Implement the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS) to align vision and execution across a company. Use when the user mentions "EOS", "Entrepreneurial Operating System", "V/TO", "quarterly rocks", "Level 10 meetings", "accountability chart", "IDS process", "my company feels chaotic", "we keep having the same problems", or "get the whole team aligned". Also trigger when a growing company needs meeting structure, goal-setting frameworks, or a systematic way to solve recurring organizational issues. Covers the six EOS components: Vision, People, Data, Issues, Process, Traction. For team motivation design, see drive-motivation. For lean experimentation, see lean-startup.
npx skills add https://github.com/wondelai/skills --skill traction-eos
A complete system for running a business with six key components. Designed for entrepreneurial companies ($2M-$50M revenue, 10-250 employees) that want to align vision and execution.
Most businesses suffer from the same core issues: people, vision, traction. Great vision without traction is hallucination; traction without vision is aimless. EOS connects the two through a practical weekly operating rhythm that strengthens the Six Key Components of any organization.
Goal: 10/10. Score the business by how many of the six Quick Diagnostic rows pass (each component is either in place or not), mapped to the bands below. Bands: 9-10 = all six diagnostic rows pass and rocks consistently hit 80%+ completion; 7-8 = five rows pass, one component weak; 5-6 = three to four rows pass; 3-4 = one to two rows pass; <=2 = no operating rhythm in place. Always state the current score, the failing diagnostic rows, and the next action for each.
Vision → People → Data → Issues → Process → Traction
Question: Does everyone in the organization know where you're going and how you plan to get there?
Tool: Vision/Traction Organizer (V/TO) — answers eight questions on two pages:
| Question | What It Defines | Example |
|----------|----------------|---------|
| Core Values | 3-7 non-negotiable beliefs | "Own it", "Do the right thing", "Grow or die" |
| Core Focus | Purpose/cause/passion + niche | "Simplify small business" + "Cloud accounting" |
| 10-Year Target | Big, hairy, audacious goal | "$100M revenue" or "10,000 customers" |
| Marketing Strategy | Target market, 3 uniques, proven process, guarantee | Who you serve, why you're different |
| 3-Year Picture | What the company looks like in 3 years | Revenue, profit, headcount, key metrics |
| 1-Year Plan | Revenue, profit, measurables, goals | Specific targets for this year |
| Quarterly Rocks | 3-7 priorities for this quarter | Most important things in 90 days |
| Issues List | All unresolved obstacles | Problems, ideas, opportunities |
Process: Leadership completes the V/TO together (2-day off-site), shares it with the entire organization, reviews quarterly, updates annually.
Key insight: If the leadership team can't agree on the V/TO, you have a bigger problem — alignment comes first.
See references/vto.md when filling in the V/TO — the eight-question template and the off-site exercise sequence.
Question: Do you have the right people in the right seats?
Tool: Accountability Chart — not an org chart; it defines the structure and who owns what.
Visionary ←→ Integrator
├── Sales/Marketing
├── Operations
└── Finance
Tool: People Analyzer — evaluate every person on two dimensions:
People decisions:
See references/people.md when building the accountability chart or running People Analyzer — templates plus GWC scoring guidance.
Question: Are you managing based on objective data, or subjective opinions?
Tool: Scorecard — a weekly report card of 5-15 numbers that tell you how the business is doing. Weekly data spots problems 2-4 weeks earlier than monthly and replaces gut-feel management with accountability.
Scorecard rules:
Example:
| Metric | Owner | Goal | W1 | W2 | W3 | W4 |
|--------|-------|------|----|----|----|----|
| Revenue | Sales Lead | $50K/wk | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ |
| New Leads | Marketing | 100/wk | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Cash Balance | Finance | >$200K | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
Metric selection: If you had to go on vacation for 4 weeks, what 5-15 numbers would tell you how the business is doing?
See references/data.md when building the scorecard — templates plus how to pick leading-indicator metrics.
Question: Are you identifying, discussing, and solving issues quickly?
Tool: Issues Solving Track (IDS) — Identify → Discuss → Solve:
Three types of issues:
| Type | Examples | Action |
|------|----------|--------|
| Problems | Customer churn, team conflict, outage | IDS → solve |
| Ideas | New feature, process change, opportunity | IDS → decide (yes/no/later) |
| Obstacles | Blocked rock, resource constraint | IDS → remove or escalate |
Issues list rules: Anyone can add issues; prioritize most important first; unsolved issues carry forward — not everything gets solved each meeting.
Common IDS failures: discussing symptoms instead of root cause, rehashing the same issue weekly, ending without clear action items.
See references/issues.md when facilitating IDS — a Five Whys worked example and tangent-control tactics.
Question: Have you documented and consistently followed your core processes?
Tool: Core Process Documentation — the 20/80 rule: document 20% of your processes to get 80% consistency.
Core processes to identify: HR (hiring, onboarding, reviews), sales (lead → close), operations (delivery, fulfillment), customer service (support → resolution), finance (invoicing, collections).
Documentation format: Name the process, list 5-20 major steps with just enough detail (not a 50-page manual), make it visual where possible.
Example: Sales Process "The Closer"
Followed By All (FBA): Document it, train on it, measure compliance, update quarterly.
See references/process.md when documenting a core process — full templates and a worked HR/sales/ops example.
Question: Are you executing on your vision every day?
The 3-7 most important things to accomplish in the next 90 days. Ninety days is long enough to achieve something meaningful, short enough to maintain urgency.
Rock-setting process:
SMART rocks: Specific ("Launch new pricing page", not "improve pricing"), Measurable (clear completion criteria), Achievable in 90 days, Realistic given resources, Time-bound (due end of quarter).
