tool-foundation-sprint-magic-lenses

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Foundation Sprint Magic Lenses

Day 2 afternoon of a Foundation Sprint. The team evaluates each candidate approach from multiple perspectives, surfaces contradictions, and produces a top bet plus a backup plan. The Decider names both; without an explicit backup, invalidation of the top bet sends the team back to ambiguous debate.

Family contract:

docs/reference/skill-families/foundation-sprint-skills-contract.md

. This skill is a member of

foundation-sprint-skills

Foundation Sprint第2天下午环节。团队从多个视角评估每个候选方案，梳理矛盾点，并确定首选方案及备选计划。由Decider（决策者）指定这两个方案；若未明确备选方案，一旦首选方案被否决，团队将陷入无意义的争论。

团队约定：

docs/reference/skill-families/foundation-sprint-skills-contract.md

。本技能属于

foundation-sprint-skills

技能家族。

When to Use

适用场景

Day 2 afternoon of a Foundation Sprint.
Approach Options is signed; the team has 3-7 candidate approaches advancing.
The team has at least 1 team-specific custom lens prepared (per ratified spec decision; classic lenses alone are insufficient).

Foundation Sprint第2天下午。
Approach Options已获批；团队有3-7个候选方案推进。
团队已准备至少1个团队专属的自定义视角（符合已批准的规范决定；仅使用经典视角是不够的）。

When NOT to Use

不适用场景

Approach Options is unresolved or under-numbered (fewer than 3). Force a third option through the approach-options skill first.
The team has pre-committed to a top bet. Magic Lenses is a sense-making exercise; if the decision is already made, the time is better spent on Founding Hypothesis.
The team is exhausted and cannot evaluate clearly. Postpone to Day 2 morning of a follow-up sprint rather than rush.

Approach Options未确定或数量不足（少于3个）。需先通过approach-options技能生成第三个方案。
团队已预先选定首选方案。Magic Lenses是一种梳理思路的练习；若决策已确定，时间应更好地用于Founding Hypothesis（初始假设）环节。
团队已疲惫不堪，无法清晰评估。应推迟至后续冲刺的第2天上午，而非仓促进行。

What This Skill Produces

产出物

A single bundled artifact with six sections:

Classic lens charts: customer, pragmatic, growth, money lenses each as a 2x2 plot or qualitative position of every approach.
Custom lens charts: at least 1 team-specific lens (defensibility, mission fit, founder excitement, learning rate, etc.).
Pattern review: consistent winners across lenses, contradictions, biggest trade-off the team is making.
Top bet: the Decider's chosen approach with rationale.
Backup plan: the runner-up approach the team falls back to if the top bet invalidates.
Decision rationale: one paragraph explaining why the top bet over the backup.

See

references/TEMPLATE.md

for the canonical structure and

references/EXAMPLE.md

for the Brainshelf example.

一份包含六个部分的整合文档：

经典视角图表：客户、务实、增长、金钱视角，每个视角以2x2矩阵或定性定位展示所有方案。
自定义视角图表：至少1个团队专属视角（如防御性、使命契合度、创始人积极性、学习速度等）。
模式复盘：各视角下一致胜出的方案、矛盾点、团队面临的最大权衡。
首选方案：Decider选定的方案及理由。
备选计划：若首选方案被否决，团队将转向的次优方案。
决策理由：一段解释为何选择首选方案而非备选方案的文字。

可参考

references/TEMPLATE.md

的标准结构，以及

references/EXAMPLE.md

中的Brainshelf示例。

The Five Canonical Lenses

五个标准视角

Lens	What it asks	Why it matters
Customer	Which approach do target customers immediately understand and want?	If customers don't get it, nothing else matters
Pragmatic	Which approach can the team ship at quality in [build window]?	Beautiful approaches the team can't ship are not real options
Growth	Which approach gives the team a story strong enough to acquire users without paid channels?	Friction at the door tells you about word-of-mouth potential
Money	Which approach has the cleanest path to a paying customer?	Strategic clarity must include the revenue path
Custom (1+ required)	Team-specific lens that captures what would otherwise be missed	Each team has a unique constraint or opportunity worth a dedicated view

Custom lens examples: defensibility against a specific competitor, founder excitement, mission fit, learning rate, regulatory risk, partner alignment, hiring leverage.

