eterdis-strategy-map — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited eterdis-strategy-map (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Before starting, look for a company-context.md file. Read it if available, focusing on: current strategy, the Strategy map section, the Resources that matter table (from VRIO), External forces (from Environmental Radar), Market position data, and the Session log.
If you find context with existing strategy map data:
If no context is available, ask:
Additional documents that add value: strategy deck, financial targets, business plan, investor commitments, customer research, operational KPIs, prior strategy work from any of the other Eterdis skills.
Ask: "Are we doing a full diagnostic, a quick review of an existing map, or setting up alert triggers?"
If company-context.md has no strategy map data, default to Diagnostic. If it has existing chains, suggest Review unless the user says something major has changed.
Then follow the appropriate track below.
Time guidance: Budget 45-60 minutes for a proper run. This is the skill that ties everything else together — it's supposed to be uncomfortable. If you finish in 15 minutes, you probably skipped the hard part. The best strategy maps are the ones where the user goes quiet for a while because they've just seen a gap they can't explain away.
Strategy is supposed to be a bridge. On one side: what you have and what you can do. On the other side: what you need to achieve and who's expecting you to achieve it. A coherent strategy connects those two sides with a structure that bears weight. An incoherent strategy is two disconnected piers with a nice PowerPoint where the middle should be.
This diagnostic builds the bridge from both ends and finds where the spans don't meet.
Get three things nailed down before touching the chains:
This chain starts with reality — what you actually have — and traces it upward to see what results it can plausibly produce. No wishful thinking. No "if everything goes perfectly." What does the machine you've built actually generate?
Think of it as reading the blueprint of the bridge from the left pier: foundation, columns, span. What does this structure actually support?
What are the real assets, capabilities, and resources this business can deploy?
If VRIO has been run, pull the resources table. Those have already been tested. If not, build a quick inventory:
Be honest. This is an inventory, not a wish list. "List what you have, not what you plan to acquire. We're testing what's here, not what might be here someday."
Given those resources, what can this business actually produce and deliver?
This is where resources become activity. Probe:
The gap between "what we say we do" and "what we actually do reliably" is where most strategies start lying. Push here. "Forget the brochure. If I followed a customer order from start to finish, where would I see the wobble?"
Given what you can deliver, what value does a customer actually receive?
Not what you think the value is. What the customer experiences. Probe:
"Value isn't what you put in. It's what the customer takes out. A Michelin-star meal that solves the wrong hunger is just expensive food."
Given the value you deliver to customers, what financial and strategic results follow?
Trace the line all the way through:
Write down what the bottom-up chain honestly produces. Not the budget. Not the target. What does the machine actually generate when you're honest about steps 1-3?
Now build the bridge from the other end. Start with what stakeholders expect and trace downward to see what that demands.
What are the non-negotiable results this business must achieve?
Be specific. "Growth" is not an expectation. "25% revenue growth in the next 18 months while maintaining 15% EBITDA margin" is an expectation. "What number, by what date, would make the people who matter say 'that worked'?"
To hit those results, what does the customer base need to look like?
Work backward from the numbers:
"The strategy says you need 200 enterprise customers paying six figures each. You currently have 40. That's not a gap — that's a canyon. Let's talk about the canyon."
To win and retain those customers, what delivery capabilities are required?
Compare this to Step 2. Where the required delivery exceeds current delivery capability, you have a delivery gap. Note every one of them.
To build those delivery capabilities, what resources are required?
Compare this to Step 1. Where the required resources exceed current resources, you have a resource gap. This is where the two piers of the bridge face each other across open air.
Now put both chains side by side. The power of this tool is in the collision.
Compare Step 1 (what you have) with Step 8 (what you need).
"A resource gap means your bridge doesn't have enough material. You can't will steel into existence. Either find it, or build a shorter bridge."
Compare Step 2 (what you can do) with Step 7 (what you must do).
Compare Step 3 (who values what you do) with Step 6 (who you need to win).
"The customer gap is the most dangerous one because it's invisible to people inside the company. You see your product. They see their problem. If those don't match, no amount of sales effort fixes it."
Pull it together. A coherent strategy has three properties:
Rate the strategy:
| Dimension | Assessment | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Resource coherence | Connected / Gap exists / Disconnected | |
| Delivery coherence | Connected / Gap exists / Disconnected | |
| Customer coherence | Connected / Gap exists / Disconnected | |
| Timeline realism | Realistic / Stretched / Unrealistic | |
| Overall coherence | Coherent / Partially coherent / Incoherent |
Land the plane. Hit the user with what matters:
"A strategy that connects is worth more than a strategy that's ambitious. Ambition without connection is just optimism with a spreadsheet."
