mirror of
https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot.git
synced 2026-03-21 08:35:14 +00:00
* feat: add 11 GTM skills for technical product founders and operators * fix: remove duplicate pr package folder --------- Co-authored-by: Smit Patel <smitpatel@Smits-Laptop.local>
418 lines
16 KiB
Markdown
418 lines
16 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: gtm-operating-cadence
|
|
description: Design meeting rhythms, metric reporting, quarterly planning, and decision-making velocity for scaling companies. Use when decisions are slow, planning is broken, the company is growing but alignment is worse, or leadership meetings consume all time without producing decisions.
|
|
license: MIT
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Operating Cadence
|
|
|
|
The meeting structure that worked at 30 people collapses at 100. What worked at 100 collapses at 300. The failure mode is always the same: too many people in too many meetings making too few decisions.
|
|
|
|
## When to Use
|
|
|
|
**Triggers:**
|
|
- "Our meetings don't produce decisions"
|
|
- "We're growing but alignment is getting worse"
|
|
- "How often should we meet?"
|
|
- "Nobody knows what's happening across functions"
|
|
- "Decisions take forever"
|
|
- "Leadership is in meetings all day"
|
|
|
|
**Context:**
|
|
- Companies scaling from 20 to 300+ people
|
|
- Post-PMF through growth stage
|
|
- Distributed / remote teams
|
|
- Any stage where "we need to talk about this" has become the default
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Core Frameworks
|
|
|
|
### 1. The Five-Level Meeting Architecture
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
Different meetings serve different purposes. Conflating them creates either inefficiency (too much time) or confusion (unclear decisions). Separate meetings by function, frequency, and decision authority.
|
|
|
|
**Level 1: Daily Standup (15 min, teams only)**
|
|
|
|
- What we finished yesterday, what we're starting today, what's blocking us
|
|
- 5-10 people max. Whole-company standups are theater
|
|
- Anti-pattern: Status reporting (use Slack, not meetings)
|
|
- Anti-pattern: Strategic discussion (wrong time, wrong place)
|
|
- Success criteria: Finishes in 15 minutes, surfaces 1-2 blockers
|
|
|
|
**Level 2: Weekly Functional Reviews (60 min, function leadership)**
|
|
|
|
Each function gets its own weekly rhythm:
|
|
- Product team Friday 4pm: metrics, user feedback, roadmap blockers
|
|
- GTM team Tuesday 4pm: pipeline, customer updates, deal health
|
|
- Engineering Wednesday 4pm: velocity, bug backlog, deployment
|
|
|
|
Format: Metric recap (10 min) → Wins/blockers (15 min) → One deep-dive (30 min) → Next week priorities (5 min)
|
|
|
|
Anti-pattern: Trying to solve every problem in the meeting. Pick 1-2, delegate the rest to follow-ups.
|
|
|
|
**Level 3: Weekly All-Hands (60 min, whole company)**
|
|
|
|
The single most important alignment mechanism at a scaling company.
|
|
|
|
- CEO update (15 min): north star progress, week focus, what's changed
|
|
- Metric dashboard (10 min): same format every week (consistency enables pattern recognition)
|
|
- Deep dive (20 min): one strategic topic needing team input — not a presentation, a discussion
|
|
- Q&A (15 min): real questions, real answers
|
|
|
|
Anti-pattern: Defensive tone. All-hands should be straightforward, not spin.
|
|
Anti-pattern: Inconsistent metrics. If you change the dashboard, the team can't track progress.
|
|
|
|
**Level 4: Bi-Weekly Leadership Alignment (90 min)**
|
|
|
|
- North star progress (5 min)
|
|
- Functional updates (30 min, 5-7 min each)
|
|
- Major decisions needing resolution (30-40 min): resource conflicts, strategic pivots, customer/product decisions
|
|
- Next 2 weeks planning (15 min)
|
|
|
|
This is where cross-functional blockers get resolved. If functions operate independently, this meeting isn't working.
|
|
|
|
**Level 5: Quarterly Strategic Planning (half-day to full-day)**
|
|
|
|
- Previous quarter retrospective (90 min): What worked, what didn't, what we'd do differently
|
|
- Next quarter planning (120 min): What are we optimizing for? What's the roadmap?
|
|
- Function breakouts (90 min): Each function plans their quarter
|
|
- Synthesis (60 min): Functions share commitments, resolve conflicts
|
|
|
|
Anti-pattern: Too much "fun activity," not enough substance.
|
|
Anti-pattern: No clear decisions coming out.
