c-level-advisor/skills/strategic-alignment/SKILL.md
Cascades strategy from boardroom to individual contributor. Detects and fixes misalignment between company goals and team execution. Covers strategy articulation, cascade mapping, orphan goal detection, silo identification, communication gap analysis, and realignment protocols. Use when teams are pulling in different directions, OKRs don't connect, departments optimize locally at company expense, or when user mentions alignment, strategy cascade, silo, conflicting OKRs, or strategy communication.
npx skillsauth add alirezarezvani/claude-skills strategic-alignmentInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Strategy fails at the cascade, not the boardroom. This skill detects misalignment before it becomes dysfunction and builds systems that keep strategy connected from CEO to individual contributor.
strategic alignment, strategy cascade, OKR alignment, orphan OKRs, conflicting goals, silos, communication gap, department alignment, alignment checker, strategy articulation, cross-functional, goal cascade, misalignment, alignment score
python scripts/alignment_checker.py # Check OKR alignment: orphans, conflicts, coverage gaps
The alignment problem: The further a goal gets from the strategy that created it, the less likely it reflects the original intent. This is the organizational telephone game. It happens at every stage. The question is how bad it is and how to fix it.
Before checking cascade, check the source. Ask five people from five different teams: "What is the company's most important strategic priority right now?"
Scoring:
Format test: The strategy should be statable in one sentence. If leadership needs a paragraph, teams won't internalize it.
Map the flow from company strategy → each level of the organization.
Company level: OKR-1, OKR-2, OKR-3
↓
Dept level: Sales OKRs, Eng OKRs, Product OKRs, CS OKRs
↓
Team level: Team A OKRs, Team B OKRs...
↓
Individual: Personal goals / rocks
For each goal at every level, ask:
Three failure patterns:
Orphan goals: Team or individual goals that don't connect to any company goal.
Conflicting goals: Two teams' goals, when both succeed, create a worse outcome.
Coverage gaps: Company has 3 OKRs. 5 teams support OKR-1, 2 support OKR-2, 0 support OKR-3.
See scripts/alignment_checker.py for automated detection against your JSON-formatted OKRs.
Silos exist when teams optimize for local metrics at the expense of company metrics.
Silo signals:
Silo root causes:
Silo measurement:
What the CEO says ≠ what teams hear. The gap grows with company size.
The message decay model:
Gap sources:
Gap detection:
How to fix misalignment without calling it a "realignment" (which creates fear).
Step 6a: Don't start with what's wrong Starting with "here's our misalignment" creates defensiveness. Start with "here's where we're heading and I want to make sure we're connected."
Step 6b: Re-cascade in a workshop, not a memo Alignment workshops are more effective than documents. Get company-level OKR owners and department leads in a room. Map connections. Find gaps together.
Step 6c: Fix incentives before fixing goals If department heads are rewarded for local metrics that conflict with company goals, no amount of goal-setting fixes the problem. The incentive structure must change first.
Step 6d: Install a quarterly alignment check
After fixing, prevent recurrence. See references/alignment-playbook.md for quarterly cadence.
A quick health check. Score each area 0–10:
| Area | Question | Score | |------|----------|-------| | Strategy clarity | Can 5 people from different teams state the strategy consistently? | /10 | | Cascade completeness | Do all team goals connect to company goals? | /10 | | Conflict detection | Have cross-team OKR conflicts been reviewed and resolved? | /10 | | Coverage | Does each company OKR have explicit team ownership? | /10 | | Communication | Do teams' behaviors reflect the strategy (not just their stated understanding)? | /10 |
Total: __ / 50
| Score | Status | |-------|--------| | 45–50 | Excellent. Maintain the system. | | 35–44 | Good. Address specific weak areas. | | 20–34 | Misalignment is costing you. Immediate attention required. | | < 20 | Strategic drift. Treat as crisis. |
| When... | Work with... | To... | |---------|-------------|-------| | New strategy is set | CEO + COO | Cascade into quarterly rocks before announcing | | OKR cycle starts | COO | Run cross-team conflict check before finalizing | | Team consistently misses goals | CHRO | Diagnose: capability gap or alignment gap? | | Silo identified | COO | Design shared metrics or cross-functional OKRs | | Post-M&A | CEO + Culture Architect | Detect strategy conflicts between merged entities |
scripts/alignment_checker.py — Automated OKR alignment analysis (orphans, conflicts, coverage)references/alignment-playbook.md — Cascade techniques, quarterly alignment check, common patternsdata-ai
Use when you want to understand what Claude contributed vs what you drove in a session. Triggers on: /collab-proof, session retrospective, ai contribution analysis, collaboration evidence, what did claude do.
data-ai
Personal coach that teaches users to become Claude power users. Use this skill the FIRST time a user asks to "learn Claude", "be a power user", "coach me", "teach me Claude tricks", "what can Claude do", "make me better at prompting", or any variation. After activation, also use it on EVERY subsequent turn to detect missed optimization opportunities (vague prompts, ignored capabilities, manual work Claude could automate) and surface a single power-user tip. Trigger generously — most users do not know what they do not know, so err on the side of coaching.
development
Use when designing or revisiting product pricing — selecting a pricing model (subscription seat-based, usage-based, value-based, freemium, or hybrid), running Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter analysis on WTP survey data, or designing Good/Better/Best packaging tiers. Recommends a model and a price range with trade-offs, never a single number. For Commercial leads, Product Marketing, and CMOs at the pricing-design moment — not deal-by-deal discounting, not brand positioning.
testing
Use when a startup is approached by a prospective partner and someone has to decide should we sign this partner, at what partner tier (referral / reseller / OEM / SI-consulting / strategic alliance), with what joint GTM commitment, and at what revshare. Classifies partner tier from independent-demand evidence vs. preferential-terms hunting, designs a 90-day joint GTM plan, models revshare against direct-sale margin, and surfaces kill criteria for unwinding under-performing partnerships. For Head of Partnerships, Head of BD, and Founder-CEOs doing reseller agreement, OEM deal, or strategic alliance review — not technical sale enablement, not channel cost economics, not M&A.