Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →When the user wants to plan go-to-market strategy, GTM framework, or market entry. Also use when the user mentions "GTM," "go-to-market," "market entry," "new market," "repositioning," "PLG," "sales-led," "product-led," "marketing-led," "ICP," "buyer persona," "GTM motion," or "market expansion." For launch checklist, use product-launch.
.claude/skills/mkurman-gtm-strategy/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 5% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 8% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 18% | 0% |
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 25% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 59% | 0% |
----|-------|-----| | Product launch | New product to market | Full GTM; see product-launch for launch execution | | New market entry | New geography or segment | Full GTM; different buying behaviors, competitors, regulations | | Repositioning | Shift who you serve, what you solve | Messaging, ICP, channel alignment; not just rebrand | | Feature launch | New capability in existing product | Tiered by impact; T1 (revenue) = full planning; T2/T3 = lighter |
GTM vs product launch: GTM is the strategy; product launch is the execution phase. GTM applies to multiple scenarios—not just new products.
| Mode | When to Use | ACV | Buyer | |------|-------------|-----|-------| | Product-led (PLG) | Value in minutes; self-evaluate; simple adoption | <$10K | Buyer = end user | | Sales-led (SLG) | Multi-stakeholder; complex procurement; implementation | >$25K | Enterprise; negotiation | | Marketing-led (MLG) | Content, SEO, paid drive awareness; market education | Varies | Demand gen focus | | Hybrid | PLG for acquisition; sales for expansion | Common | Self-serve → sales handoff |
Decision factors: ACV, product complexity, buyer profile, how customers want to buy. Target LTV:CAC ≥3:1; CAC payback <12 months.
| Phase | Weeks | Focus | |-------|-------|-------| | Market analysis | 1–3 | Validate demand; competitive landscape; TAM; buying signals | | Strategy design | 4–6 | ICP, personas; positioning; pricing; GTM mode; channels | | Execution build | 7–9 | Messaging, content, sales playbook; tech stack | | Launch & iterate | 10–12 | Go live; measure; iterate |
Key: Connect plan to real buying activity within 90 days—not disconnected strategy documents.
| Type | Level | Defines | |------|-------|---------| | ICP | Company | Which organizations deliver best unit economics; firmographics (industry, size, revenue), technographics, problem intensity | | Buyer persona | Individual | Decision-makers within target companies; roles, goals, pain points, objections, preferred channels |
ICP impact: Defined ICPs → ~68% higher conversion, ~50% lower CAC, ~30% shorter sales cycles. Include negative profiles (explicit disqualifiers) to protect pipeline quality.
| Element | Purpose | |---------|---------| | TAM | Total addressable market; named account lists; primary TAM, serviceable TAM, accounts with buying signals | | Competitive landscape | Customer bases, strengths, weaknesses, positioning claims | | Buying patterns | Replace assumptions with data; customer pain points; decision criteria |
| Challenge | Mitigation | |-----------|------------| | Customization | Product modularity; professional services; clear scope | | Data security / private deployment | On-prem or private cloud; compliance; security certifications | | Procurement cycles | Multi-stakeholder alignment; champion building; long sales cycles | | Buy vs SaaS | Total cost of ownership; flexibility; ongoing value |
Use: When GTM targets enterprise or high-ACV—expect longer cycles, procurement, and security requirements.
~70% of international market entries fail within two years—often from overestimating demand, underestimating execution, spreading resources thin.
| Entry model | Trade-off | |-------------|-----------| | Organic expansion | High control; slower; capital-intensive | | Strategic partnerships | Faster access; shared risk; reduced control | | M&A / Acquisition | Immediate presence; high integration risk | | Asset-light (EOR, outsourcing) | Fastest; minimal upfront; market testing | | Pilot testing | Lowest commitment; validation |
Critical: Domestic playbook won't transfer. Buying behaviors vary (self-service US vs consultation-heavy Europe vs relationship-driven APAC); competitive landscapes shift; regulatory complexity multiplies (GDPR, data localization).
Repositioning = Strategic shift in who you serve, what problem you solve, where you play. Rebranding = Visual/verbal expression (logo, voice). Repositioning ≠ rebrand.
| When to reposition | Avoid | |--------------------|-------| | Moving upmarket (SMB → enterprise) | Quick fix for missed quarters | | New geography with different dynamics | Leadership boredom | | ICP fundamentally changed | | | Major pivot, launch, or acquisition | |
Success factors: Research-driven (customer discovery, market analysis); cross-functional alignment (sales, marketing, product, clinical); sharp differentiation.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→pass | 31,978 | 24,910 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,863 | 5,123 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 31,116 | 27,328 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,774 | 5,141 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 26,555 | 22,981 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,380 | 5,163 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 17,037 | 16,297 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,482 | 3,904 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 6,556 | 5,142 | -22% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,074 | 2,239 | +108% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 17,655 | 10,713 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,495 | 3,127 | +25% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 15,909 | 14,335 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,628 | 3,591 | +37% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 16,165 | 14,897 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,671 | 3,887 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 17,187 | 17,200 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,597 | 4,125 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 11,489 | 6,230 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,698 | 2,256 | +33% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 20,303 | 21,645 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,973 | 4,720 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 19,764 | 19,251 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,756 | 4,030 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 18,795 | 13,424 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,795 | 3,314 | +19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 13,476 | 17,069 | +27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,111 | 3,952 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 15,751 | 11,069 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,141 | 3,012 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 14,008 | 9,857 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,192 | 2,850 | +30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 7,749 | 8,129 | +5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,218 | 2,598 | +113% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 17,784 | 18,051 | +2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,655 | 4,081 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 11,934 | 11,087 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,755 | 3,249 | +85% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 20,576 | 17,789 | -14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,168 | 4,128 | +30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 21,172 | 20,403 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,323 | 4,493 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 17,386 | 18,416 | +6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,974 | 4,396 | +48% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→pass | 19,270 | 18,708 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,933 | 4,281 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +26 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 23 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.