/pestel-delta-monitor

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** factor