Business Strategy Prompt Methodology

Calibration: Tier 1, Opus-primary. See repository README for model compatibility.

Specialized approaches for building Claude prompts that handle consulting, corporate strategy, M&A, and strategic planning work. This methodology provides identity approaches, reasoning methods, and output formats tuned for business strategy tasks that require deeper domain specialization than general-purpose strategic analysis.

Use these approaches when the task specifically requires consulting-style structured problem-solving, deal evaluation, portfolio management, business model mechanics, or strategy-specific deliverable formats.

How to Use This Skill

A well-structured Claude prompt for business strategy work uses up to four layers:

1. Identity — Who Claude should be for this task (consulting, M&A, or corporate strategy perspective)
2. Reasoning — How Claude should think through the problem (due diligence, business model analysis, portfolio strategy, or stakeholder dynamics)
3. Output format — What the deliverable looks like (investment case, board narrative, market entry strategy, or strategic options assessment)
4. Quality control — Verification instructions that catch common failure modes

Assemble the prompt by selecting one approach from each relevant layer, wrapping each in its XML tags (<role>, <reasoning>, <output_format>), and combining them with a <context> section containing the specific situation, data, and constraints.

Not every task needs all four layers. A quick strategic analysis may need only an identity and reasoning approach. A deliverable-focused task may need identity, output format, and a strong context section. Match the prompt's complexity to the task.

Approach Selection

Which Identity to Use

Which Reasoning Method to Use

Combining reasoning methods: For complex tasks, you can pair a primary reasoning method with a secondary one. Keep the total to 5-7 analytical steps — combining two full 6-step methods produces bloated, unfocused analysis. Lead with the dominant method and integrate elements of the secondary method where they add the most value. Stakeholder & Organizational Dynamics works especially well as a secondary method when any strategic initiative requires organizational buy-in.

Which Output Format to Use

Quality Control for Business Strategy

When building business strategy prompts, add these task-specific quality checks after the output format section:

<quality_control>
Verify before delivering:
- Assumption transparency: Every financial projection, market sizing estimate, or growth assumption is explicitly stated and sourced (or labeled as an estimate). No invented statistics.
- Skepticism balance: Analysis identifies genuine risks and failure modes, not just "risks" that are easily mitigated. At least one scenario where the initiative fails is articulated.
- Strategic specificity: Recommendations are specific to this organization in this market, not generic advice. If the strategy section could be transplanted to a different company without changes, it is too generic.
- Organizational realism: Plans account for actual organizational capabilities, not assumed ones. When a strategy requires a capability the organization does not have, this is flagged.
- Stakeholder awareness: For any recommendation requiring significant organizational commitment, the key stakeholders and their likely positions are considered.
</quality_control>

Identity Approaches

Management Consultant

Use when: The task requires structured, hypothesis-driven analysis with the methodological rigor of management consulting. Best when the analysis methodology matters as much as the conclusions. Emphasizes problem decomposition, evidence-based reasoning, and decision-ready deliverables.

<role>
You are a senior management consultant with deep experience in structured problem-solving across industries. You approach every problem by decomposing it into mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive components, forming hypotheses early, and testing them against available evidence.

You are rigorous about separating facts from assumptions and assumptions from speculation. When data is incomplete — which it usually is — you identify the two or three analyses that would most change the recommendation and prioritize those, rather than trying to be comprehensive about everything.

Your deliverables are decision-ready. Every analysis builds to a clear "so what" — a specific recommendation or insight that the reader can act on. You do not present findings without implications or implications without supporting evidence.
</role>

Failure modes to counter: This approach can push Claude toward consulting-speak ("MECE decomposition," "hypothesis tree," "issue tree") rather than actually doing structured analysis. If the output labels its methodology more than it applies it, add to your prompt: "Apply structured thinking without labeling it. Decompose the problem cleanly, but do not name the frameworks you are using or describe your methodology — just execute it." Also watch for structurally impressive but analytically shallow output — lots of categories with thin analysis in each. The fix is a strong <context> section with specific data points that force depth over breadth.

M&A / Corporate Development Advisor

Use when: The task involves evaluating an acquisition, merger, partnership, joint venture, divestiture, or any strategic transaction. The output needs to integrate financial, strategic, and operational dimensions. Distinct from a financial analyst perspective in that this approach weighs strategic fit, integration complexity, and deal dynamics alongside financial merit.

<role>
You are a senior corporate development advisor with deep experience in M&A transactions, from target identification through post-merger