- Portfolio map with invest/sustain/harvest/divest recommendations
- Strategic initiative roadmap with outcomes, dependencies, and owners
- Options paper with criteria, trade-offs, and recommendation
- Target operating model (TOM) outline and capability heatmap
- Scenario briefs (base / upside / downside) with triggers and responses
- Board or exec deck storyline (decision ask on final slide)
- Strategic KPI tree linking corporate metrics → BU → initiatives

## Inputs and stakeholders

Gather or state assumptions for:

- Financial baseline (revenue, margin, cash, leverage)—use `financial-analyst` for models, not this skill alone
- Market and competitive context—segment size, growth, share trends
- Capability and talent constraints
- Regulatory or geopolitical constraints affecting where to play
- Board and investor priorities (growth vs margin vs resilience)
- In-flight M&A or partnership discussions (strategy framing only)

Stakeholders: board, CEO, CFO, BU leaders, corp dev, strategy/PMO, HR for org design implications.

## Boundaries vs adjacent roles

| Topic | Enterprise strategist | Hand off to |
|---|---|---|
| Issue trees, workshop design | Light use | `business-consultant` |
| Program milestones, RAID | Out of scope | `technical-program-manager` |
| Legal terms, DD checklists | Out of scope | `commercial-counsel`, `transaction-principal` |
| Cloud reference architecture | Implications only | `enterprise-cloud-architect` |
| System integration design | Implications only | `senior-system-architecture` |
| Marketing campaign plan | Out of scope | `communication-lead` |

## Quality bar

- **MECE** options and explicit recommendation with dissent risks noted
- **Outcome-linked** initiatives (revenue, margin, risk, capability)—not activity lists
- **Capacity-aware** roadmaps (funding, people, change absorption)
- **Traceability** from board priority → pillar → initiative → metric
- Avoid generic platitudes; anchor claims in stated assumptions and label unknowns

# Growth, diversification, and market position

## Table of contents

1. [Growth paths](#growth-paths)
2. [Diversification types](#diversification-types)
3. [Competitive positioning at enterprise scale](#competitive-positioning-at-enterprise-scale)
4. [Options generation and comparison](#options-generation-and-comparison)
5. [Strategic narrative](#strategic-narrative)
6. [Metrics](#metrics)

## Growth paths

| Path | Description | Enterprise considerations |
|---|---|---|
| Market penetration | More share in current segments | Pricing power, sales capacity, brand |
| Market development | Existing offer, new geographies/segments | GTM model, regulatory, localization |
| Product development | New offer, current customers | Platform leverage, cannibalization |
| Diversification | New offer, new markets | Capability gap, risk, governance |

Map options to **Ansoff-style** paths but validate with segment economics—not labels alone.

## Diversification types

| Type | Relatedness | Risk profile |
|---|---|---|
| Horizontal | Same value chain, new product/market | Medium—shared capabilities |
| Vertical | Up/down stream integration | Medium-high—capital intensity |
| Conglomerate | Unrelated businesses | High—governance complexity |

For each diversification option document:

- **Thesis** — why now, why us
- **Capabilities required** — build, buy, partner
- **Synergies** — revenue, cost, risk (quantify ranges)
- **Anti-synergies** — distraction, culture, regulatory
- **Exit / failure mode** — how to unwind if thesis fails

## Competitive positioning at enterprise scale

Enterprise positioning spans **multiple BUs and brands**—avoid single-product taglines as corporate strategy.

Analyze at layers:

1. **Corporate** — reputation, scale, trust, ESG, financial strength
2. **BU / category** — segment share, differentiation, price band
3. **Capability** — what is uniquely hard to replicate (data, distribution, IP)

Use structured comparison:

| Competitor | Segment focus | Strengths | Vulnerabilities | Likely moves |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| … | … | … | … | … |

Positioning statement template (per BU):

> For **[target segment]**, **[BU/offer]** is the **[category]** that **[primary benefit]** because **[proof points]**.

Corporate rollup should explain **coherence** across BUs (platform, bundle, cross-sell) or **deliberate separation** (house of brands).

## Options generation and comparison

Generate **3–5 distinct strategic options** (not minor variants). Compare on:

| Criterion | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (range) | | | |
| Margin impact | | | |
| Investment required | | | |
| Time to impact | | | |
| Risk | | | |
| Org complexity | | | |

End with **recommended option**, **conditions** that would change the recommendation, and **no-regret moves** valid under all scenarios.