视角	核心问题	重要性
Customer（客户）	目标客户能立即理解并想要哪种方案？	如果客户不认可，其他一切都毫无意义
Pragmatic（务实）	团队能在[开发周期]内高质量交付哪种方案？	团队无法交付的完美方案并非可行选项
Growth（增长）	哪种方案能让团队无需付费渠道即可获取用户？	获客门槛反映了口碑传播的潜力
Money（金钱）	哪种方案拥有最清晰的付费客户转化路径？	战略清晰度必须包含盈利路径
Custom（自定义，至少1个）	团队专属视角，捕捉其他视角遗漏的要点	每个团队都有独特的约束或机会，值得专门关注

自定义视角示例：针对特定竞争对手的防御性、创始人积极性、使命契合度、学习速度、监管风险、合作伙伴对齐度、招聘杠杆。

Sequence (105 minutes)

流程（105分钟）

Step 1: Frame the lenses (5 min)

步骤1：明确视角（5分钟）

Facilitator restates the 4 classic lenses and confirms the 1 or more custom lenses the team prepared. If no custom lens is prepared, this skill prompts the team to generate one before proceeding (per ratified spec decision).

主持人重申4个经典视角，并确认团队准备的1个或多个自定义视角。若未准备自定义视角，本技能会提示团队先生成一个（符合已批准的规范决定）。

Step 2: Score each approach per lens (40-60 min)

步骤2：按视角为每个方案评分（40-60分钟）

For each lens, plot each approach on a 2x2 of (high/low value on that lens) by (high/low feasibility for that lens). Use dot positions rather than numeric scores; arbitrary precision (3.7 vs 3.8) is a smell that the team has confused sense-making with math.

The team discusses each lens briefly before plotting. Decider does not vote in this step; the Decider supervotes at the end.

针对每个视角，将每个方案绘制在2x2矩阵上，横轴为该视角下的价值高低，纵轴为该视角下的可行性高低。使用点的位置而非数值评分；刻意追求精确性（如3.7 vs 3.8）意味着团队混淆了思路梳理与数学计算。

团队在绘制前简要讨论每个视角。Decider在此步骤不投票，仅在最后进行最终投票。

Step 3: Pattern review (15-25 min)

步骤3：模式复盘（15-25分钟）

After all lenses are plotted, the team identifies:

Consistent winners: approaches that score in the top half of 3 or more lenses.
Consistent losers: approaches that score in the bottom half of 3 or more lenses. These drop out.
Contradictions: approaches that win one lens hard but lose another. These surface the trade-offs the Decider must make.
Biggest trade-off: name it explicitly. "Boring-and-shippable vs risky-and-distinctive." "Mass-market vs niche-defensible." Naming the trade-off prevents the Decider from picking by vibes.

完成所有视角的绘制后，团队需找出：

一致胜出方案：在3个或更多视角中排名前半部分的方案。
一致淘汰方案：在3个或更多视角中排名后半部分的方案。这些方案将被淘汰。
矛盾方案：在一个视角表现极佳但在另一个视角表现极差的方案。这些方案揭示了Decider必须做出的权衡。
最大权衡：明确命名。例如“稳妥可交付 vs 高风险差异化”、“大众市场 vs 小众防御性”。命名权衡可避免Decider凭感觉做选择。

Step 4: Decider supervote on top bet (10-15 min)

步骤4：Decider最终投票选定首选方案（10-15分钟）

The Decider names the top bet. The chosen approach should be:

A consistent winner OR a contradictory approach the Decider explicitly chooses to take the bet on.
Defensible in language ("we are betting [trade-off] because [reason]").
Aligned with the Mini Manifesto from Day 1.

Decider指定首选方案。选定的方案应：

是一致胜出方案，或是Decider明确选择承担风险的矛盾方案。
有合理的理由支持（“我们选择[权衡点]，因为[原因]”）。
与第1天的Mini Manifesto（迷你宣言）保持一致。

Step 5: Decider names backup plan (5-10 min)

步骤5：Decider指定备选计划（5-10分钟）

The Decider names the backup. The backup is NOT a second-place approach to soothe whoever advocated for it; it is the approach the team will pivot to if the top bet fails validation. The backup MUST be distinct from the top bet in strategic direction.

If the top bet and backup are too similar, the Decider has not named a real backup. The skill prompts for a more distinct alternative.

Decider指定备选方案。备选方案并非为了安抚支持其他方案的人而选的次优选项；而是当前首选方案验证失败时，团队将转向的方案。备选方案必须与首选方案在战略方向上有明显差异。

若首选方案与备选方案过于相似，则Decider未指定真正的备选方案。本技能会提示选择差异更大的方案。

Step 6: Decision rationale (5-10 min)

步骤6：撰写决策理由（5-10分钟）

The Decider authors one paragraph explaining why this top bet over this backup. The rationale will become the spine of the Founding Hypothesis's "why we believe this" section.

