kill-criteria-exit-ramps
Establishes pre-defined, objective conditions for stopping projects and specific decision points for continue/pivot/kill evaluations. Guides through defining kill criteria, setting go/no-go gates, avoiding sunk cost fallacy, and executing disciplined stopping decisions. Use when defining stopping rules for projects, avoiding sunk cost fallacy, setting objective exit criteria, deciding whether to continue/pivot/kill initiatives, or when users mention kill criteria, exit ramps, stopping rules, go/no-go decisions, project termination, or sunk costs.
What this skill does
# Kill Criteria & Exit Ramps
---
## Common Patterns
### Pattern 1: Upfront Kill Criteria (Before Launch)
**When**: Starting new project, experiment, or product
**Process**: (1) Define success metrics ("10% conversion"), (2) Set time horizon ("6 months"), (3) Establish kill criteria ("If <5% after 6 months, kill"), (4) Assign decision rights (specific person), (5) Document formally (signed PRD)
**Example**: New feature — Success: 20% adoption in 3 months, Kill: <10% adoption, Decision: Product VP makes call
### Pattern 2: Go/No-Go Gates (Milestone-Based)
**When**: Multi-stage projects with increasing investment
**Structure**: Stage 1 (cheap, concept) → Go/No-Go → Stage 2 (moderate, MVP) → Go/No-Go → Stage 3 (expensive, launch) → Go/No-Go
**Example**: Gate 1 (4wk, $10k): 15+ customer interviews show interest → GO. Gate 2 (3mo, $50k): 40% weekly active (got 25%) → NO-GO, kill
**Benefit**: Small investments first, kill before expensive stages
### Pattern 3: Trigger-Based Exit Ramps
**When**: Ongoing projects with uncertain outcomes
**Common triggers**: Time-based ("not profitable by Month 18"), Metric-based ("churn >8% for 2 months"), Market-based ("competitor launches"), Resource-based ("budget overrun >30%"), Opportunity-based ("better option emerges")
**Example**: SaaS — Trigger 1: MRR growth <10%/mo for 3 months → Evaluate. Trigger 2: CAC payback >24mo → Evaluate. Trigger 3: Competitor raises >$50M → Evaluate
**Note**: Triggers prompt evaluation, not automatic kill
### Pattern 4: Pivot vs. Kill Decision
**When**: Project isn't working as planned — should you pivot or kill?
**Framework**:
**Pivot if**:
- Core insight is valid but execution is wrong
- Customer pain is real, solution is wrong
- Market exists, go-to-market is wrong
- Learning rate is high (discovering new insights rapidly)
- Resource burn is sustainable (not desperation mode)
**Kill if**:
- No customer pain (nice-to-have, not must-have)
- Market too small (can't sustain business)
- Burn rate too high relative to progress
- Team doesn't believe in vision
- Better opportunities available (opportunity cost)
- Regulatory/legal blockers
**Example**: Mobile app with low engagement
- **Situation**: Launched fitness app, 10k downloads, 5% weekly active (target was 40%)
- **Pivot option**: Interviews reveal users want meal tracking not workout tracking → Pivot to nutrition app
- **Kill option**: Users don't care about fitness tracking at all, market saturated → Kill, reallocate team
**Decision**: Pivot if hypothesis valid but execution wrong. Kill if hypothesis invalid.
### Pattern 5: Portfolio Kill Criteria (Multiple Projects)
**When**: Managing portfolio of projects, need to kill some to focus
**Process**:
1. **Rank by expected value**: ROI, strategic fit, resource efficiency
2. **Define minimum threshold**: "Top 70% of portfolio gets resources"
3. **Kill bottom 30%**: Projects below threshold, regardless of sunk cost
4. **Reallocate resources**: Winners get resources from killed projects
**Example**: Company with 10 projects, capacity for 7
- Rank by: (Expected Revenue × Probability of Success) / Resource Cost
- Kill: Projects ranked #8, #9, #10 (even if they're "almost done")
- Reallocate: Engineers from killed projects to top 3
**Principle**: Opportunity cost matters more than sunk cost. "Almost done" doesn't justify continuing if better alternatives exist.
### Pattern 6: Sunk Cost Trap Avoidance
**When**: Team resists killing project due to past investment
**Technique**: **Pre-mortem inversion**
1. Ask: "If we were starting today with zero investment, would we start this project?"
2. If answer is "No" → Kill (sunk costs are irrelevant)
3. If answer is "Yes, but differently" → Pivot
4. If answer is "Yes, exactly as-is" → Continue
**Example**: Failed enterprise sales push
- **Situation**: 18 months, $2M spent, 2 customers (need 50 for viability)
- **Inversion**: "If starting today, would we pursue enterprise sales?" → "No, we'd focus on self-serve SMB"
- **Decision**: Kill enterprise sales, pivot to SMB (sunk $2M is irrelevant)
**Trap**: "We've invested so much, we can't quit now" → This is sunk cost fallacy
**Escape**: Only future costs and benefits matter. Past is gone.
---
## Workflow
Use this structured approach when defining or applying kill criteria:
```
□ Step 1: Define success metrics and time horizon
□ Step 2: Establish objective kill criteria
□ Step 3: Assign decision rights and governance
□ Step 4: Set milestone gates or trigger points
□ Step 5: Document formally (signed agreement)
□ Step 6: Monitor metrics regularly
□ Step 7: Evaluate at gates/triggers
□ Step 8: Execute kill decision (if triggered)
```
**Step 1: Define success metrics and time horizon** ([details](#1-define-success-metrics-and-time-horizon))
Specify quantifiable success criteria (e.g., "20% conversion") and evaluation period (e.g., "6 months post-launch").