## Strategic narrative

Exec-ready storyline:

1. Context — market shift, performance gap, opportunity
2. Ambition — measurable 3-year outcomes
3. Choices — where to play / how to win (explicit **nos**)
4. Enablers — capabilities, operating model, capital
5. Roadmap — waves, not a flat Gantt
6. Ask — decisions, funding, governance changes

## Metrics

| Category | Examples |
|---|---|
| Growth | Revenue CAGR, share, new segment penetration |
| Profitability | Gross margin, EBITDA margin, ROIC |
| Position | Win rate, NPS by segment, brand index |
| Health | Customer concentration, churn, pipeline coverage |

Link metrics to **strategic pillars** in the KPI tree (see `scenario_planning_and_executive_alignment.md`).

# M&A, partnerships, and corporate development

## Table of contents

1. [Strategy layer vs execution](#strategy-layer-vs-execution)
2. [M&A strategic thesis](#m-a-strategic-thesis)
3. [Synergy types and realism](#synergy-types-and-realism)
4. [Partnerships and alliances](#partnerships-and-alliances)
5. [Divestitures and portfolio exits](#divestitures-and-portfolio-exits)
6. [Integration boundaries](#integration-boundaries)
7. [Governance and stage gates](#governance-and-stage-gates)

## Strategy layer vs execution

This reference covers **corporate development strategy framing**—not legal due diligence, signing, or funds flow.

| Activity | Enterprise strategist | Hand off |
|---|---|---|
| Deal thesis, strategic fit | Yes | — |
| Valuation models, IC pack | Partial narrative | `transaction-principal` |
| LOI/SPA negotiation | No | `commercial-counsel`, `transaction-principal` |
| Closing checklist | No | `transaction-manager` |
| Integration program plan | Boundaries + waves | `technical-program-manager` |

## M&A strategic thesis

Thesis template:

1. **Strategic gap** — what capability or position is missing
2. **Why M&A** vs build/partner (speed, assets, talent, regulation)
3. **Target profile** — size, geography, tech, culture fit criteria
4. **Value creation** — revenue synergies, cost synergies, multiple expansion logic
5. **Risks** — integration, antitrust, talent flight, tech debt
6. **Deal breakers** — lines not crossed

Screen targets against **portfolio posture** (invest vs harvest)—acquisitions in harvest businesses need exceptional rationale.

## Synergy types and realism

| Type | Examples | Validation |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | Cross-sell, bundle, geographic expansion | Customer overlap data, pipeline assumptions |
| Cost | G&A consolidation, procurement, IT rationalization | Duplicate cost baselines, timing |
| Capability | Talent, IP, platform | Retention plans, roadmap conflicts |
| Risk | Diversification, regulatory license | Stress cases |

Apply **haircuts** to synergies in upside cases; separate **cost to achieve** (integration, retention bonuses, systems).

## Partnerships and alliances

Use when full acquisition is excessive risk or capital:

| Partnership type | Strategic use |
|---|---|
| Distribution | Market access without capex |
| Technology | Complement platform gaps |
| Co-development | Shared R&D risk |
| JV | Regulated or local ownership requirements |

Define: objectives, scope, exclusivity, IP, data sharing, exit clauses (strategy summary—not contract drafting).

## Divestitures and portfolio exits

Reasons: focus, liquidity, regulatory, poor fit, valuation capture.

Plan at strategy level:

- **Separation thesis** — stand-alone viability, TSA needs (high level)
- **Buyer universe** — strategic vs financial
- **Impact on remaining portfolio** — stranded costs, brand, customers
- **Timing** — market window, internal distraction

## Integration boundaries

Pre-deal, define **integration ambition**:

| Model | When |
|---|---|
| Absorption | Full consolidation, retire duplicate |
| Best-of-breed | Keep target systems for capability |
| Standalone | Holdco, minimal integration |
| Reverse integration | Target practices adopted by acquirer |

Document **must-integrate** vs **must-not-touch** lists to protect the thesis (e.g., brand, core tech, key talent).

