strategy-document

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Strategy Document Writer

战略文档撰写指南

Produces strategic documents that are specific enough to act on. The quality bar: every statement should be falsifiable ("We have 3 React developers with 10+ years experience" vs "We have a strong team") and every recommendation should be implementable within a defined timeframe.

撰写足够具体、可落地的战略文档。质量标准：每一项陈述都应可证伪（例如“我们拥有3名具备10年以上经验的React开发人员”而非“我们拥有强大的团队”），每一项建议都应能在明确的时间范围内实施。

Process

流程

Step 1: Determine the mode

步骤1：确定文档类型

Ask the user which document type they need:

SWOT analysis — assess current position
Business plan (lean or full) — articulate the business model
OKRs / Goals — set measurable objectives
Competitive analysis — understand the market landscape

If the user is unsure, ask what decision they are trying to make. That usually reveals the right mode:

"Should we enter this market?" -> Competitive analysis + SWOT
"What should we focus on this quarter?" -> OKRs
"We need funding / a partner deck" -> Business plan
"Something feels off but I can't pinpoint it" -> SWOT

询问用户需要哪种类型的文档：

SWOT分析 — 评估当前定位
商业计划（精益版或完整版） — 明确商业模式
OKR/目标 — 设定可衡量的目标
竞争分析 — 了解市场格局

如果用户不确定，询问他们要做出什么决策，这通常能明确合适的文档类型：

“我们是否应该进入这个市场？” -> 竞争分析 + SWOT
“本季度我们应该聚焦什么？” -> OKR
“我们需要融资/合作伙伴演示文稿” -> 商业计划
“感觉哪里不对，但找不到问题所在” -> SWOT

Step 2: Gather context

步骤2：收集背景信息

Ask for:

Business name, industry, size (team, revenue if comfortable sharing)
Current situation (what prompted this exercise?)
Key competitors (if known)
Time horizon (this quarter, this year, 3-year)
Audience for the document (internal team, board, investors, bank, personal clarity)

The audience determines the level of detail. A bank wants financial projections. A founder wants clarity. A team wants direction.

询问以下内容：

企业名称、行业、规模（团队人数，如方便可提供营收情况）
当前状况（是什么促使开展这项工作？）
主要竞争对手（如已知）
时间范围（本季度、本年度、3年）
文档受众（内部团队、董事会、投资者、银行、个人梳理思路）

受众决定了文档的详细程度。银行需要财务预测，创始人需要清晰的方向，团队需要明确的指引。

Step 3: Draft and validate

步骤3：起草与验证

Write the document, then review every entry against the specificity test: could this statement apply to any business in the industry? If yes, it is too vague. Rewrite with the user's specific context.

撰写文档后，对照具体性标准检查每一项内容：该陈述是否适用于行业内的任何企业？如果是，说明过于模糊。结合用户的具体背景重新撰写。

Mode 1: SWOT Analysis

模式1：SWOT分析

Structure

结构

Present as a 2x2 grid with 3-5 points per quadrant. Each point is one sentence — specific and actionable.

             HELPFUL                    HARMFUL
          to achieving objectives    to achieving objectives

INTERNAL  STRENGTHS                  WEAKNESSES
(origin)  - ...                      - ...
          - ...                      - ...

EXTERNAL  OPPORTUNITIES              THREATS
(origin)  - ...                      - ...
          - ...                      - ...

Internal (Strengths, Weaknesses) = things the business controls: team skills, processes, technology, finances, culture, IP.

External (Opportunities, Threats) = things the business does not control: market trends, competitors, regulation, economic conditions, technology shifts.

以2x2网格呈现，每个象限包含3-5个要点。每个要点为一句话，具体且可落地。

             HELPFUL                    HARMFUL
          to achieving objectives    to achieving objectives

INTERNAL  STRENGTHS                  WEAKNESSES
(origin)  - ...                      - ...
          - ...                      - ...

EXTERNAL  OPPORTUNITIES              THREATS
(origin)  - ...                      - ...
          - ...                      - ...