|
|
|
|
**Scaling Adjustments:**
|
|
|
|
- **<30 people**: Levels 2-3 only. Skip daily standups (you see everything). Skip bi-weekly leadership (you ARE leadership).
|
|
- **30-100 people**: Add all 5 levels. Monthly review catches what you no longer see daily.
|
|
- **100-300 people**: Add skip-level reviews. You're 2+ layers from execution.
|
|
- **300+ people**: Add function-specific sub-cadences. CEO should be in *fewer* meetings than at 50 — not more.
|
|
|
|
**The Rule That Makes This Work:**
|
|
|
|
Every meeting must produce decisions or be cancelled. Status updates are async. If you're in a meeting and nobody is making a decision, leave.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 2. Weekly Metric Reporting (The Dashboard That Catches Problems Early)
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
Monthly reporting catches problems 30 days late. By then, a bad month is baked. Weekly reporting catches problems in week 2, when you can still save the month.
|
|
|
|
**The Format (Same Structure Every Week):**
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
WEEK OF [DATE]
|
|
|
|
North Star: [Metric]
|
|
This Week: [Value] | Last Week: [Value] | Change: [+/-] [↑↓]
|
|
Context: [One sentence — why this trend matters]
|
|
|
|
Functional Metrics:
|
|
Product: 7-Day Retention: 34% | Last: 33% | +1% ↑
|
|
Feature Adoption: 18% | Last: 16% | +2% ↑
|
|
Context: Onboarding improvements showing impact
|
|
|
|
GTM: Pipeline: $8.2M | Last: $7.8M | +$400K ↑
|
|
New POCs: 3 | Last: 2
|
|
Context: Partner pipeline adding deals
|
|
|
|
Health: Team Morale: 7.2/10 (down from 7.5)
|
|
Context: Org restructure causing uncertainty
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**The Discipline Rules:**
|
|
|
|
1. **Same metrics every week.** Consistency enables pattern recognition. OK to add metrics, never drop them.
|
|
2. **One context sentence per metric.** Not just the number — why does this matter? Vs plan? Vs last period?
|
|
3. **Trend direction for every metric.** Up/down/flat arrow. If it moved significantly: temporary or structural?
|
|
4. **Traffic light colors.** GREEN (on track), YELLOW (watch), RED (action needed). Every RED item must have: owner, specific action, deadline.
|
|
|
|
**The Escalation Rule:**
|
|
|
|
If a metric is RED two weeks in a row with the same action plan, escalate — the action plan isn't working.
|
|
|
|
**How Many Metrics:**
|
|
|
|
Pick 8-12 total. If a metric doesn't change your behavior when it moves, remove it. Dashboards with 40 metrics are decoration, not decision tools.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
Vanity metrics that look good but don't predict business outcomes. Total downloads without adoption context. CEO headlines without supporting metrics.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 3. Quarterly Planning (The Process That Prevents Strategic Drift)
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
Without quarterly planning, companies drift. Each function optimizes locally. Sales chases deals outside ICP. Product builds features for one customer. Marketing runs campaigns that don't connect to pipeline.
|
|
|
|
**The 3-Week Planning Cycle:**
|
|
|
|
**Week 1: Retrospective + Data Gathering**
|
|
- Previous quarter results vs plan (leadership prepares)
|
|
- Each function writes 1-page retrospective: what worked, what didn't, what we'd do differently
|
|
- Finance prepares: revenue actuals, spend actuals, forecast
|
|
- Market data: competitive moves, customer feedback themes, win/loss analysis
|
|
|
|
**Week 2: Priority Setting (Leadership Half-Day)**
|
|
- Review retrospectives (30 min — pre-read, don't present)
|
|
- Agree on 3-5 company-level priorities
|
|
- For each: owner, success metric, resource requirements
|
|
- Identify what you're *not* doing (as important as what you are)
|
|
- Resolve cross-functional dependencies
|
|
- Use the north star as tiebreaker: "Does this help us hit the goal? Prioritize. Nice-to-have? Defer."
|
|
|
|
**Week 3: OKR Cascade + Resource Allocation**
|
|
- Each function translates company priorities into team OKRs
|
|
- Leadership reviews for alignment
|
|
- Resource allocation finalized (headcount, budget, tools)
|
|
- Final plan shared company-wide
|
|
|
|
**The Quarterly Commitment Format:**
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Q2 2026 Roadmap
|
|
North Star: [What we're optimizing for]
|
|
|
|
Pillar 1: Product (25% team effort)
|
|
Initiative: [Name]
|
|
Problem: [What we're solving]
|
|
Success: [Specific metric]
|
|
Owner: [Name]
|
|
Timeline: [When]
|
|
|
|
Pillar 2: GTM (50% team effort)
|
|
Initiative: [Name]
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
Pillar 3: People (10% effort)
|
|
Initiative: [Name]
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
Pillar 4: Tech Debt (15% effort)
|
|
Initiative: [Name]
|
|
...
