Add comprehensive Loop phase skill
This commit is contained in:
267
skills/design-thinking/loop.md
Normal file
267
skills/design-thinking/loop.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,267 @@
|
||||
# Skill: Design Thinking - Loop
|
||||
|
||||
## Description
|
||||
Connect all phases of design thinking into a continuous improvement cycle, with clear decision points for iteration vs shipping.
|
||||
|
||||
## Input
|
||||
- **phase_results**: Results from empathize, define, ideate, prototype, test phases (required)
|
||||
- **iteration_number**: Which iteration is this (optional, default: 1)
|
||||
- **time_constraint**: Timeline for shipping (optional)
|
||||
- **quality_bar**: Minimum quality requirements (optional)
|
||||
|
||||
## The Continuous Loop
|
||||
|
||||
### Full Cycle Flow
|
||||
```
|
||||
EMPATHIZE → DEFINE → IDEATE → PROTOTYPE → TEST
|
||||
↑ ↓
|
||||
└──────────── LOOP BACK ───────────────┘
|
||||
|
||||
Decision Points:
|
||||
1. After TEST: Ship, Iterate, or Pivot?
|
||||
2. If Iterate: Which phase to revisit?
|
||||
3. If Pivot: Back to Empathize or Define?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Loop Decision Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Matrix:**
|
||||
```
|
||||
Test Results → Next Action
|
||||
|
||||
SHIP:
|
||||
- Success rate: >80%
|
||||
- User satisfaction: >4/5
|
||||
- No critical issues
|
||||
- Meets business goals
|
||||
→ Action: Deploy to production
|
||||
|
||||
ITERATE (Minor):
|
||||
- Success rate: 60-80%
|
||||
- 2-3 moderate issues
|
||||
- Core concept works
|
||||
- Quick fixes available
|
||||
→ Action: PROTOTYPE → TEST
|
||||
|
||||
ITERATE (Major):
|
||||
- Success rate: 40-60%
|
||||
- Multiple issues
|
||||
- Concept solid but execution off
|
||||
- Need design changes
|
||||
→ Action: IDEATE → PROTOTYPE → TEST
|
||||
|
||||
PIVOT:
|
||||
- Success rate: <40%
|
||||
- Wrong problem solved
|
||||
- Users prefer current solution
|
||||
- Fundamental assumption wrong
|
||||
→ Action: EMPATHIZE or DEFINE
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### When to Loop Back to Each Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Back to EMPATHIZE if:**
|
||||
- Users dont have the problem you thought
|
||||
- Your solution solves wrong pain point
|
||||
- Missing key user segment
|
||||
- Assumptions about users proven wrong
|
||||
|
||||
**Back to DEFINE if:**
|
||||
- Problem statement too broad/narrow
|
||||
- Wrong success metrics
|
||||
- HMW question leads to wrong solutions
|
||||
- Persona doesnt match real users
|
||||
|
||||
**Back to IDEATE if:**
|
||||
- Solution works but not optimal
|
||||
- Better ideas emerged during testing
|
||||
- Technical constraints changed
|
||||
- Simpler approach possible
|
||||
|
||||
**Back to PROTOTYPE if:**
|
||||
- Concept good, execution poor
|
||||
- Usability issues in UI/UX
|
||||
- Need higher/lower fidelity
|
||||
- Technical implementation issues
|
||||
|
||||
**Rerun TEST if:**
|
||||
- Fixed critical issues
|
||||
- Changed user segment
|
||||
- Need more data
|
||||
- A/B test needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Iteration Velocity
|
||||
|
||||
### Fast Iteration Cycles
|
||||
```
|
||||
Week 1:
|
||||
- Mon: Empathize (existing data)
|
||||
- Tue: Define + Ideate
|
||||
- Wed: Prototype (lo-fi)
|
||||
- Thu: Test (3-5 users)
|
||||
- Fri: Loop decision
|
||||
|
||||
Week 2:
|
||||
- Mon-Tue: Iterate prototype
|
||||
- Wed: Test again
|
||||
- Thu: Ship or continue
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Quality vs Speed Trade-offs
|
||||
```
|
||||
Speed Priority:
|
||||
- Lo-fi prototypes
|
||||
- 3-user tests
|
||||
- Ship at 70% quality
|
||||
- Fix in production
|
||||
|
||||
Quality Priority:
|
||||
- Hi-fi prototypes
|
||||
- 10+ user tests
|
||||
- Ship at 95% quality
|
||||
- Polish before launch
|
||||
|
||||
Balanced:
|
||||
- Med-fi prototypes
|
||||
- 5-user tests
|
||||
- Ship at 80% quality
|
||||
- Plan iteration post-launch
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Metrics That Matter
|
||||
|
||||
### Leading Indicators (Predict Success)
|