Decider撰写一段文字，解释为何选择该首选方案而非备选方案。该理由将成为Founding Hypothesis中“我们为何相信此方案”部分的核心内容。

Common Pitfalls

常见误区

Treating lens scoring as mathematical truth. Lenses are sense-making tools; if the team argues about whether an approach scores 3.7 or 3.8 on a lens, the team has lost the plot.
Skipping the custom lens. The 4 classic lenses are generic by design. The custom lens is where the team's specific situation shows up; skipping it produces a generic top bet.
Falling in love with the top bet. Confidence after Magic Lenses should be calibrated, not high. The next skill, Founding Hypothesis, asks "what could prove us wrong"; the team that has fallen in love with the top bet cannot answer that question honestly.
Skipping the backup plan. Without an explicit backup, invalidation sends the team back to ambiguous debate. The backup forces the team to acknowledge that the top bet might fail.
Backup that is too similar to top bet. "Approach Yellow with one feature added" is not a backup; it's an iteration. Backup must be a different strategic direction.
Decider names top bet by enthusiasm, not by analysis. The pattern review exists to give the Decider a structured basis for the call. If the Decider picks before the pattern review, the skill provided no value.

将视角评分视为数学真理。视角是梳理思路的工具；如果团队纠结某个方案在某视角的得分是3.7还是3.8，说明团队偏离了目标。
跳过自定义视角。4个经典视角是通用的。自定义视角才能体现团队的具体情况；跳过它会导致生成通用的首选方案。
过度偏爱首选方案。Magic Lenses后的信心应是适度的，而非过高。下一个技能Founding Hypothesis会问“什么能证明我们错了”；过度偏爱首选方案的团队无法诚实地回答这个问题。
跳过备选计划。若未明确备选方案，一旦首选方案被否决，团队将陷入无意义的争论。备选方案迫使团队承认首选方案可能失败。
备选方案与首选方案过于相似。“在Approach Yellow基础上添加一个功能”不是备选方案，而是迭代。备选方案必须是不同的战略方向。
Decider凭热情而非分析选定首选方案。模式复盘是为了给Decider提供结构化的决策依据。如果Decider在模式复盘前就做出选择，本技能就失去了价值。

Decider Role

Decider的角色

The Decider's job during Magic Lenses:

Listen during lens scoring without telegraphing preferences.
Engage during pattern review to surface the trade-off explicitly.
Supervote the top bet with rationale.
Name the backup plan as a distinct strategic direction.
Author the one-paragraph decision rationale.

Decider在Magic Lenses中的职责：

在视角评分阶段倾听，不透露偏好。
在模式复盘阶段参与，明确梳理出权衡点。
最终投票选定首选方案并给出理由。
指定具有明显差异战略方向的备选计划。
撰写一段决策理由。

Canonical Sources

权威来源

Character Capital. "Foundation Sprint guide." Magic Lenses section and lens definitions.
Knapp, J., and Zeratsky, J. Click. Day 2 afternoon sequence.
Knapp, J., and Zeratsky, J. "Introducing the Foundation Sprint." Lenny's Newsletter. Magic Lenses section.

Character Capital. 《Foundation Sprint指南》。Magic Lenses章节及视角定义。
Knapp, J., 和 Zeratsky, J. 《Click》。第2天下午流程。
Knapp, J., 和 Zeratsky, J. “Introducing the Foundation Sprint”。Lenny's Newsletter。Magic Lenses章节。

Cross-Skill Usage

跨技能使用

Prerequisites:

tool-foundation-sprint-approach-options

. The approach set is the load-bearing input.

The skill invokes

tool-note-and-vote

at least once (for the top bet supervote when scoring is ambiguous). Additional invocations may happen for the custom lens definition if the team has not pre-prepared one.

Next invocation:

tool-foundation-sprint-founding-hypothesis

at Day 2 end. The top bet, the backup, and the decision rationale flow directly into the Founding Hypothesis template.

前置技能：

tool-foundation-sprint-approach-options

。方案集是核心输入。

本技能至少会调用一次

tool-note-and-vote

（当评分模糊时，用于首选方案的最终投票）。若团队未预先准备自定义视角，可能会额外调用该技能来定义自定义视角。

下一个调用技能：Day 2结束时的

tool-foundation-sprint-founding-hypothesis

。首选方案、备选方案和决策理由将直接导入Founding Hypothesis模板。

Decider Checkpoint

Decider检查点

This skill ends with a Decider Checkpoint in

references/TEMPLATE.md

. The Decider signs off on the top bet, the backup, and the decision rationale. Without sign-off, Founding Hypothesis cannot start cleanly.

本技能结束时，需在

references/TEMPLATE.md

中完成Decider检查点。Decider需在首选方案、备选方案和决策理由上签字确认。若未签字，Founding Hypothesis无法顺利启动。