内部因素（优势、劣势）= 企业可掌控的事项：团队技能、流程、技术、财务、文化、知识产权。

外部因素（机会、威胁）= 企业无法掌控的事项：市场趋势、竞争对手、监管政策、经济环境、技术变革。

Quality bar for entries

内容质量标准

Too vague	Specific and useful
"Strong team"	"3 developers with 10+ years React experience; only 1 has backend skills"
"Good reputation"	"4.8 Google rating from 127 reviews; 94% client retention over 3 years"
"Growing market"	"Australian SME SaaS market growing 12% annually (IBISWorld 2025)"
"Competition"	"Competitor X launched a free tier in Q4 2025, capturing 200+ of our target segment"
"Cash flow issues"	"Average debtor days: 58; target: 30. $120K outstanding beyond 60 days"

Every entry should pass the "so what?" test — it must be clear why this point matters for strategic decisions.

过于模糊	具体且实用
"强大的团队"	"3名具备10年以上React经验的开发人员；仅1人具备后端技能"
"良好的声誉"	"谷歌评分4.8分（来自127条评价）；3年客户留存率94%"
"增长的市场"	"澳大利亚SME SaaS市场年增长率12%（来源：IBISWorld 2025）"
"竞争压力"	"竞争对手X在2025年第四季度推出免费套餐，抢占了我们200+目标客户"
"现金流问题"	"平均应收账款天数：58天；目标：30天。逾期60天以上的未结账款达12万美元"

每一项内容都应通过“那又如何？”测试 —— 必须明确该要点对战略决策的重要性。

The "So What?" Section

“战略启示”部分

After the grid, add a section that translates findings into actions:

Strategic implications:

Which strengths can be leveraged against which opportunities? (attack)
Which weaknesses are exposed by which threats? (defend)
What should the business start doing, stop doing, or change?

This is the most valuable part of a SWOT. The grid without implications is an exercise in categorisation, not strategy.

在网格后添加一个部分，将分析结果转化为行动：

战略启示：

哪些优势可以用来抓住哪些机会？（进攻）
哪些劣势会受到哪些威胁的影响？（防御）
企业应该开始做什么、停止做什么或改变什么？

这是SWOT分析最有价值的部分。仅有网格只是分类练习，而非战略规划。

Anti-patterns

反模式

Listing the same point in both Strengths and Opportunities (if it is internal, it is a strength)
Including items the business cannot influence in Strengths/Weaknesses
Generic entries that apply to every business in the industry
No implications section — the grid alone is not actionable

在优势和机会中列出相同的要点（如果是内部因素，属于优势）
在优势/劣势中包含企业无法影响的事项
加入适用于行业内所有企业的通用内容
没有启示部分 —— 仅网格无法落地

Mode 2: Business Plan

模式2：商业计划

Lean format (one page)

精益格式（单页）

Use when the audience is the founder or a small team needing clarity. One paragraph per section, no padding.

Section	What to write
Problem	What pain exists? Who feels it? How do they cope today?
Solution	What does the business offer? In one sentence.
Key Metrics	3-5 numbers that indicate health (MRR, churn, CAC, LTV, NPS)
Unique Value Prop	Why this business over alternatives? One sentence.
Channels	How do customers find you? Rank by effectiveness.
Revenue Streams	How does money come in? List each stream with approximate % of total.
Cost Structure	Top 5 cost categories with approximate monthly/annual figures.
Unfair Advantage	What cannot be easily copied? (team expertise, proprietary data, network effects, regulatory position)

The test for each section: if you cannot say it in one paragraph, you do not understand it well enough yet. Rewrite until you can.