## Governance and stage gates

Typical stage gates (names vary):

1. Theme approval → 2. Target longlist → 3. Approach / NDA → 4. IOI → 5. LOI → 6. Confirmatory DD → 7. Sign → 8. Close → 9. Integration

Enterprise strategist contributes most through **gate 1–4**; partner with corp dev and `transaction-principal` thereafter.

# Operating model and capability strategy

## Table of contents

1. [From strategy to operating model](#from-strategy-to-operating-model)
2. [Target operating model components](#target-operating-model-components)
3. [Capability mapping](#capability-mapping)
4. [Gap analysis and sourcing](#gap-analysis-and-sourcing)
5. [Organization and governance](#organization-and-governance)
6. [Transformation sequencing](#transformation-sequencing)

## From strategy to operating model

Strategy without operating model change often fails in execution. Translate **strategic choices** into:

- How work is **organized** (structure, centers of excellence, shared services)
- How decisions are **made** (governance, delegation, metrics)
- How value is **delivered** (end-to-end processes, customer journeys)
- What **capabilities** must exist at what maturity

Distinguish **target state** from **transition state**—interim models are valid for 12–24 months.

## Target operating model components

| Component | Questions |
|---|---|
| Value chain | Which activities are core vs partner vs outsource? |
| Process | Which processes standardize globally vs localize? |
| Organization | Functional, divisional, matrix, platform model? |
| Location | Hub/spoke, nearshore, follow-the-sun |
| Technology | Platform strategy implications (not detailed design) |
| People | Skills, leadership model, culture shifts |
| Performance | Metrics, incentives aligned to strategy |

Document **design principles** (e.g., "customer ownership in BU, platforms shared at group level") before detailed design.

## Capability mapping

Define **business capabilities** (what the enterprise must do), not org chart boxes:

```
Level 1: e.g., Customer management
  Level 2: e.g., Account planning, Service delivery
    Level 3: optional for heatmaps
```

Rate each capability:

| Maturity | Definition (example) |
|---|---|
| 1 Initial | Ad hoc, heroics |
| 2 Developing | Repeatable locally |
| 3 Defined | Standard enterprise-wide |
| 4 Managed | Measured and improved |
| 5 Leading | Benchmark, drives advantage |

Heatmap: **current** vs **target** vs **priority** (H/M/L) for investment.

## Gap analysis and sourcing

For each priority gap choose **build, buy, borrow, bot**:

| Mode | When | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Build | Core differentiator, no suitable market | Time, talent |
| Buy | M&A fills capability fast | Integration |
| Borrow | Partner/alliance, non-core | Dependency |
| Bot | Automate commodity work | Change, security |

Hand off **build** execution to `technical-program-manager`; **buy** strategy thesis to corp dev / `transaction-principal`; **tech platform** implications to `enterprise-cloud-architect` or `senior-system-architecture`.

## Organization and governance

Align governance to strategy:

- **Steering forums** — strategy vs delivery vs architecture (separate agendas)
- **Decision rights** — RACI or DACI for portfolio, spend, standards
- **Funding model** — central transformation fund vs BU P&L chargeback

Flag **matrix pain** explicitly when strategy requires dual reporting—propose escalation paths.

## Transformation sequencing

Order changes by **value waves** and **dependency**:

1. Quick wins that fund belief and cash
2. Foundation (data, core platforms, leadership)
3. Scale (rollout, operating model shift)
4. Optimize (automation, portfolio cleanup)

Each wave needs: outcomes, scope boundaries, change impact, and **stop rules** if benefits do not materialize.

# Scenario planning and executive alignment

## Table of contents

1. [Scenario planning process](#scenario-planning-process)
2. [Scenario archetypes](#scenario-archetypes)
3. [Strategic trade-offs](#strategic-trade-offs)
4. [Board and executive alignment](#board-and-executive-alignment)
5. [KPI trees and strategic metrics](#kpi-trees-and-strategic-metrics)
6. [Decision memos and governance](#decision-memos-and-governance)

## Scenario planning process

1. **Identify driving forces** — macro, industry, technology, regulation, competition
2. **Select critical uncertainties** — two axes that most affect outcomes
3. **Name scenarios** — memorable, not probability labels only
4. **Flesh narratives** — 1–2 page story per scenario with leading indicators
5. **Stress-test strategy** — which options win/lose per scenario
6. **Define signposts** — metrics that signal which scenario is emerging
7. **Pre-commit responses** — no-regret moves vs contingent bets

Avoid false precision in scenario financials; use **ranges** and explicit assumptions.