Rock scoring: Done = checked off (no partial credit); not done = carried forward or dropped. Target 80%+ completion. Beware rocks that are just "business as usual" — they don't move the needle.
See references/rocks.md when setting quarterly rocks — the binary done-test, the nine-row mistakes table, and a mid-quarter check-in.
The most important meeting in EOS. Every week, same day, same time, same agenda — 90 minutes, never longer.
| Time | Section | Purpose |
|------|---------|---------|
| 5 min | Segue | Good news, personal and professional |
| 5 min | Scorecard | Review weekly numbers |
| 5 min | Rock Review | On track / off track per rock |
| 5 min | Headlines | Customer/employee quick updates |
| 5 min | To-Do List | Last week's to-dos: done or not done |
| 60 min | IDS | Identify, Discuss, Solve issues |
| 5 min | Conclude | Recap to-dos, rate meeting 1-10 |
Rules:
See references/level-10.md when running or fixing a Level 10 — facilitation script and how to interpret the meeting rating.
Typical rollout: 2 years to full implementation.
| Phase | Timeline | Focus |
|-------|----------|-------|
| Focus Day | Day 1 (8 hours) | Accountability chart, rocks, scorecard, Level 10 |
| Vision Building Day 1 | Month 1 | V/TO: core values, core focus, 10-year target |
| Vision Building Day 2 | Month 2 | V/TO: marketing strategy, 3-year, 1-year, rocks |
| Quarterly Sessions | Every 90 days | Review rocks, set new rocks, IDS major issues |
| Annual Planning | Yearly | Full V/TO review, 1-year plan, Q1 rocks |
Self-implementation (read the book, follow the tools — free, slower) vs. EOS Implementer (certified facilitator — faster, expensive).
See references/implementation.md when planning the rollout — phase-by-phase sequencing and the self-vs-Implementer decision. For examples of how real companies sequenced it, see references/case-studies.md.
Rate the company 1-5 on each statement:
| Component | Statement | Score (1-5) |
|-----------|-----------|-------------|
| Vision | Leadership team agrees on where we're going and how to get there | |
| People | We have the right people in the right seats | |
| Data | We manage from a weekly scorecard of 5-15 numbers | |
| Issues | We solve issues quickly and permanently | |
| Process | Core processes are documented and followed by all | |
| Traction | We set and achieve 90-day priorities (rocks) | |
Scoring: 25-30 strong (fine-tune) | 20-24 good (close gaps) | 15-19 average (significant work) | below 15 weak (consider an EOS Implementer).
| Mistake | Why It Fails | Fix |
|---------|-------------|------|
| Skipping Level 10s | Weekly rhythm lost, issues pile up | Protect the meeting, never cancel |
| No scorecard | Managing by gut, constant surprises | Choose 5-15 weekly numbers |
| Wrong people kept | Drags the entire team down | People Analyzer, make the tough calls |
| V/TO not shared | Team doesn't know the vision | Share with the entire company |
For rock-specific mistakes (too many, too vague, business-as-usual, mid-quarter changes), see references/rocks.md — full nine-row table with fixes.
| Question | If No | Action |
|----------|-------|--------|
| Does leadership agree on vision? | Misalignment | Complete the V/TO together |
| Right people in right seats? | Performance issues | People Analyzer on all seats |
| Managing from data weekly? | Reactive management | Build a weekly scorecard |
| Issues solved permanently? | Same problems repeat | IDS in Level 10s |
| Core processes documented? | Inconsistency | Document the top 5 processes |
| 90-day priorities set and tracked? | No traction | Set quarterly rocks |
For the complete system:
Gino Wickman is the creator of EOS and founder of EOS Worldwide, a community of certified Implementers. *Traction* has sold over 2 million copies, and EOS is used by more than 250,000 companies worldwide. His work focuses on the practical tools entrepreneurial leadership teams need to get real traction.
Investor pitch deck structure with slide-by-slide framework, visual design rules, and data presentation. Covers the 12-slide framework, chart types, team slides, and common investor turn-offs. Use for: fundraising decks, investor presentations, startup pitch, demo day, grant proposals. Triggers: pitch deck, investor deck, startup pitch, fundraising deck, demo day, pitch presentation, investor presentation, seed deck, series a deck, pitch slides, startup presentation, vc pitch, investor meeting
Automate SendGrid email operations including sending emails, managing contacts/lists, sender identities, templates, and analytics via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
Fallback authoring playbook for building general-purpose personal assistant agents that do not fit a more specific archetype. Use this only after checking the other archetype skills (coding, spreadsheet, research, customer-support, content-writer, ops-automation). Examples include summarizing emails, drafting short answers, capturing notes, or generic personal-helper agents.
Automate SendGrid email operations including sending emails, managing contacts/lists, sender identities, templates, and analytics via Rube MCP (Composio). Always search tools first for current schemas.
> Track all identified/contacted people across strategies. CSV-backed contact database with dedup by LinkedIn URL or email. Prevents duplicate outreach when running strategies on a recurring cadence.
Analyze your email patterns over a time period — volume trends, top senders, response time estimates, busiest days, and unread backlog statistics.
Deliver performance reports. Use when: sending KPI summaries via Slack, email, or Google Sheets with analysis.
| 한국 팀의 주간 비즈니스 리뷰(WBR) 보고서 자동 생성 스킬입니다. 일일 노트·완료 태스크·KPI 데이터를 입력받아 임원/팀 두 버전(격식체/구어체)으로 작성합니다. Notion·Linear·Asana·Slack MCP가 가용하면 자동 데이터 fetch, 없어도 자유 텍스트 입력 fallback.
Take wondelai/traction-eos from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.