gh-lyndonkl-claude/skills/hypotheticals-counterfactuals/resources/template.md

Hypotheticals and Counterfactuals Templates

Quick-start templates for counterfactual analysis, scenario planning, and pre-mortem exercises.

Focal Question Template

What are you exploring?

Type: [Counterfactual (past) / Hypothetical (future)]

Core question:

• Counterfactual: "What would have happened if [X] had been different?"
• Hypothetical: "What could happen if [X] occurs in the future?"

Context: [What decision, event, or situation are you analyzing?]

Time frame: [Past event date / Future time horizon (6 months, 1 year, 5 years)]

Purpose: [What do you hope to learn? Understand causality? Identify risks? Test assumptions?]

---

Counterfactual Analysis Template

Actual outcome (what happened):

• Decision made: [What did we actually do?]
• Outcome: [What resulted?]
• Key metrics: [Quantify results]

Counterfactual (what if we had done differently):

• Alternative decision: "What if we had [done X instead]?"
• Hypothesized outcome: [What would have happened?]
• Reasoning: [WHY would outcome be different? Specify causal mechanism]

Evidence for counterfactual:

• Analogies: [Similar cases where X led to Y]
• Data: [Market data, competitor examples, historical patterns]
• Expert opinion: [What do domain experts say?]

Causal insight:

• What mattered: [Which factor was causal?]
• What didn't matter: [Which factors were irrelevant?]
• Lesson learned: [What should we do differently next time?]

Example:

• Actual: Launched in US first, 10k users in 6 months
• Counterfactual: "What if we had launched in EU first?"
• Hypothesized outcome: 5k users (smaller market, slower adoption)
• Reasoning: EU market 40% size of US, GDPR compliance slows growth
• Insight: US-first was right call. Market size matters more than competition.

---

Pre-Mortem Template

Project/Decision: [What are you launching or deciding?]

Future date: "It is [6 months / 1 year] from now..."

Assumed outcome: "...and the [project has failed / decision was disastrous]."

Individual brainstorm (5 min, silent): Each person writes 3-5 reasons why it failed.

1. [Failure reason 1]
2. [Failure reason 2]
3. [Failure reason 3]
4. [Failure reason 4]
5. [Failure reason 5]

Consolidate (round-robin sharing):

• [Consolidated failure cause 1]
• [Consolidated failure cause 2]
• [Consolidated failure cause 3]
• [Consolidated failure cause 4]
• [Consolidated failure cause 5] ...

Vote on top risks (dot voting):

Risk	Votes	Likelihood	Impact	Priority
[Risk 1]	8	High	High	⚠ Critical
[Risk 2]	6	Medium	High	⚠ High
[Risk 3]	4	High	Medium	Medium
[Risk 4]	2	Low	Low	Low

Mitigation actions (top 3-5 risks):

Risk	Mitigation	Owner	Deadline
[Risk 1]	[Specific action to prevent/reduce]	[Name]	[Date]
[Risk 2]	[Specific action]	[Name]	[Date]
[Risk 3]	[Specific action]	[Name]	[Date]

---

Scenario Generation Template

Time horizon: [6 months / 1 year / 3 years / 5 years]

Key uncertainties (2-3 factors that most shape the future):

1. [Uncertainty 1, e.g., "Market adoption rate"]
2. [Uncertainty 2, e.g., "Competitive intensity"]
3. [Uncertainty 3, e.g., "Regulatory environment"]

Option A: Three Scenarios

Optimistic scenario (Probability: [%]):

• Name: "[Descriptive name]"
• Description: [1-2 paragraphs describing this future]
• Key drivers: [What makes this happen?]
• Implications: [What does this mean for us?]

Baseline scenario (Probability: [%]):

• Name: "[Descriptive name]"
• Description: [1-2 paragraphs]
• Key drivers: [What makes this happen?]
• Implications: [What does this mean for us?]

Pessimistic scenario (Probability: [%]):

• Name: "[Descriptive name]"
• Description: [1-2 paragraphs]
• Key drivers: [What makes this happen?]
• Implications: [What does this mean for us?]

Option B: 2×2 Matrix

Uncertainty 1: [e.g., Market adoption] - Axes: [Slow / Fast] Uncertainty 2: [e.g., Regulation] - Axes: [Strict / Loose]

	Slow Adoption	Fast Adoption
Strict Regulation	Scenario 1: "[Name]" [Description]	Scenario 2: "[Name]" [Description]
Loose Regulation	Scenario 3: "[Name]" [Description]	Scenario 4: "[Name]" [Description]

---

Scenario Development Template

Scenario name: "[Memorable title]"

Time: [Future date, e.g., "January 2026"]

Narrative (tell the story, make it vivid): [2-4 paragraphs describing this world. Use present tense, concrete details, make it feel real.]

