--- name: pestel-delta-monitor argument-hint: "[prior PESTEL analysis, and any suspected events since]" description: "Quarterly re-scan of a prior PESTEL analysis. Use when checking which macro factors moved, which assumptions broke, and what's new — turning PESTEL from a workshop artifact into a radar." intent: >- Refresh a PESTEL analysis by diffing each factor against the prior run and reporting material movement only — regulation passed, thresholds crossed, technology matured, assumptions broken. Macro factors move slowly; the value is catching the two that moved, not re-debating the twenty that did not. type: workflow theme: market-intelligence best_for: - "Keeping a PESTEL analysis alive on a quarterly cadence instead of letting it rot in a deck" - "Catching which macro assumptions your strategy quietly depends on — and which just broke" - "Feeding regulatory and macro shifts into roadmap and OKR conversations with citations" scenarios: - "Here's the PESTEL we did in Q1 — what's moved since?" - "A new regulation just passed in our space; re-run the macro scan against our baseline" estimated_time: "15-30 min per run" --- # PESTEL Delta Monitor ## Purpose Refresh a PESTEL analysis by diffing each factor — Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, Legal — against the prior run and reporting **material movement only**: **search plan → factor-by-factor diff → broken assumptions → new entrants to the frame → next-step options.** Macro factors move slowly, which is exactly why teams stop looking; the value of a cadence is catching the two factors that moved, not re-debating the twenty that didn't. Diffing also reveals which baseline entries were live assumptions versus furniture — **broken assumptions are the real output.** ## Input **Works best with:** the prior PESTEL analysis (pasted or attached) and the product/market scope it covered — this skill *requires* a baseline to diff against. **Also useful:** any events since the last run you already suspect matter — they get checked first. Input supplied inline with the invocation — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended `ARGUMENTS:` line — counts as answers already given. Use it against the question budget; don't re-ask. **Arriving empty-handed?** This is the one investigation skill with a hard prerequisite: with no baseline, it recommends running [`pestel-analysis`](../pestel-analysis/SKILL.md) first and stops — there is nothing to diff. (That referral *is* the empty-handed path: you leave knowing exactly what to do first.) **Example invocation:** `PESTEL delta against the attached Q1 analysis — scope is our EU payments product; I suspect the new AI liability directive matters.` ## Key Concepts - **Governing protocol:** honors the [`autonomous-investigation`](../autonomous-investigation/SKILL.md) contract — question budget of 2, search-plan gate, Fact/Inference/Assumption labels, Just Enough Mode, stable schema, 4-option Final Step. Disciplines: GEOINT/DEMOINT statistics plus FININT regulatory sources (see [`intelligence-collection-disciplines`](../intelligence-collection-disciplines/SKILL.md)); this is the annual/quarterly layer of the fusion cadence. - **Materiality for macro factors:** regulation passed *or credibly proposed*, macro indicators crossing thresholds your baseline named, technology maturation with adoption evidence, social signals with data behind them. "No material movement" per factor is a valid and *common* result — a quiet quarter reported honestly keeps the radar trusted. - **Broken assumptions are the headline.** A baseline entry now contradicted by evidence outranks ten new observations, because strategy was built on it. The diff exists to find these. - **Assumptions vs. furniture.** Entries that never move and touch no decision were furniture — flag them for retirement at the next baseline refresh rather than re-scanning them forever. - **Scope changes break diffs.** New market, pivot, fundamentally different business context → redo the full PESTEL; never diff across a scope change. - **Do-not-invent list:** regulations, statistics, dates, events. Real URLs and dates on everything — invented regulation is this domain's signature fabrication risk. ## Application 1. **Check the prerequisite.** No prior PESTEL → recommend [`pestel-analysis`](../pestel-analysis/SKILL.md) and stop. Scope changed since the baseline → recommend a fresh full analysis and stop. 2. **Credit inline context**, then ask only the unanswered questions (max 2): 1. Prior PESTEL to paste? 2. Any events since then you already suspect matter? 3. **Read the prior analysis fully; diff factor by factor** — the baseline document is the diff target, not your general knowledge of the macro environment. 