## Scenario archetypes

| Archetype | Description | Strategic implication |
|---|---|---|
| Base | Most likely continuation | Default resource plan |
| Upside | Faster growth, favorable regulation | Accelerate invest, capacity risk |
| Downside | Recession, share loss, shock | Harvest, divest, resilience |
| Disruption | New entrant, tech shift | Option bets, partnerships |
| Regulatory | New rules, sanctions, privacy | Exit markets, compliance invest |

Map **initiatives** to scenarios: core (all), optional (one scenario), hedge (downside protection).

## Strategic trade-offs

Make trade-offs explicit—leadership cannot optimize everything:

| Trade-off | Example tension |
|---|---|
| Growth vs margin | Land grab vs profitability |
| Centralize vs federate | Speed local vs scale global |
| Innovate vs optimize | R&D bets vs cost programs |
| Resilience vs efficiency | Inventory, redundancy, slack |
| Short vs long horizon | Quarterly targets vs transformation |

Use **even-over** statements where helpful: "We prioritize share in core segment **even over** margin expansion in adjacencies this cycle."

## Board and executive alignment

### Alignment checklist

- [ ] Single set of **strategic pillars** endorsed by CEO
- [ ] Portfolio postures agreed per major BU
- [ ] Top initiatives capped with named sponsors
- [ ] Financial envelope reconciled with CFO
- [ ] Risk appetite stated (growth, compliance, concentration)
- [ ] Comms narrative aligned (`communication-lead` for execution)

### Board materials

Typical board strategy section:

1. Performance vs strategic plan
2. Market and competitive update
3. Portfolio decisions required
4. Major initiative status (outcomes, not tasks)
5. Scenario update and signposts
6. **Decisions requested** (approve / note / defer)

Avoid operational detail; link to **strategic risks** and **mitigations**.

## KPI trees and strategic metrics

Build a **KPI tree** top-down:

```
North star / corporate outcome
  ├── Pillar 1 metric(s)
  │     ├── Initiative A leading indicators
  ├── Pillar 2 metric(s)
  └── Financial guardrails (cash, leverage, ROIC)
```

Rules:

- **Few metrics** at corporate level (≤7–10)
- Distinguish **outcome** vs **output** vs **activity**
- Assign **one owner** per metric
- Set review cadence (monthly ops vs quarterly board)

| Layer | Example metrics |
|---|---|
| Corporate | Group revenue growth, ROIC, FCF, NPS index |
| BU | Segment share, BU EBITDA, pipeline coverage |
| Initiative | Benefits realized, milestone outcomes, adoption |

Cascade without metric overload—BUs should not inherit 40 corporate KPIs.

## Decision memos and governance

Decision memo structure:

1. **Decision required** (one sentence)
2. Context (brief)
3. Options (2–4) with pros/cons
4. Recommendation and rationale
5. Risks and mitigations
6. Resource ask
7. Implementation outline and owners
8. Appendices (detail for readers who need depth)

Log decisions in SteerCo or strategy forum minutes; revisit when **signposts** trigger scenario shifts.

---
name: enterprise-strategist
description: |
  This skill should be used when the user asks about enterprise strategy, corporate strategy,
  business unit strategy, portfolio prioritization, strategic roadmap, growth strategy,
  diversification, operating model, capability map, strategic initiative, enterprise transformation,
  board strategy, scenario planning, or competitive positioning at enterprise level. Guides
  corporate and BU strategy, portfolio prioritization, growth and diversification, market
  positioning, operating model and capabilities, transformation roadmaps, M&A/partnership/divestiture
  framing (strategy—not legal DD), scenarios, executive alignment, and KPI trees—not product
  backlog or program RAID (technical-program-manager), financial models only (financial-analyst),
  contracts (commercial-counsel), cloud or system architecture alone (enterprise-cloud-architect,
  senior-system-architecture), or consulting workshops without enterprise portfolio scope
  (business-consultant).
---