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**The "Not Doing" List:**
|
|
|
|
For every priority you add, identify one thing you're stopping. If you can't name what you're *not* doing, you have too many priorities.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
Quarterly planning that produces a 30-page doc nobody reads. The output should be: 3-5 priorities on one page, each with owner and metric. That's it.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 4. Decision Velocity and Authority
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
At 20 people, the CEO makes every decision in real-time. Fast. At 100 people, decisions require alignment. Slow. At 300, decisions require alignment, approval, and documentation. Glacial.
|
|
|
|
**The fix isn't more meetings. It's clear decision rights.**
|
|
|
|
**Decision Authority Matrix:**
|
|
|
|
| Decision | Who Decides | Timeline | Escalation |
|
|
|----------|------------|----------|------------|
|
|
| Company strategy | CEO | 1 week | Board if strategic |
|
|
| Feature priority | Product lead | 1 week | CEO if >3 eng weeks |
|
|
| Customer support issue | CSM | Immediately | CS lead if escalated |
|
|
| Marketing campaign | Marketing lead | 2 weeks | CMO if >$10K budget |
|
|
| Hiring | Function leader | 2 weeks | CEO if role not approved |
|
|
| New partnership | CEO | 2 weeks | Board if strategic |
|
|
| Vendor selection | Function leader | 1 week | CEO if >$50K/year |
|
|
|
|
**The Problem:**
|
|
|
|
Scaling companies start treating reversible, low-stakes decisions like irreversible, high-stakes ones. Everything needs approval. Everything needs a meeting. Everything needs consensus.
|
|
|
|
**The Fix:**
|
|
|
|
**Type 1 (Irreversible, high-stakes):** Pricing model, market entry, major partnership → CEO/leadership decides with debate in one meeting. Timeline: 1-2 weeks max.
|
|
|
|
**Type 2 (Reversible, low-stakes):** Campaign creative, feature prioritization, single hire → Function owner decides, informs, iterates. Timeline: same day or next day.
|
|
|
|
**Make decisions with 70% information, not 100%.** Speed is a competitive advantage at every stage.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
Consensus culture masquerading as collaboration. "Let's get everyone aligned" often means "nobody wants to decide." Name the decider. Let them decide. Move on.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 5. Async-First Communication
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
Synchronous meetings don't scale. Default to async, escalate to sync.
|
|
|
|
**Async First (No Meeting Needed):**
|
|
- Decision documents (even major ones — write up proposal, solicit comments, 48-72 hours for feedback, decide if consensus or no material objections)
|
|
- Progress updates (use weekly reporting, not meetings)
|
|
- Process changes and SOPs
|
|
- Decisions already made (inform, don't discuss)
|
|
|
|
**Sync When:**
|
|
- Real-time brainstorming needed
|
|
- Major disagreement to work through
|
|
- Complex topic needing whiteboard
|
|
- Team building / relationship
|
|
|
|
**Documentation Discipline:**
|
|
|
|
Every decision documented: What was decided? Why? Who decided? When does it take effect? Who needs to know?
|
|
|
|
Store in searchable format (wiki, shared drive). New hires onboard faster. Past decisions don't get relitigated.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
"Quick sync" meetings that grow to consume 10 hours per week. Over-communicating in Slack (ephemeral, noisy) and under-communicating in persistent formats (docs, emails). The important stuff should be searchable 6 months later.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 6. The CEO Weekly Update
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
The single highest-leverage communication tool at a scaling company. 5-10 minutes to write. Everyone reads it. It sets context, celebrates wins, names priorities, and creates shared understanding.
|
|
|
|
**Format (Sent Sunday Night or Monday Morning):**
|
|
|
|
**1. Week Focus (1 paragraph):**
|
|
What's the priority this week? What should the team be focused on?
|
|
|
|
**2. North Star Progress (1-2 bullets):**
|
|
Where are we on the key metric? Trend up/down/flat? Why does this matter?
|
|
|
|
**3. Wins This Week (3-5 bullets):**
|
|
What shipped? Customer/partner wins? Big picture implication?
|
|
|
|
**4. Blockers Getting Resolved (1-2 bullets):**
|
|
What are we unblocking this week? Who needs to know?