4. **Show the 3-bullet search plan** — which factor categories get active searching this cycle (suspected events first), source types (government and regulatory sources, central-bank and statistical data, credible news, industry bodies, standards organizations), fact/inference separation. Continue unless revised. 5. **Emit the schema below exactly.** ### Output schema (do not reorder) ~~~markdown # PESTEL Delta Report ## 1. Run Header **Scope (from prior analysis):** | **Prior analysis date:** | **This run date:** ## 2. Factor-by-Factor Delta For each of P / E / S / T / E / L: ### [Factor]: [moved / no material movement] - **What moved:** [1-2 bullets, labeled, cited — only if moved] - **Prior assumption affected:** [which entry from the baseline] - **Reading:** [Inference — implication for the product scope] Keep "no material movement" factors to a single line each. ## 3. Broken Assumptions - [Baseline entries now contradicted by evidence — the run's most important section; cited] ## 4. New to the Frame - [Factors absent from the baseline that now warrant a slot] ## 5. So What? - **3** implications for strategy or roadmap - **2** factors to watch closely next cycle - **3** assumptions to validate Each bullet: label, confidence, URL where relevant. ~~~ A copy/paste fill-in version of this schema, with quality checks, lives in [`template.md`](template.md). ### Final Step (offer exactly 4 options) 1. Update the baseline PESTEL with these deltas (new baseline) 2. Deep-dive the most consequential moved factor 3. Trace the broken assumptions into roadmap or OKR impact 4. Set next cycle's watch priorities Accept `1`, `2`, `3`, `4`, `1 and 2`, `Verbose Mode`, or a custom path. ## Examples **A factor that moved, traced to its assumption (fictional):** > ### Legal: moved > - **What moved:** the data-residency provision cleared committee with an 18-month compliance > window — **Fact** ([legislature record, URL, date]) > - **Prior assumption affected:** baseline entry L2 assumed "no residency mandate before 2028," > which justified deferring the regional storage architecture > - **Reading:** the deferral logic is dead — **Inference**: the architecture decision moves from > someday to next two roadmap quarters, and compliance becomes a sales asset in regulated verticals > before it's a legal obligation. **A quiet quarter reported honestly:** five factors show "no material movement" at one line each; one Economic entry moved (a rate-path shift crossing the baseline's stated budget-gate threshold). The report is half a page. That brevity *is* the radar working — the reader spends two minutes and knows the strategy's macro floor held except where it didn't. See [`examples/sample.md`](examples/sample.md) for a complete worked delta run (fictional trades-software scope) with two broken assumptions traced to their baseline entries and furniture flagged for retirement. [`examples/sample-industrial.md`](examples/sample-industrial.md) runs the industrial scope, where the hot factors swap — tariffs, energy, disclosure rules — and threshold crossings are distinguished from broken assumptions. ## Common Pitfalls - **Re-debating the unmoved.** Rewriting all six factors every quarter turns the radar back into the workshop it was meant to replace. One line per quiet factor — the discipline is the product. - **Materiality inflation.** Promoting think-pieces and proposals-going-nowhere into "movement." The bar is passed/credibly-proposed regulation, crossed thresholds, adoption evidence — not discourse. - **Burying broken assumptions.** Listing deltas without connecting them to the baseline entries they contradict. The "prior assumption affected" line is what makes a delta actionable. - **Diffing across a pivot.** The business entered a new market and the monitor keeps diffing the old scope's factors. Scope change = new baseline, always. - **Invented specificity.** A regulation name, effective date, or statistic that doesn't check out. In this domain a fabricated citation isn't just wrong, it's a compliance risk for the reader — the do-not-invent list is load-bearing. ## References - [`pestel-analysis`](../pestel-analysis/SKILL.md) (Component) — builds the baseline this monitor diffs against; the pair turns PESTEL into an operating radar - [`autonomous-investigation`](../autonomous-investigation/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — the governing protocol - [`intelligence-collection-disciplines`](../intelligence-collection-disciplines/SKILL.md) (Component) — GEOINT/DEMOINT statistical sources; regulatory registries - [`derisk-measurement-advisor`](../derisk-measurement-advisor/SKILL.md) (Interactive) — consumes broken assumptions as risk inputs - [`competitive-intel-watch`](../competitive-intel-watch/SKILL.md) (Workflow) — the competitor-level sibling of this macro-level watch - Adapted from `market-intelligence/pestel-delta-monitor-prompt.md` in the `https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-prompts` repo.