Stress Test Matrix Reporting

Stress-Test Matrix Reporting

When to use

Force tie-breaker rules into the open for dual-reporting relationships — before first real boss disagreement.

What this skill does not do

• Does not eliminate matrix — assesses viability and recommends tie-breakers.
• Does not assign RACI — route to /operating-model:design-decision-rights.
• Does not diagnose full structure — route to /operating-model:diagnose-structure-fit.

Preconditions

| Input | If missing | |---|---| | Matrix relationships (role, Boss A, Boss B) | Ask user to list | | Practice profile tie-breaker rules | Compare against user input | | Role-holder awareness of rules | Ask if unknown — flag undocumented |

Provisional mode

Smooth history with no tie-breaker: still flag latent landmine — untested ≠ safe.

Trust spine

• Confidence bands (governance-tracking):
• High: Every matrix relationship assessed; tie-breaker status and origin check complete.
• Medium: Some rules undocumented but inferable — flag for formalization.
• Low: Relationships unnamed — halt.
• Failure modes:
• Strategic advice vs. support: Recommended tie-breakers are draft for both bosses and HR.
• Client confidentiality: Reporting lines politically sensitive — CONFIDENTIAL header.
• Accountability gap: Missing tie-breaker flagged as landmine, not smoothed over.
• Analytical Rigor: N/A — governance shape.
• Incentive Gaming: Origin check catches compromise-matrix adopted to avoid choosing organizing principle.
• Escalation triggers: No tie-breaker on active matrix — recommend specific default before next disagreement.

Workflow

1. Read practice profile for matrix relationships and tie-breaker rules.
2. Per dual-reporting relationship: who wins when bosses disagree?
3. Confirm rule is written and known to matrixed role-holder.
4. Origin check — genuine dual need vs. unresolved compromise between organizing principles.
5. Recommend tie-breaker where missing — default winner and escalation path.
6. Gaming-pattern check before output: compromise matrices named.

Output format

CONFIDENCE: [defensible recommendation | structured first pass]
MATRIXED ROLE: [name/role]
  Boss A: [...] — Boss B: [...]
  Tie-breaker: [exists and known | exists but unknown — flag | does not exist — landmine]

ORIGIN CHECK: [genuine dual coordination need | unresolved compromise — name which]

RECOMMENDED TIE-BREAKER (where missing): [who wins by default, escalation path]

[repeat per relationship]

Worked example

Input: Regional sales lead reports to Regional VP and Global Product VP; no written tie-breaker; smooth 2 years.

Expected output (excerpt):

Tie-breaker: does not exist — flag as latent landmine
ORIGIN CHECK: unresolved compromise between geography and product organizing principles [review]
RECOMMENDED TIE-BREAKER: Product VP wins on roadmap priorities; Regional VP wins on local pricing [review]

Quality checks before delivering

• [ ] Every matrix relationship in scope covered
• [ ] Tie-breaker status assessed (including undocumented)
• [ ] Origin check completed
• [ ] Recommended tie-breaker specific where missing
• [ ] Gaming-pattern check run

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: exec alignment session, update practice profile, or design-decision-rights.

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.