/focus

name: focus
description: "Use this skill when the user suspects an activity isn't worth their time, feels stuck on something, or wants to know if they should keep doing X or try something else. Also use when the user mentions '80/20,' 'Pareto,' 'is this worth my time,' 'should I keep doing X,' 'not getting results from X,' 'spending too much time on X,' or 'what should I focus on instead.' Delivers a kill/refine/pivot verdict with a concrete weekly action plan."

80/20 Focus

You suspect something you're doing isn't worth your time. This skill helps you decide: kill it, refine it, or pivot to something with more leverage.

**This skill is for evaluating whether an activity is worth your time — time allocation, not product decisions.** For deciding which features to build next, use **prioritize**. For finding your best acquisition channel without a specific activity to evaluate, use **growth**.

How This Works

1. You describe the activity and what's (not) happening 2. I diagnose: wrong activity or wrong execution? 3. I compare it against higher-leverage alternatives at your stage 4. You get a verdict and a concrete plan for this week

---

Step 1: Understand

Before diagnosing, establish the basics. Ask the founder:

• What exactly are you doing? (Be specific — not "marketing" but "sending 50 cold emails per week to SaaS founders")
• How much time per week?
• What results so far? (Replies, demos, signups, revenue — whatever the activity is supposed to produce)

2-3 questions. Not an interrogation.

---

Step 2: Diagnose

Apply two filters:

Ceiling Test

Even if you executed this perfectly, would it move the needle at your stage?

Signs of a low ceiling:

• Cold outreach to enterprise when you have no case studies or social proof
• SEO content strategy when you have 0 customers and no product-market fit signal
• Building integrations when your core product doesn't retain users
• Paid ads when you don't know your conversion rate or LTV
• Perfecting onboarding when you don't have enough signups to measure

A low ceiling means the activity can't work yet — not at this stage, not with these prerequisites missing.

Execution Test

Are you doing the high-leverage 20% of this activity, or spreading effort across the full 100%?

Signs of a 100% spread:

• Sending 100 generic emails instead of 10 deeply researched ones
• Writing 4 blog posts per week instead of 1 exceptional one
• Building 5 features at once instead of finishing 1
• Posting on 4 social platforms instead of dominating 1
• Attending 3 networking events per week instead of deeply following up with 5 warm contacts

The 80/20 version is almost always: do less, but do it with more depth and intention.

If both tests fail — low ceiling AND spread execution — the verdict is Kill. Wrong activity done the wrong way cannot be refined into something that works.

---

Step 3: Leverage Comparison

Regardless of the diagnosis, compare the current activity against 2-3 alternatives in the same category. The founder needs to see: even if this activity is fine, is it the BEST use of these hours?

Category: Customer Acquisition

| Tactic | Early Stage (<$1k MRR) | Growth ($1k-$10k MRR) | Scaling ($10k+ MRR) | |--------|----------------------|----------------------|---------------------| | Direct outreach | High leverage (if targeted) | Medium — shifts to partnerships | Low — doesn't scale | | Content/SEO | Low — too slow, no domain authority | Medium — start building | High — compounds over time | | Paid ads | Low — don't know LTV yet | Medium — test with small budget | High — scale what converts | | Community/social | High — build relationships that convert | High — establishes authority | Medium — diminishing personal returns | | Referrals | Low — not enough users | High — program pays for itself | High — lowest CAC channel | | Partnerships | Low — nothing to offer yet | High — mutual amplification | High — channel partnerships |

**Common trap:** Founders at early stage invest in SEO or paid ads because they feel scalable. But without product-market fit signal, you're scaling something that doesn't work.

Category: Product

| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling | |--------|------------|--------|---------| | New features | Medium — only if validating PMF | Low — focus on what exists | Medium — expand for new segments | | Bug fixes | High — broken product kills trust | High — reliability matters | High — always | | Onboarding polish | High — activation is everything | High — biggest ROI per hour | Medium — diminishing returns | | Technical debt | Low — premature optimization | Medium — only if blocking you | High — invest systematically | | Design polish | Low — function over form | Medium — builds trust | High — competitive differentiator |

**Common trap:** Building features before fixing activation. New features don't help if users never experience the existing ones.

Category: Retention

| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling | |--------|------------|--------|---------| | Manual check-ins | High — learn why people stay/leave | Medium — can't scale | Low — automate | | Email sequences | Medium — worth a basic welcome | High — lifecycle program | High — sophisticated segmentation | | Feedback collection | High — talk to every user | High — systematize | Medium — diminishing signal-to-noise | | Usage monitoring | Low — not enough data | High — catch churn signals | High — predictive models |

**Common trap:** Building retention mechanics before you have enough users to retain. At early stage, just talk to people.

Category: Revenue

| Tactic | Early Stage | Growth | Scaling | |--------|------------|--------|---------| | Pricing changes | High — most founders underprice | High — test annually | Medium — optimize | | Upsells/expansion | Low — get the first sale right | High — existing customers are cheapest | High — major growth lever | | Payment optimization | Low — not enough volume | Medium — red