# Enterprise Strategist

## When to Use

- Set or refresh **corporate strategy** — where to play, how to win, strategic pillars
- Define **business unit (BU) strategy** aligned to corporate intent and P&L accountability
- Prioritize the **enterprise portfolio** — invest, sustain, harvest, divest
- Build a **strategic roadmap** and initiative backlog tied to outcomes, not features
- Evaluate **growth and diversification** options (organic, partnerships, M&A themes)
- Frame **competitive and market positioning** at enterprise or multi-BU scale
- Design **target operating model** and **capability** implications of strategy
- Plan **enterprise transformation** — sequencing, dependencies, value waves
- Frame **M&A, partnerships, or divestitures** at strategy layer (thesis, synergies, boundaries)
- Run **scenario planning** and articulate strategic trade-offs for leadership
- Align initiatives with **board and executive priorities**; define strategic KPI trees
- Prepare **board or exec strategy** narratives, decision memos, and option papers

## When NOT to Use

- User stories, sprint backlog, or feature-level roadmap → `business-analyst`, `technical-program-manager`
- Multi-team delivery tracking, RAID, launch readiness → `technical-program-manager`
- Hypothesis workshops and consulting engagement framing only → `business-consultant`
- Detailed financial models, DCF, or close calendars → `financial-analyst`, `compute-accounting-manager`
- Contract redlines, MSAs, or legal risk → `commercial-counsel`
- M&A closing matrix, signing, or funds flow → `transaction-manager`
- Live deal valuation, IC materials, negotiation → `transaction-principal`
- System integration ADRs, C4, or NFR targets → `senior-system-architecture`
- Cloud landing zones, CCoE, or EA commits → `enterprise-cloud-architect`, `cloud-architect`
- Hands-on cloud service configuration → `cloud-engineer`
- Security program, controls, or IR → `cybersecurity`, `enterprise-security-architect`
- Marketing campaigns, brand, or demand gen → `communication-lead` (comms cadence only)
- Single-product roadmap and feature prioritization → `business-analyst`

## Related skills

| Need | Skill |
|---|---|
| Consulting engagement framing, issue trees, workshops | `business-consultant` |
| Cross-team program execution and milestones | `technical-program-manager` |
| Enterprise cloud governance and landing zones | `enterprise-cloud-architect` |
| Cross-system architecture and ADRs | `senior-system-architecture` |
| Cloud TCO and commit economics in business cases | `cloud-economist` |
| Customer solution design and PoC scope | `solutions-architect` |
| Commercial contracts and negotiation | `commercial-counsel` |
| M&A deal execution and closing | `transaction-manager` |
| M&A thesis, valuation, negotiation | `transaction-principal` |
| Executive and board communications cadence | `communication-lead` |
| Cloud program portfolio and SteerCo | `vp-of-cloud` |
| Infrastructure org and capex envelope | `vp-of-infrastructure` |

## Core Workflows

### 1. Strategy framing and scope

Clarify level (corporate vs BU), time horizon, constraints, and decision audience.

**See `references/enterprise_strategist_scope.md`.**

### 2. Portfolio prioritization

Map businesses and initiatives; apply invest/sustain/harvest/divest and capacity limits.

**See `references/corporate_portfolio_and_prioritization.md`.**

### 3. Growth, diversification, and market position

Generate and compare strategic options; position vs competitors at enterprise scale.

**See `references/growth_diversification_and_market_position.md`.**

### 4. Operating model and capabilities

Translate strategy into target operating model, capability gaps, and org implications.

**See `references/operating_model_and_capability_strategy.md`.**

### 5. Corporate development framing

Articulate M&A/partnership/divestiture theses, synergy logic, and integration boundaries (not legal DD).

**See `references/ma_partnerships_and_corporate_development.md`.**

### 6. Scenarios, alignment, and metrics

Build scenarios, exec/board alignment, and strategic KPI trees linked to initiatives.

**See `references/scenario_planning_and_executive_alignment.md`.**

## When to load references

- **Scope, outputs, boundaries** → `references/enterprise_strategist_scope.md`
- **Portfolio and prioritization** → `references/corporate_portfolio_and_prioritization.md`
- **Growth, diversification, positioning** → `references/growth_diversification_and_market_position.md`
- **Operating model and capabilities** → `references/operating_model_and_capability_strategy.md`
- **M&A and partnerships (strategy)** → `references/ma_partnerships_and_corporate_development.md`
- **Scenarios, board, KPI trees** → `references/scenario_planning_and_executive_alignment.md`