适用于创始人或小团队需要梳理思路的场景。每个部分一段内容，无需冗余。

部分	撰写要点
问题	存在什么痛点？谁在面临这些痛点？他们目前如何应对？
解决方案	企业提供什么？一句话概括。
核心指标	3-5个体现企业健康状况的数字（MRR、客户流失率、CAC、LTV、NPS）
独特价值主张	为什么选择这家企业而非其他？一句话概括。
获客渠道	客户如何找到你？按效果排序。
收入来源	资金如何流入？列出每个来源及占总收入的大致比例。
成本结构	前5大成本类别及大致月度/年度金额。
不公平优势	哪些优势难以被复制？（团队专业知识、专有数据、网络效应、监管地位）

每个部分的测试标准：如果无法用一段内容说明，说明你还不够了解。反复修改直到可以。

Full format

完整格式

Adds to the lean format:

Executive Summary (write last — it summarises everything else)
Market Analysis — TAM/SAM/SOM with sources, customer segments, market trends
Financial Projections — 12-month P&L, cash flow forecast, break-even analysis
Team — key people, their relevant experience, gaps to fill
Milestones — what happens in the next 3, 6, and 12 months with specific deliverables

在精益格式基础上添加以下内容：

执行摘要（最后撰写 —— 总结所有内容）
市场分析 — TAM/SAM/SOM（含数据来源）、客户细分、市场趋势
财务预测 — 12个月损益表、现金流预测、盈亏平衡分析
团队 — 核心人员、相关经验、待填补的缺口
里程碑 — 未来3、6、12个月的具体交付成果

Writing principles for plans

计划撰写原则

Present tense for current state, future tense for plans. Never past tense for the core model.
Financial projections must state assumptions explicitly. "$50K MRR by month 12" needs "assuming 15% monthly growth from current $12K base and 5% churn."
Acknowledge risks. Investors and lenders trust founders who see the dangers, not those who pretend they do not exist.
No aspirational filler. "We aim to be the leading provider" is not a plan. "We will acquire 200 paying customers in 12 months through Google Ads ($5K/month budget, target $25 CAC)" is a plan.

当前状态用现在时，计划用将来时。核心商业模式绝不使用过去时。
财务预测必须明确说明假设条件。“第12个月MRR达到5万美元”需要补充“假设从当前1.2万美元基数实现每月15%的增长，客户流失率5%”。
承认风险。投资者和贷款人更信任能看到风险的创始人，而非假装没有风险的人。
无空泛的豪言壮语。“我们立志成为领先供应商”不是计划。“我们将通过谷歌广告（每月5000美元预算，目标CAC低于30美元）在12个月内获取200个付费客户”才是计划。

Mode 3: OKRs and Goals

模式3：OKR与目标

Structure

结构

OBJECTIVE: [Qualitative, inspiring, time-bound]

  KR1: [Quantitative, measurable, has a number]
  KR2: [Quantitative, measurable, has a number]
  KR3: [Quantitative, measurable, has a number]

Typically 3-5 Objectives per quarter, each with 3-5 Key Results.

OBJECTIVE: [定性、鼓舞人心、有时间限制]

  KR1: [定量、可衡量、有具体数字]
  KR2: [定量、可衡量、有具体数字]
  KR3: [定量、可衡量、有具体数字]

通常每季度设定3-5个目标，每个目标对应3-5个关键结果。

Objectives

目标

Qualitative and inspiring — describes the desired future state
Time-bound (usually one quarter)
Ambitious but achievable with stretch effort (70% completion = healthy)

Too vague	Specific
"Improve our marketing"	"Establish a predictable inbound lead pipeline by end of Q2"
"Grow the business"	"Expand into the Brisbane market with a repeatable sales process by Q3"
"Be more efficient"	"Eliminate manual reporting bottlenecks across all client accounts by Q2"

定性且鼓舞人心 —— 描述理想的未来状态
有时间限制（通常为一个季度）
有挑战性但通过努力可实现（完成70%即为良好）

过于模糊	具体明确
“改进我们的营销”	“截至第二季度末建立可预测的 inbound 线索管道”
“发展业务”	“截至第三季度通过可复制的销售流程拓展布里斯班市场”
“提高效率”	“截至第二季度消除所有客户账户的手动报告瓶颈”