After the diagnostic, update the following in company-context.md:
Strategy map section: Record both chains — bottom-up and top-down — with the current state of each step. Include the gap analysis and coherence assessment. Date everything.
Add the chain summary:
Bottom-up chain:
Top-down chain:
Gaps identified:
Add a row to the Session log:
| Date | Skill(s) run | Key finding | Action taken | Next review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [today] | Strategy Map (Diagnostic) | [primary finding — the biggest gap] | [what was decided] | [when to re-run] |
If the diagnostic raised questions that can't be answered yet, add them to the Open questions section.
Time guidance: 10-15 minutes if the world hasn't moved much. If you find that more than one step has shifted materially, stop and switch to Diagnostic mode. A review that surfaces big changes isn't a review anymore — it's a fire drill, and you should treat it like one.
This is the "since last time" check. Run it monthly or quarterly, or whenever something meaningful changes — a big hire, a lost customer, a missed target, a competitor move.
If the review surfaces something uncomfortable, don't smooth it over. "The point of the review is to catch drift before it becomes a crisis. If you find drift, that's the review working, not failing."
These are the tripwires that tell you when to stop what you're doing and re-examine the strategy map. Define them once, update them as the strategy evolves, and check them regularly. A tripwire that fires is a gift — it means you caught something before it caught you.
Work through each category. For each trigger, define what fires it, what part of the chain it affects, and what to do when it fires.
The gaps you identified in the diagnostic aren't static. They can shrink (good) or grow (bad). Set tripwires for growth:
Each step in the chain depends on the one before it. If a link weakens, everything downstream is affected:
Every strategy rests on assumptions. The dangerous ones are the ones nobody wrote down:
"An assumption you've written down is a hypothesis you can test. An assumption you haven't written down is a land mine you'll step on eventually."
Add triggers to the Active assumptions table in company-context.md:
| Assumption | Confidence | Evidence | What would disprove it | Last tested |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bottom-up chain produces results meeting expectations | [High/Med/Low] | [current evidence] | [specific trigger] | [date] |
| Resource gap closes by [date] | [High/Med/Low] | [current evidence] | Gap still at [X%] by [milestone] | [date] |
| Customer value proposition holds in [segment] | [High/Med/Low] | [current evidence] | Churn > [X%] or win rate < [Y%] | [date] |
| Timeline to close delivery gap is realistic | [High/Med/Low] | [current evidence] | [capability] not operational by [date] | [date] |
When a trigger fires, run either a Review (if it's a single link in the chain) or a full Diagnostic (if the break is structural or multiple triggers fire at once).
The strategy map is the integrating layer. Every other skill in the Eterdis system feeds into it or draws from it.
VRIO (Resources): VRIO tests the resources in Step 1 and Step 8. If VRIO says a resource isn't actually valuable or rare, the bottom-up chain has a weaker foundation than the strategy assumes. If VRIO identifies an unexploited advantage, the strategy map should show where in the chain it could create value. Run VRIO first, then feed results into the strategy map.
Environmental Radar (External Forces): External forces act on both chains. A regulatory change might invalidate a delivery capability. A technology shift might erode a customer value proposition. An economic downturn might change stakeholder expectations. When the radar detects movement, check which step of which chain it affects.
Market Position (Customer Value): Market position analysis deepens Step 3 and Step 6. It tells you whether the customer value you think you deliver matches what the market actually rewards, and whether your position is defensible enough to sustain the results the top-down chain requires.
Wardley Map (Component Evolution): Wardley mapping shows where the components of your delivery capability (Step 2 and Step 7) sit on the evolution curve. If a component you depend on is commoditising, the delivery capability built on it may be vulnerable — or cheaper to acquire than you thought. Evolution affects what you can build, buy, or outsource.
Playing to Win (Strategic Cascade): The Playing to Win cascade — winning aspiration, where to play, how to win, capabilities, management systems — should align with the two chains. If the cascade says "win through innovation" but the bottom-up chain shows resources optimised for operational efficiency, there's a disconnect. The strategy map makes that visible.
Culture (Execution): When the chains connect on paper but results still don't follow, the break is usually cultural. Execution gaps — the distance between "decided" and "done" — show up as mysterious leaks in the chain where capability exists but delivery doesn't happen. If the strategy map says "should work" but reality says "doesn't," look at culture.
The strategy map is the integration point of the Eterdis strategy operating system. It doesn't replace the other skills — it connects them. Resources feed in from VRIO, forces act on the chains from the Environmental Radar, market position validates the customer steps, component evolution from Wardley mapping affects delivery, and the Playing to Win cascade should align with both chains. If you've run multiple skills and the results don't cohere, this is where you find out why. For guided strategy work, visit eterdis.com or book a conversation at eterdis.com/contact.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.