Key assumptions:

• [Assumption 1: what had to be true for this scenario?]
• [Assumption 2]
• [Assumption 3]

Metrics in this world:

• [Metric 1]: [Value, e.g., "Market size: $500M"]
• [Metric 2]: [Value, e.g., "Our market share: 15%"]
• [Metric 3]: [Value, e.g., "Churn rate: 3%/month"]

Leading indicators (early signals this scenario is unfolding):

• [Indicator 1]: [e.g., "If regulation bill passes Q1"]
• [Indicator 2]: [e.g., "If competitor raises >$50M"]
• [Indicator 3]: [e.g., "If adoption rate >20% MoM for 3 months"]

Implications for our strategy:

• What should we do in this world? [Strategic response]
• What should we avoid? [Actions that fail in this scenario]
• What capabilities do we need? [Org/tech requirements]

---

Assumption Reversal Template

Current assumption: [State the belief we take for granted]

Reversed assumption: "What if [opposite] is true?"

Explore the reversal:

• Is it plausible? [Could the reversal actually be true?]
• Evidence for reversal: [What would suggest our assumption is wrong?]
• Implications if reversed: [What would we do differently?]
• New possibilities: [What doors does this open?]

Example:

• Current: "Customers want more features"
• Reversed: "What if customers want fewer features?"
• Plausible?: Yes (research shows feature bloat frustrates users)
• Implications: Simplify product, remove rarely-used features, focus on core workflow
• New possibility: "Feature-light" positioning vs. competitors

---

Stress Test Template

Decision being tested: [What are we deciding?]

Baseline assumptions:

• [Assumption 1]: [Current expectation, e.g., "CAC = $100"]
• [Assumption 2]: [e.g., "Churn = 5%/month"]
• [Assumption 3]: [e.g., "Market size = $1B"]

Stress scenario 1: Optimistic

• [Assumption 1]: [Best case, e.g., "CAC = $50"]
• [Assumption 2]: [e.g., "Churn = 2%/month"]
• [Assumption 3]: [e.g., "Market size = $2B"]
• Decision still valid?: [Yes/No, with explanation]

Stress scenario 2: Pessimistic

• [Assumption 1]: [Worst case, e.g., "CAC = $200"]
• [Assumption 2]: [e.g., "Churn = 10%/month"]
• [Assumption 3]: [e.g., "Market size = $500M"]
• Decision still valid?: [Yes/No, with explanation]

Stress scenario 3: Black swan

• [Extreme event]: [e.g., "Major competitor offers product free"]
• Decision still valid?: [Yes/No, with explanation]

Conclusion:

• Decision robust? [Does it hold across scenarios?]
• Hedges needed? [What can we do to protect downside?]
• Go/no-go? [Final decision]

---

Action Extraction Template

Scenarios analyzed: [List 2-4 scenarios explored]

Common actions (work across all scenarios):

• [Action 1]: [What should we do regardless of which future unfolds?]
• [Action 2]
• [Action 3]

Hedges (protect against downside scenarios):

• [Hedge 1]: [What reduces risk if pessimistic scenario happens?]
• [Hedge 2]

Options (prepare for upside scenarios):

• [Option 1]: [What positions us to capture value if optimistic scenario happens?]
• [Option 2]

Monitoring (track which scenario unfolding):

• [Indicator 1]: [What to watch, e.g., "Track regulation votes monthly"]
• [Indicator 2]: [e.g., "Monitor competitor funding rounds"]
• [Indicator 3]: [e.g., "Measure adoption rate vs. baseline"]

Decision points (when to adjust):

• If [indicator crosses threshold], then [action]
• If [indicator crosses threshold], then [action]

Example:

• Common: Build core product, hire team, launch beta
• Hedge: Keep burn low, maintain 18-month runway for slow-growth scenario
• Option: Prepare enterprise sales motion if early adoption strong
• Monitor: Track adoption rate monthly; if >15% MoM for 3 months, trigger enterprise hiring

---

Quick Examples

Example 1: Product Launch Pre-Mortem

Project: Launch new mobile app, target 50k downloads in 6 months

Pre-mortem (failure causes):

1. App crashes on Android (not tested thoroughly)
2. Marketing budget too small (couldn't acquire users at scale)
3. Onboarding too complex (80% drop-off after signup)
4. Competitor launched free version (undercut pricing)
5. App Store rejection (didn't follow guidelines)

Mitigation:

• Comprehensive Android testing before launch
• Double marketing budget or lower target
• Simplify onboarding to 3 steps max
• Monitor competitor activity, prepare pricing flex
• Review App Store guidelines, get pre-approval

Example 2: Counterfactual Learning

Actual: Raised $5M Series A, 18-month runway, hired 15 people

Outcome: Burned through runway in 14 months, failed to reach next milestone

Counterfactual: "What if we had raised $3M instead?"

• Hypothesized outcome: 12-month runway, hired 8 people, reached profitability
• Reasoning: Smaller team = lower burn, forced focus on revenue, faster decisions
• Insight: Raising more money led to premature scaling. Constraint is good early-stage.

Example 3: Strategic Scenarios (3 Futures)

Time: 2026 (2 years out)

Optimistic ("Market Leader"):

• 40% market share, $10M ARR, profitability
• Drivers: Product-market fit strong, viral growth, weak competition

Baseline ("Steady Climb"):

• 15% market share, $3M ARR, break-even
• Drivers: Expected growth, moderate competition, steady execution

Pessimistic ("Survival Mode"):

• 5% market share, $500k ARR, burning cash
• Drivers: Strong competitor launches, slow adoption, pivot needed

Implications: Build for "Steady Climb", hedge for "Survival" (low burn), prepare for "Leader" (scale infrastructure).