**Step 2: Establish objective kill criteria** ([details](#2-establish-objective-kill-criteria))
Set numeric thresholds that trigger stop decision (e.g., "If <10% conversion after 6 months"). Make criteria objective, not subjective.
**Step 3: Assign decision rights and governance** ([details](#3-assign-decision-rights-and-governance))
Name specific person who makes kill decision. Define escalation process. Avoid "team consensus" (leads to paralysis).
**Step 4: Set milestone gates or trigger points** ([details](#4-set-milestone-gates-or-trigger-points))
For multi-stage projects: define go/no-go gates. For ongoing projects: define triggers that prompt evaluation.
**Step 5: Document formally** ([details](#5-document-formally))
Write kill criteria in PRD, project charter, or investment memo. Get stakeholders to sign/approve before launch (prevents moving goalposts).
**Step 6: Monitor metrics regularly** ([details](#6-monitor-metrics-regularly))
Track metrics weekly/monthly. Dashboard with kill criteria thresholds clearly marked. Automate alerts when approaching thresholds.
**Step 7: Evaluate at gates/triggers** ([details](#7-evaluate-at-gatestriggers))
When gate or trigger hit, conduct formal evaluation. Use pre-mortem inversion: "Would we start this today?" Decide: continue, pivot, or kill.
**Step 8: Execute kill decision** ([details](#8-execute-kill-decision))
If kill triggered: communicate decision, wind down project, reallocate resources, conduct postmortem. Execute quickly (avoid zombie projects).
---
## Guardrails
### 1. Set Kill Criteria Before Launch (Not After)
**Danger**: Defining kill criteria after project starts leads to moving goalposts
**Guardrail**: Write kill criteria in initial project document, before emotional/financial investment. Get stakeholder sign-off.
**Red flag**: "We'll figure out when to stop as we go" — this leads to sunk cost trap
### 2. Make Criteria Objective (Not Subjective)
**Danger**: Subjective criteria ("team feels it's not working") are easy to ignore
**Guardrail**: Use quantifiable metrics (numbers, dates, milestones). "5% conversion" not "low adoption". "6 months" not "reasonable time".
**Test**: Could two people independently evaluate criteria and reach same conclusion? If not, too subjective.
### 3. Assign Clear Decision Rights
**Danger**: "Team decides" or "we'll discuss" leads to paralysis (everyone has sunk cost)
**Guardrail**: Name specific person who makes kill decision. Define what data they need. Escalation path for overrides.
**Example**: "Product VP makes kill decision based on 6-month metrics. Can be overridden only by CEO with written justification."
### 4. Don't Move the Goalposts
**Danger**: When kill criteria approached, team lowers bar or extends timeline
**Guardrail**: Kill criteria are fixed at launch. Changes require formal process (written justification, senior approval, new document).
**Red flag**: "Let's give it another 3 months" when 6-month criteria not met
### 5. Sunk Costs Are Irrelevant
**Danger**: "We've invested $2M, can't stop noRelated in General
modeling-omnistudio-epc-catalog
IncludedSalesforce Industries CME EPC product-modeling skill for Product2-based catalog creation. Use when creating EPC products, configuring product attributes, building offer bundles with Product Child Items, or reviewing EPC DataPack JSON metadata for product catalog changes. TRIGGER when: user creates or updates Product2 EPC records, AttributeAssignment payloads, AttributeMetadata/AttributeDefaultValues, Offer bundles, or ProductChildItem relationships. DO NOT TRIGGER when: designing OmniScripts/FlexCards/Integration Procedures (use building-omnistudio-omniscript, building-omnistudio-flexcard, or building-omnistudio-integration-procedure), implementing Apex business logic (use generating-apex), or troubleshooting deployment pipelines (use deploying-metadata).
relationship-science-coach
IncludedUse this skill for direct, practical adult relationship coaching: couples conflict, repair, trust, marriage, dating, flirting, attachment patterns, emotional connection, sex, desire differences, eroticism, kink negotiation, affection, love languages, breakups, and long-term passion. Draw on Gottman, EFT and Hold Me Tight, attachment science, modern sex research, Perel, Nagoski, Kerner, Schnarch, Love and Stosny, and flexible love-language tools. Be concrete and low-hedge. Redirect only for imminent danger, abuse, coercive control, minors, non-consent, self-harm, stalking, or medical/legal/psychiatric decisions.
building-sf-integrations
IncludedSalesforce integration architecture and runtime plumbing with 120-point scoring. Use this skill to set up Named Credentials, External Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callout patterns, Platform Events, and Change Data Capture. TRIGGER when: user sets up Named Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callouts, Platform Events, CDC, or touches .namedCredential-meta.xml files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: Connected App/OAuth config (use configuring-connected-apps), Apex-only logic (use generating-apex), or data import/export (use handling-sf-data).
venue-templates
IncludedAccess comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.
let-fate-decide
IncludedDraws the 12 Houses of the Zodiac Tarot spread to inject entropy into planning when prompts are vague, ambiguous, or casually delegated. Interprets the spread to guide next steps. Use when the user says 'let fate decide', 'YOLO', 'whatever', 'idk', or other nonchalant phrases, makes Yu-Gi-Oh references, or when you are about to arbitrarily pick between multiple reasonable approaches. Prefer over ask-questions-if-underspecified when the user's tone is casual or playful rather than precision-seeking.
net-ops
IncludedCross-platform network troubleshooting (Windows, macOS, Linux) via local or remote shell. Use for: DNS broken, can't resolve hostnames, nslookup/dig works but apps fail, NRPT, WFP, scutil, /etc/resolver, systemd-resolved, /etc/resolv.conf, NetworkManager, VPN DNS leak residue (ProtonVPN/Mullvad/WireGuard/AnyConnect), AV/firewall blocking DNS or DoH, Tailscale DNS interaction, intermittent connectivity, remote diagnostics over SSH.