Key Results

关键结果

Quantitative with a specific target number
Measurable — you can check at quarter end whether it was achieved
Outcomes, not tasks

Task (wrong)	Outcome (right)
"Launch the new website"	"Achieve 1,000 monthly organic visitors to the new site"
"Hire 2 developers"	"Reduce average feature delivery time from 3 weeks to 1 week"
"Run Google Ads campaign"	"Generate 50 qualified leads at under $30 CAC"
"Write 12 blog posts"	"Grow organic traffic 40% (800 to 1,120 monthly sessions)"

Tasks are the activities you do to achieve Key Results. They belong on a project plan, not in OKRs.

定量且有具体目标数字
可衡量 —— 季度末可检查是否达成
结果，而非任务

任务（错误）	结果（正确）
“推出新网站”	“新网站每月自然访问量达到1000次”
“招聘2名开发人员”	“将平均功能交付时间从3周缩短至1周”
“运行谷歌广告活动”	“以低于30美元的CAC生成50个合格线索”
“撰写12篇博客文章”	“自然流量增长40%（从每月800次会话增至1120次）”

任务是实现关键结果的活动，属于项目计划范畴，不应出现在OKR中。

Scoring

评分

At quarter end, score each KR from 0.0 to 1.0:

0.0-0.3: Failed to make meaningful progress
0.4-0.6: Made progress but fell short
0.7-0.9: Delivered strong results (this is the target zone)
1.0: Hit the target exactly (may indicate the target was too easy)

If every OKR scores 1.0, the goals were not ambitious enough. If every OKR scores below 0.3, they were unrealistic or the wrong priorities.

季度末，为每个关键结果评分（0.0-1.0）：

0.0-0.3：未取得有意义的进展
0.4-0.6：取得进展但未达标
0.7-0.9：交付了出色的成果（这是目标区间）
1.0：完全达成目标（可能说明目标过于简单）

如果所有OKR都得1.0，说明目标不够有挑战性。如果所有OKR得分都低于0.3，说明目标不切实际或优先级错误。

Mode 4: Competitive Analysis

模式4：竞争分析

Structure

结构

Start with a comparison matrix, then interpret it.

Comparison matrix:

Factor	Your Business	Competitor A	Competitor B	Competitor C
Price point	$X/mo	$Y/mo	$Z/mo	Free tier + $W/mo
Key feature 1	Yes	Yes	No	Partial
Key feature 2	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
Target market	AU SMEs	Enterprise	Startups	All segments
Strength	Personal service	Scale	Price	Brand recognition
Weakness	Small team	Impersonal	Limited features	Slow support

先呈现对比矩阵，再进行解读。

对比矩阵：

因素	你的企业	竞争对手A	竞争对手B	竞争对手C
价格区间	$X/月	$Y/月	$Z/月	免费版 + $W/月
核心功能1	是	是	否	部分支持
核心功能2	否	是	是	是
目标市场	澳大利亚中小企业	企业客户	初创企业	全细分市场
优势	个性化服务	规模化	价格优势	品牌知名度
劣势	团队规模小	缺乏人情味	功能有限	支持响应慢

Interpretation sections

解读部分

Where you win: Specific advantages with evidence. "Faster onboarding (3 days vs industry average of 2 weeks)" not "better service".

Where you lose: Honest assessment. "Competitor A has 10x our development team; we cannot match their feature velocity" is more useful than pretending the gap does not exist.

Where you differentiate: What you do that others structurally cannot or choose not to. This is the strategic gold — it informs positioning, messaging, and product decisions.

Recommended actions: Based on the analysis, what should change? New features to build, segments to target or avoid, pricing adjustments, partnership opportunities.