|
|
|
|
**5. Ask (1 bullet, optional):**
|
|
What help does the team need? Referrals, feedback, customer introductions?
|
|
|
|
**The Rule:**
|
|
|
|
Same day every week. Consistency signals operational discipline. If you skip a week, the team notices — and starts wondering what you're not telling them.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
Too long (team doesn't read), too detailed (save that for function meetings), only good news (team loses trust), inconsistent (team stops reading).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 7. Role Clarity > Titles
|
|
|
|
**The Pattern:**
|
|
|
|
The most powerful tool for speed isn't hierarchy — it's explicit role clarity. When someone knows exactly what they own and can't delegate it away, decisions happen faster.
|
|
|
|
**How to Execute:**
|
|
|
|
- Every initiative gets exactly one owner (with supporting teammates)
|
|
- Metrics are tied to that owner
|
|
- Success is measured by moving KPIs, not completing tasks
|
|
- Eliminate initiatives without clear ownership within 48 hours
|
|
|
|
**The Test:**
|
|
|
|
Can you name the single person who owns this outcome? Not "the team" — a person. If you can't, the initiative will drift.
|
|
|
|
**Common Mistake:**
|
|
|
|
Assigning projects to multiple people ("everyone owns it" = nobody owns it). Measuring activity instead of impact. Burn rate going up without clear ROI tracking per initiative.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Decision Trees
|
|
|
|
### Which Meeting Levels Do We Need?
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Company size <30?
|
|
├─ Yes → Levels 2-3 only (weekly functional + all-hands)
|
|
└─ No → Continue...
|
|
│
|
|
30-100 people?
|
|
├─ Yes → All 5 levels
|
|
└─ No → All 5 + skip-level reviews + function sub-cadences
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Is This Meeting Worth Keeping?
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Does it produce decisions?
|
|
├─ No → Can it be async?
|
|
│ ├─ Yes → Make it async, cancel the meeting
|
|
│ └─ No → Redesign with decision agenda
|
|
└─ Yes → Are the right people in the room?
|
|
├─ No → Fix attendee list (fewer > more)
|
|
└─ Yes → Keep it
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Common Mistakes
|
|
|
|
**1. Adding meetings as you grow**
|
|
Replace them. At 200 people, the CEO should be in fewer meetings than at 50.
|
|
|
|
**2. Status update meetings**
|
|
If it can be an email, it should be an email. Meetings are for decisions.
|
|
|
|
**3. Changing metrics every quarter**
|
|
Consistency enables trend identification. Same dashboard, every time.
|
|
|
|
**4. Consensus culture**
|
|
Name the decider. Let them decide. Inform everyone else.
|
|
|
|
**5. All information in Slack**
|
|
Ephemeral, noisy, unsearchable. Important decisions go in docs.
|
|
|
|
**6. Quarterly planning that produces 30-page docs**
|
|
3-5 priorities on one page. That's the output.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Quick Reference
|
|
|
|
**Meeting architecture:**
|
|
Daily standup (15 min) → Weekly functional (60 min) → Weekly all-hands (60 min) → Bi-weekly leadership (90 min) → Quarterly planning (half-day)
|
|
|
|
**Weekly metric dashboard:**
|
|
8-12 metrics, same format every week, traffic light colors, one context sentence per metric, owner + action + deadline for every RED
|
|
|
|
**Quarterly planning cycle:**
|
|
Week 1: Retro + data → Week 2: Priority setting (3-5 max) → Week 3: OKR cascade + resources
|
|
|
|
**Decision authority:**
|
|
Type 1 (irreversible): CEO/leadership, 1-2 weeks → Type 2 (reversible): Function owner, same day
|
|
|
|
**CEO weekly update:**
|
|
Week focus → North star progress → Wins → Blockers → Ask
|
|
|
|
**Information flow:**
|
|
Daily: Slack wins/customer-voice → Weekly: CEO email + function updates → Monthly: All-hands + skip-levels → Quarterly: Planning share + demos
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Related Skills
|
|
|
|
- **enterprise-account-planning**: Stakeholder management and deal cadence patterns
|
|
- **0-to-1-launch**: Launch-specific execution cadence
|
|
- **board-and-investor-communication**: Board meeting structure and investor updates
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
*Based on operating cadence design across companies scaling from 20 to 1,000+ employees, including the five-level meeting architecture that survived 3x headcount growth, the weekly reporting format that caught pipeline problems 3 weeks earlier than monthly reviews, and the CEO weekly update format refined across multiple companies. Not theory — patterns from building operating systems through hypergrowth and teaching them to the next team.*
|