||||
```
|
||||
Empathize:
|
||||
- Users interviewed per segment
|
||||
- Pain points validated by 3+ users
|
||||
- Quote-to-insight ratio
|
||||
|
||||
Define:
|
||||
- HMW clarity score (1-5)
|
||||
- Stakeholder alignment (%)
|
||||
- Success metric specificity
|
||||
|
||||
Ideate:
|
||||
- Ideas per session
|
||||
- Effort/Impact scoring
|
||||
- Idea diversity
|
||||
|
||||
Prototype:
|
||||
- Build time vs plan
|
||||
- Component reuse rate
|
||||
- Fidelity appropriate for stage
|
||||
|
||||
Test:
|
||||
- User completion rate
|
||||
- Time on task vs target
|
||||
- SUS score
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Lagging Indicators (Measure Impact)
|
||||
```
|
||||
Post-Launch:
|
||||
- User adoption rate
|
||||
- Feature usage frequency
|
||||
- Support tickets (fewer = better)
|
||||
- User satisfaction (NPS)
|
||||
- Business metrics (revenue, retention)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Output Format
|
||||
```json
|
||||
{
|
||||
"status": "success",
|
||||
"iteration": 2,
|
||||
"cycle_summary": {
|
||||
"empathize": "5 users interviewed, 3 critical pains identified",
|
||||
"define": "HMW: Reduce setup time from 2hr to 5min",
|
||||
"ideate": "8 ideas generated, selected template-based approach",
|
||||
"prototype": "Med-fi prototype, 6hrs build time",
|
||||
"test": "80% success rate, SUS score 72"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"decision": {
|
||||
"verdict": "iterate_minor",
|
||||
"confidence": "high",
|
||||
"reasoning": "Core flow works but 2 UX issues need fixing"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"loop_back_to": "prototype",
|
||||
"changes_needed": [
|
||||
"Add template preview on hover",
|
||||
"Improve success confirmation message"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"estimated_effort": "4 hours",
|
||||
"next_test_plan": {
|
||||
"users": 3,
|
||||
"focus": "Template selection UX",
|
||||
"success_criteria": "90% success rate on template task"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"ship_criteria": {
|
||||
"must_have": [
|
||||
"90% task completion",
|
||||
"SUS score > 75",
|
||||
"Zero critical issues"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"nice_to_have": [
|
||||
"Template customization",
|
||||
"Saved templates"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"timeline": {
|
||||
"this_iteration": "3 days",
|
||||
"total_so_far": "10 days",
|
||||
"target_ship": "14 days"
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality Gates
|
||||
- [ ] Clear decision made (ship/iterate/pivot)
|
||||
- [ ] Loop target phase identified
|
||||
- [ ] Specific changes documented
|
||||
- [ ] Success criteria for next iteration defined
|
||||
- [ ] Timeline realistic
|
||||
- [ ] Learning captured for future iterations
|
||||
|
||||
## Token Budget
|
||||
- Max input: 1500 tokens
|
||||
- Max output: 2000 tokens
|
||||
|
||||
## Model
|
||||
- Recommended: sonnet (strategic reasoning)
|
||||
|
||||
## Philosophy
|
||||
> "Done is better than perfect. But learning is better than done."
|
||||
> Ship fast, learn faster, improve continuously.
|
||||
|
||||
**Keep it simple:**
|
||||
- Small iterations beat big leaps
|
||||
- Test assumptions early
|
||||
- Fail fast, learn faster
|
||||
- Perfect is the enemy of shipped
|
||||
- User feedback > internal opinions
|
||||
|
||||
## Pivot vs Persevere
|
||||
|
||||
**Persevere if:**
|
||||
- Core metrics trending up
|
||||
- Users like the direction
|
||||
- Issues are tactical, not strategic
|
||||
- Learning compounds each iteration
|
||||
|
||||
**Pivot if:**
|
||||
- 3+ iterations with no improvement
|
||||
- Users consistently reject solution
|
||||
- Wrong problem being solved
|
||||
- Better opportunity identified
|
||||
|
||||
## Continuous Improvement Post-Launch
|
||||
```
|
||||
Post-Ship Loop:
|
||||
1. Monitor usage analytics
|
||||
2. Collect user feedback
|
||||
3. Identify new pain points
|
||||
4. Prioritize improvements
|
||||
5. Small iterations weekly
|
||||
6. Major updates monthly
|
||||
```
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user