你的优势： 有证据支持的具体优势。“更快的入职流程（3天 vs 行业平均2周）”而非“更好的服务”。

你的劣势： 诚实评估。“竞争对手A的开发团队规模是我们的10倍；我们无法匹配他们的功能迭代速度”比假装差距不存在更有用。

差异化点： 你做了哪些竞争对手在结构上无法或不愿做的事情。这是战略的黄金点 —— 指导定位、 messaging 和产品决策。

建议行动： 基于分析结果，应该做出哪些改变？需要开发的新功能、要瞄准或避开的细分市场、价格调整、合作机会。

Research sources

研究来源

Competitor websites (pricing pages, feature lists, case studies)
Review sites (G2, Capterra, Google Reviews, ProductHunt)
Job listings (reveal their priorities and gaps)
Social media and content (positioning, audience, tone)
Industry reports (market size, growth rates, trends)

If the user has access to competitors' actual customers (through industry networks, forums, social media), first-hand feedback is more valuable than any published report.

竞争对手网站（定价页、功能列表、案例研究）
评论网站（G2、Capterra、谷歌评论、ProductHunt）
招聘信息（揭示他们的优先级和缺口）
社交媒体与内容（定位、受众、风格）
行业报告（市场规模、增长率、趋势）

如果用户能通过行业网络、论坛、社交媒体接触到竞争对手的实际客户，第一手反馈比任何公开报告都更有价值。

Writing Principles (All Modes)

所有模式的撰写原则

Specific over vague. Every claim needs a number, a name, or a concrete example. "Strong growth" is not strategy — "40% revenue increase from $850K to $1.19M" is strategy.

Evidence over opinion. "We believe the market is growing" vs "The AU SaaS market grew 12% in 2025 (source)." If you cannot find evidence, say so — an honest gap is better than a fabricated claim.

Actionable over aspirational. Every section should answer "what do we do with this information?" If a SWOT entry or competitive insight does not lead to a decision or action, it is not worth including.

Honest about weaknesses. Strategy documents that only list strengths are useless. The value is in seeing the full picture — including the uncomfortable parts. Investors, partners, and teams all trust honesty more than polish.

Appropriate length. A lean business plan is one page. A SWOT is one page plus implications. OKRs are a few pages at most. Competitive analysis scales with the number of competitors. Do not pad for length — every sentence must earn its place.

具体而非模糊。 每一个主张都需要数字、名称或具体例子。“强劲增长”不是战略 —— “收入从85万美元增长140%至119万美元”才是战略。

证据而非观点。 “我们认为市场在增长” vs “澳大利亚SaaS市场2025年增长12%（来源）”。如果找不到证据，如实说明 —— 诚实的空白比编造的主张更好。

可落地而非空泛。 每个部分都应回答“我们用这些信息做什么？”如果SWOT条目或竞争洞察无法引导决策或行动，就不值得包含。

坦诚面对劣势。 只列出优势的战略文档毫无用处。价值在于看到完整的图景 —— 包括令人不适的部分。投资者、合作伙伴和团队都更信任诚实而非粉饰。

长度适当。 精益商业计划为1页，SWOT为1页加启示部分，OKR最多几页，竞争分析长度随竞争对手数量调整。不要为了凑长度而冗余 —— 每一句话都要有存在的价值。

Example: SWOT Strength Entry

示例：SWOT优势条目

Too vague:

Strong digital presence and good online reputation.

Right approach:

4.8 average Google rating from 127 reviews (highest among Newcastle web agencies). Website generates 35 qualified leads per month organically, with a 12% conversion rate to paying clients. Social media following of 2,400 across LinkedIn and Instagram, with 6.2% average engagement rate on case study posts.

The second version gives the reader three data points they can compare against competitors, benchmark against industry averages, and track over time.

过于模糊：

强大的数字存在感和良好的在线声誉。

正确写法：

谷歌平均评分4.8分（来自127条评价，是纽卡斯尔地区网页设计机构中的最高分）。网站每月自然生成35个合格线索，付费客户转化率为12%。LinkedIn和Instagram总粉丝数2400，案例研究帖子的平均参与率为6.2%。

第二个版本为读者提供了三个数据点，可与竞争对手对比、对标行业平均水平，并随时间跟踪变化。