Diagnose Structure Fit

Diagnose Structure Fit

When to use

Test current/proposed structure against coordination needs the strategy requires — no universally "best" org chart.

What this skill does not do

• Does not align rewards — route to /operating-model:align-rewards-and-incentives.
• Does not design RACI — route to /operating-model:design-decision-rights.
• Does not recommend full redesign by default — targeted fixes only.

Preconditions

| Input | If missing | |---|---| | Strategic priority / coordination need | Ask what structure should optimize for | | Current or proposed structure by area | Ask user to describe or provide org chart | | Practice profile | Proceed with labeled assumptions |

Provisional mode

Without area breakdown: assess at highest level available; flag [review] on incomplete area coverage.

Trust spine

• Confidence bands (hypothesis-driven-analysis):
• High: Coordination needs stated per area; fit/mismatch specific; blank-page test complete.
• Medium: Some areas inferred; mismatches flagged with hypotheses.
• Low: Strategy priority unstated — halt.
• Failure modes:
• Strategic advice vs. support: Recommendations are options; leadership owns reorg decision.
• Client confidentiality: Structure politics sensitive — CONFIDENTIAL header.
• Accountability gap: Blank-page test names political drivers when present [review].
• Analytical Rigor: MECE area coverage; mismatches falsifiable.
• Incentive Gaming: N/A — structure focus.
• Escalation triggers: Structure driven by personalities not work — name directly.

Workflow

1. Read practice profile for structure optimization goal.
2. State coordination need precisely by area — cross-functional speed, expertise depth, local responsiveness, central control.
3. Test structure against need per area — name specific mismatches.
4. Run blank-page test — designed fresh around work, or legacy of titles/politics?
5. Recommend targeted changes where fit breaks down.
6. MECE check before output: areas in scope covered.

Output format

CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: [what the structure should optimize for]

AREA: [function/business line] — Coordination need: [...]
  Current structure: [...] — Fit: [match / mismatch — specifics]

[repeat per area]

BLANK-PAGE TEST: [yes/no — if no, what's driving current shape]

RECOMMENDED CHANGES: [targeted, by area]

Worked example

Input: Strategy needs fast cross-functional product decisions; strict functional hierarchy with no integrator.

Expected output (excerpt):

AREA: Product delivery — Coordination need: fast cross-functional decisions
  Current structure: strict functional silos — Fit: mismatch — no integrating mechanism [review]
BLANK-PAGE TEST: no — structure mirrors current VP titles [review]
RECOMMENDED CHANGES: Add product integrator role or cross-functional squad layer for delivery area only

Quality checks before delivering

• [ ] Coordination need stated per area
• [ ] Mismatches specific, not vague
• [ ] Blank-page test completed
• [ ] Changes targeted, not blanket redesign
• [ ] MECE area coverage

Propose profile update

When a stable convention surfaces during this run (thresholds, naming, tone, output format, or recurring corrections), propose a profile update: show the exact diff against ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-strategy/operating-model/CLAUDE.md (org-wide facts go to org-profile.md), ask for confirmation, and write only on yes. Only /operating-model:practice-setup auto-applies a full profile write.

Outputs

Follows plugin CLAUDE.md § Outputs. Next: align-rewards-and-incentives, design-decision-rights, or exec workshop.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: daddia
• Source: daddia/claude-for-strategy
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.