agentleFS
stephenroganstephenrogan/csm-skills/skills/value-narrative-builder/SKILL.md

value-narrative-builder

Skill0 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Constructs a compelling value narrative for a customer account by connecting product usage to business outcomes in the customer's language. Produces different versions for different audiences -- the champion, the CFO, the board. Use when asked to build a value story, articulate ROI, create a business case for the customer, prepare value evidence for a renewal or QBR, or when a CSM needs to translate usage metrics into business impact the customer will recognise. Also triggers for questions about value articulation, ROI storytelling, customer business case, value evidence, or how to prove the product is worth the investment.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Rule: Always present at least one level above what the audience already knows.

    line 34
  2. Distinctive:

    If value evidence is weak in some areas, acknowledge it:

    line 74
  3. Distinctive:

    Rule: Always label your evidence type.

    line 88

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Value Narrative Builder

Translates product usage into business outcomes in the customer's own language. The gap between "your team made 2,847 API calls this month" (product metric) and "your team eliminated 340 hours of manual work this quarter" (business outcome) is the value narrative. Most CSMs report metrics. The best CSMs tell value stories.

How to Use

Provide:

  • What the customer uses (features, workflows, frequency)
  • What outcomes they have experienced or you can estimate (time saved, revenue impact, cost reduction, error reduction, speed improvement)
  • Their original goals (why they bought -- from the sales process or onboarding)
  • The audience for this narrative (champion, CFO, CEO, board, procurement)
  • Any customer-confirmed value ("they told us X" vs. "we estimate X")

The Value Hierarchy

Value narratives work on three levels. Higher levels resonate with more senior audiences:

LevelFrameExampleBest Audience
ActivityWhat the product does"Your team automated 2,847 workflows this quarter"End users, technical leads
OutcomeWhat the activity produces"That automation eliminated 340 hours of manual work this quarter"Champions, managers, directors
ImpactWhat the outcome means for the business"At your team's loaded cost, that is EUR 51,000 in recovered productivity -- a 3.4x return on the annual investment"CFOs, CROs, executives, board

Rule: Always present at least one level above what the audience already knows. Your champion knows the activity. Give them the outcome. Your CFO does not care about the outcome. Give them the impact.

Building the Narrative

Step 1: Connect Usage to Outcomes

For each major feature or workflow the customer uses:

Usage MetricOutcome TranslationCalculation
[Metric][What it means in business terms][How you calculated it]

Example:

UsageOutcomeCalculation
2,847 automated workflows340 hours of manual work eliminatedAverage 7 minutes saved per workflow * 2,847 = 19,929 minutes = 332 hours (rounded to 340)
47 active users (of 60 seats)78% adoption -- above the 65% segment medianActive users / licensed seats
12 custom reports running automaticallyReplaced a manual weekly processCustomer confirmed: "We used to spend 4 hours every Monday compiling this"

Step 2: Translate Outcomes to Impact

OutcomeImpact TranslationMethod
340 hours savedEUR 51,000 in recovered productivity340 hours * EUR 150 loaded cost/hour (mid-market SaaS team average)
Weekly manual process eliminated208 hours/year freed for strategic work4 hours/week * 52 weeks
78% adoption (vs. 65% median)Team is extracting above-average value from the investmentBenchmark comparison

Step 3: Frame by Audience

For the Champion: "Your team automated 2,847 workflows this quarter -- up 22% from last quarter. That is roughly 340 hours your team did not spend on manual work. The adoption rate of 78% puts you in the top quartile for companies your size."

For the CFO: "The annual investment in [product] is EUR [X]. This quarter alone, the platform eliminated an estimated 340 hours of manual work across the team -- approximately EUR 51,000 in recovered productivity at your team's loaded cost. That is a 3.4x annualised return. The adoption rate continues to grow, which means this return is increasing, not plateauing."

For the Board: "[Customer] achieved a 3.4x return on their [product] investment this quarter through workflow automation and process efficiency. Adoption is in the top quartile for their segment. Expansion discussion is underway."

Step 4: Address the Gaps Honestly

If value evidence is weak in some areas, acknowledge it:

  • "We estimate 340 hours saved based on workflow completion data. This has not yet been validated by the customer -- I recommend confirming in our next QBR"
  • "Adoption is at 78% but the analytics team (12 users) has not engaged. The value narrative is strong for the engineering team but untested for analytics"

Value Evidence Types (Ranked by Credibility)

TypeCredibilityExample
Customer-confirmedHighest"The customer said: 'This tool saved us 10 hours a week'"
Customer-validatedHigh"We presented the estimate and the customer agreed it was accurate"
Data-derivedMedium"Based on workflow volume and estimated time savings per workflow"
EstimatedLow-Medium"Based on industry benchmarks for similar companies"
AssumedLow"We believe the product is delivering value" (do not use this)

Rule: Always label your evidence type. "340 hours saved (data-derived, not yet customer-confirmed)" is honest and credible. "340 hours saved" without qualification will be challenged.

Output Format

## Value Narrative: [Account Name]
**Audience:** [who this is for]
**Period:** [timeframe]

### Headline Metric
[The single number that best captures the value: "3.4x ROI" or "340 hours saved" or "67% reduction in manual reporting"]

### The Story
[3-5 sentences: what they use, what it produces, what it means for their business]

### Supporting Evidence
| Metric | Value | Type | Confidence |
|--------|-------|------|-----------|
| [metric] | [value] | [customer-confirmed / data-derived / estimated] | [H/M/L] |

### Gaps and Caveats
[What is not yet proven, what needs customer validation, what is estimated vs. confirmed]

Quality Gates

  • Does the narrative contain at least one number? A value story without quantification is an opinion, not evidence
  • Is the evidence type labelled? Presenting an estimate as a confirmed metric will backfire when challenged
  • Is the framing calibrated to the audience? Activity metrics for a CFO waste their time. Impact metrics for an end user feel disconnected from their daily experience
  • Does the narrative connect to the customer's original goals? If they bought to "reduce manual reporting time" and your narrative is about "API call volume," you have missed the connection
  • Would the customer agree with this narrative if they read it? That is the ultimate test. If they would push back on the numbers or the framing, revise before presenting

Principles

  • Value is not what the product does. Value is what the customer achieves because of what the product does. The product automates workflows. The value is the 340 hours the team spends on strategic work instead of manual tasks. Always articulate value in the customer's terms, not yours
  • Customer-confirmed value is 10x more credible than your estimate. One sentence from the customer -- "this tool saved us 10 hours a week" -- is more powerful in a renewal conversation than a 5-page ROI analysis you built yourself. Capture customer language whenever they express value
  • The value narrative should get stronger over time. If you cannot articulate more value at renewal than at the 90-day mark, something is wrong -- either value is not growing or you are not measuring it
  • An honest value narrative with gaps acknowledged is more credible than an inflated one. CFOs and procurement teams are trained to challenge vendor claims. Presenting conservative, well-sourced evidence builds trust. Presenting aggressive, unvalidated claims invites scrutiny

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.