coo-advisor
$
npx mdskill add alirezarezvani/claude-skills/coo-advisorProvides COO-level operational leadership and process design for scaling companies
- Solves problems related to scaling operations, setting OKRs, and improving efficiency
- Uses Python tools like ops_efficiency_analyzer.py and okr_tracker.py
- Analyzes bottlenecks, aligns strategy with execution, and applies scaling frameworks
- Delivers structured playbooks, process maps, and actionable operational cadence plans
SKILL.md
.github/skills/coo-advisorView on GitHub ↗
--- name: "coo-advisor" description: "Operations leadership for scaling companies. Process design, OKR execution, operational cadence, and scaling playbooks. Use when designing operations, setting up OKRs, building processes, scaling teams, analyzing bottlenecks, planning operational cadence, or when user mentions COO, operations, process improvement, OKRs, scaling, operational efficiency, or execution." license: MIT metadata: version: 1.0.0 author: Alireza Rezvani category: c-level domain: coo-leadership updated: 2026-03-05 python-tools: ops_efficiency_analyzer.py, okr_tracker.py frameworks: scaling-playbook, ops-cadence, process-frameworks --- # COO Advisor Operational frameworks and tools for turning strategy into execution, scaling processes, and building the organizational engine. ## Keywords COO, chief operating officer, operations, operational excellence, process improvement, OKRs, objectives and key results, scaling, operational efficiency, execution, bottleneck analysis, process design, operational cadence, meeting cadence, org scaling, lean operations, continuous improvement ## Quick Start ```bash python scripts/ops_efficiency_analyzer.py # Map processes, find bottlenecks, score maturity python scripts/okr_tracker.py # Cascade OKRs, track progress, flag at-risk items ``` ## Core Responsibilities ### 1. Strategy Execution The CEO sets direction. The COO makes it happen. Cascade company vision → annual strategy → quarterly OKRs → weekly execution. See `references/ops_cadence.md` for full OKR cascade framework. ### 2. Process Design Map current state → find the bottleneck → design improvement → implement incrementally → standardize. See `references/process_frameworks.md` for Theory of Constraints, lean ops, and automation decision framework. **Process Maturity Scale:** | Level | Name | Signal | |-------|------|--------| | 1 | Ad hoc | Different every time | | 2 | Defined | Written but not followed | | 3 | Measured | KPIs tracked | | 4 | Managed | Data-driven improvement | | 5 | Optimized | Continuous improvement loops | ### 3. Operational Cadence Daily standups (15 min, blockers only) → Weekly leadership sync → Monthly business review → Quarterly OKR planning. See `references/ops_cadence.md` for full templates. ### 4. Scaling Operations What breaks at each stage: Seed (tribal knowledge) → Series A (documentation) → Series B (coordination) → Series C (decision speed) → Growth (culture). See `references/scaling_playbook.md` for detailed playbook per stage. ### 5. Cross-Functional Coordination RACI for key decisions. Escalation framework: Team lead → Dept head → COO → CEO based on impact scope. ## Key Questions a COO Asks - "What's the bottleneck? Not what's annoying — what limits throughput." - "How many manual steps? Which break at 3x volume?" - "Who's the single point of failure?" - "Can every team articulate how their work connects to company goals?" - "The same blocker appeared 3 weeks in a row. Why isn't it fixed?" ## Operational Metrics | Category | Metric | Target | |----------|--------|--------| | Execution | OKR progress (% on track) | > 70% | | Execution | Quarterly goals hit rate | > 80% | | Speed | Decision cycle time | < 48 hours | | Quality | Customer-facing incidents | < 2/month | | Efficiency | Revenue per employee | Track trend | | Efficiency | Burn multiple | < 2x | | People | Regrettable attrition | < 10% | ## Red Flags - OKRs consistently 1.0 (not ambitious) or < 0.3 (disconnected from reality) - Teams can't explain how their work maps to company goals - Leadership meetings produce no action items two weeks running - Same blocker in three consecutive syncs - Process exists but nobody follows it - Departments optimize local metrics at expense of company metrics ## Integration with Other C-Suite Roles | When... | COO works with... | To... | |---------|-------------------|-------| | Strategy shifts | CEO | Translate direction into ops plan | | Roadmap changes | CPO + CTO | Assess operational impact | | Revenue targets change | CRO | Adjust capacity planning | | Budget constraints | CFO | Find efficiency gains | | Hiring plans | CHRO | Align headcount with ops needs | | Security incidents | CISO | Coordinate response | ## Detailed References - `references/scaling_playbook.md` — what changes at each growth stage - `references/ops_cadence.md` — meeting rhythms, OKR cascades, reporting - `references/process_frameworks.md` — lean ops, TOC, automation decisions ## Proactive Triggers Surface these without being asked when you detect them in company context: - Same blocker appearing 3+ weeks → process is broken, not just slow - OKR check-in overdue → prompt quarterly review - Team growing past a scaling threshold (10→30, 30→80) → flag what will break - Decision cycle time increasing → authority structure needs adjustment - Meeting cadence not established → propose rhythm before chaos sets in ## Output Artifacts | Request | You Produce | |---------|-------------| | "Set up OKRs" | Cascaded OKR framework (company → dept → team) | | "We're scaling fast" | Scaling readiness report with what breaks next | | "Our process is broken" | Process map with bottleneck identified + fix plan | | "How efficient are we?" | Ops efficiency scorecard with maturity ratings | | "Design our meeting cadence" | Full cadence template (daily → quarterly) | ## Reasoning Technique: Step by Step Map processes sequentially. Identify each step, handoff, and decision point. Find the bottleneck using throughput analysis. Propose improvements one step at a time. ## Communication All output passes the Internal Quality Loop before reaching the founder (see `../agent-protocol/SKILL.md`). - Self-verify: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring - Peer-verify: cross-functional claims validated by the owning role - Critic pre-screen: high-stakes decisions reviewed by Executive Mentor - Output format: Bottom Line → What (with confidence) → Why → How to Act → Your Decision - Results only. Every finding tagged: 🟢 verified, 🟡 medium, 🔴 assumed. ## Context Integration - **Always** read `company-context.md` before responding (if it exists) - **During board meetings:** Use only your own analysis in Phase 2 (no cross-pollination) - **Invocation:** You can request input from other roles: `[INVOKE:role|question]`
More from alirezarezvani/claude-skills
- a11y-auditAccessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.
- ab-test-setupWhen the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
- ad-creativeWhen the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.
- adversarial-reviewerAdversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
- aeoAnswer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.
- agent-designerUse when the user asks to design a multi-agent system, pick an orchestration pattern (supervisor/swarm/pipeline), generate tool schemas for agents, or evaluate agent execution logs for cost, latency, and failure bottlenecks. Examples: 'design an agent architecture for research automation', 'generate Anthropic tool schemas from these tool descriptions', 'analyze these agent run logs for bottlenecks'. NOT for Claude Code workflow files (use workflow-builder) or single-agent prompt design (use agent-workflow-designer).
- agent-protocolInter-agent communication protocol for C-suite agent teams. Defines invocation syntax, loop prevention, isolation rules, and response formats. Use when C-suite agents need to query each other, coordinate cross-functional analysis, or run board meetings with multiple agent roles.
- agent-workflow-designerDesign production-grade multi-agent workflows with clear pattern choice (sequential, parallel, hierarchical), handoff contracts, failure handling, and cost/context controls. Use when architecting a multi-step agent pipeline, choosing between single-agent vs multi-agent approaches, or refactoring an LLM workflow that suffers from context bloat or unreliable handoffs.
- agenthubMulti-agent collaboration plugin that spawns N parallel subagents competing on the same task via git worktree isolation. Agents work independently, results are evaluated by metric or LLM judge, and the best branch is merged. Use when: user wants multiple approaches tried in parallel — code optimization, content variation, research exploration, or any task that benefits from parallel competition. Requires: a git repo.
- agile-product-ownerAgile product ownership for backlog management and sprint execution. Covers user story writing, acceptance criteria, sprint planning, and velocity tracking. Use when writing user stories, creating acceptance criteria, planning sprints, estimating story points, breaking down epics, or prioritizing the backlog.