launch-debrief · git:20260516.4225f52 · 2026-05-16 · sha256 f3a48732bb804b63
launch-debrief git:20260516.4225f52A
Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/f3a48732bb804b63.
--- name: launch-debrief description: 'Structured post-launch retrospective that produces quantified learnings and improvement playbooks. Use when: launch retrospective, post-launch review, what worked, launch debrief, post-mortem, lessons learned.' --- # Launch Debrief (MIRROR Protocol) A structured post-launch retrospective engine that transforms raw launch data into quantified learnings, root-cause analyses, and improvement playbooks. MIRROR ensures every launch makes future launches better by extracting actionable insights from both successes and failures through systematic analysis rather than anecdotal recall. ## When to Use - Conducting a post-launch retrospective (ideally at T+30 and T+90) - Analyzing why a launch over- or underperformed expectations - Building an institutional knowledge base of launch learnings - Creating improvement playbooks for the next launch cycle - Presenting launch results to leadership with root-cause analysis - Comparing actual results against pre-launch projections - Identifying systemic issues across multiple launches ## What You'll Need **Critical inputs (ask if not provided):** - Launch name, date, and type (GA, beta, feature, expansion) - Pre-launch targets for all VITAL metrics (from launch-pulse) - Actual performance data for all tracked metrics - Launch readiness scores from gate reviews (from launch-command) - Budget allocation and actual spend (from budget-allocator) - Channel performance data by channel (from demand-engine) **Nice-to-have:** - Customer feedback (NPS, surveys, support tickets, social mentions) - Internal team feedback (retro notes, Slack threads, post-mortems) - Competitive activity during launch window (from battle-scanner) - Sales feedback on messaging and enablement effectiveness - Win/loss analysis data from CRM - Previous launch debrief reports for trend analysis ## Process ### Step 1: Metrics Review -- Actual vs Target vs Baseline For each VITAL metric, calculate the Performance Index and classify the result. **Performance Index Table:** | VITAL Layer | Metric | Baseline | Target | Actual | Perf. Index | Classification | |-------------|--------|----------|--------|--------|-------------|---------------| | Volume | Website Traffic | | | | Actual/Target | | | Volume | Impressions | | | | | | | Volume | Social Reach | | | | | | | Intent | MQLs | | | | | | | Intent | Demo Requests | | | | | | | Intent | Trial Signups | | | | | | | Traction | SQLs | | | | | | | Traction | Pipeline Created | | | | | | | Traction | Win Rate | | | | | | | Adoption | Activation Rate | | | | | | | Adoption | Time to Value | | | | | | | Adoption | DAU/WAU | | | | | | | Loyalty | NPS | | | | | | | Loyalty | 30-Day Retention | | | | | | | Loyalty | Referral Rate | | | | | | **Performance Index Scale:** | Index | Classification | Color | Meaning | |-------|---------------|-------|---------| | >= 1.20 | Significant Overperformance | Blue | Exceeded target by 20%+, investigate why | | 1.00 - 1.19 | On Target | Green | Met or exceeded target | | 0.80 - 0.99 | Slight Underperformance | Yellow | Close to target, minor optimization needed | | 0.60 - 0.79 | Material Underperformance | Orange | Significant gap, root-cause analysis required | | < 0.60 | Critical Miss | Red | Major failure, deep investigation required | **Top 3 Overperformances:** | Rank | Metric | Index | Why It Worked | Replicable? | |------|--------|-------|--------------|-------------| | 1 | | | | Yes / Partially / No | | 2 | | | | | | 3 | | | | | **Top 3 Underperformances:** | Rank | Metric | Index | Initial Hypothesis | Severity | |------|--------|-------|--------------------|----------| | 1 | | | | Critical / High / Medium | | 2 | | | | | | 3 | | | | | ### Step 2: Insights Extraction Systematically extract learnings across four dimensions. **Win Analysis (What Worked):** | # | Category | Finding | Evidence | Impact Level | Replicable? | |---|----------|---------|----------|-------------|-------------| | 1 | Messaging | Which messages resonated strongest? | Data point | High/Med/Low | | | 2 | Channel | Which channels outperformed? | Data point | | | | 3 | Content | Which assets drove the most engagement? | Data point | | | | 4 | Timing | Were there timing advantages? | Data point | | | | 5 | Audience | Which segments responded best? | Data point | | | **Loss Analysis (What Did Not Work):** | # | Category | Finding | Evidence | Impact Level | Preventable? | |---|----------|---------|----------|-------------|-------------| | 1 | Messaging | Which messages fell flat? | Data point | High/Med/Low | | | 2 | Channel | Which channels underperformed? | Data point | | | | 3 | Competitive | Where did competitors win? | Data point | | | | 4 | Execution | What execution gaps occurred? | Data point | | | | 5 | Assumptions | Which assumptions were wrong? | Data point | | | **Customer Feedback Synthesis:** | Source | Volume | Top Positive Themes | Top Negative Themes | Surprise Insights | |--------|--------|-------------------|-------------------|------------------| | NPS Comments | | | | | | Support Tickets | | | | | | Social Mentions | | | | | | Sales Conversations | | | | | | User Surveys | | | | | **Internal Feedback Synthesis:** | Team | What Went Well | What Was Frustrating | What Would They Change | |------|---------------|---------------------|----------------------| | Product | | | | | Marketing | | | | | Sales | | | | | Support | | | | | Engineering | | | | ### Step 3: Root-Cause Mapping For each material underperformance (Index < 0.80), perform a structured 5-Whys analysis. **5-Whys Template:** | Underperformance | Why 1 | Why 2 | Why 3 | Why 4 | Why 5 (Root Cause) | |-----------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------------------| | Metric: [name], Index: [value] | | | | | | **Root-Cause Classification:** | Root Cause | Error Type | Definition | Example | |-----------|-----------|------------|---------| | RC1 | Strategy | Wrong approach chosen | Targeted wrong segment | | RC2 | Execution | Right approach, poor implementation | Campaign launched late, buggy landing page | | RC3 | Assumption | Incorrect belief about market/customer | Assumed price sensitivity that did not exist | | RC4 | External | Outside factors beyond control | Competitor launched same week, economic shift | | RC5 | Timing | Right approach, wrong time | Feature not ready, market not primed | **Root-Cause Summary:** | # | Underperformance | Root Cause | Error Type | Controllable? | Fix Difficulty | |---|-----------------|-----------|-----------|---------------|---------------| | 1 | | | Strategy/Execution/Assumption/External/Timing | Yes/Partial/No | Easy/Medium/Hard | | 2 | | | | | | | 3 | | | | | | ### Step 4: Improvement Scoring and Prioritization Score each potential improvement on three dimensions to prioritize the next-launch playbook. **Improvement Scoring Model:** | # | Improvement | Impact (1-10) | Ease (1-10, inverse) | Confidence (1-10) | Priority Score | |---|------------|--------------|---------------------|-------------------|---------------| | 1 | | | | | | | 2 | | | | | | | 3 | | | | | | | 4 | | | | | | | 5 | | | | | | | 6 | | | | | | | 7 | | | | | | | 8 | | | | | | **Scoring Definitions:** | Dimension | Weight | 1 (Low) | 5 (Medium) | 10 (High) | |-----------|--------|---------|-----------|-----------| | Impact | 40% | Marginal improvement, <5% lift | Moderate improvement, 10-20% lift | Transformative, >30% lift | | Ease (inverse) | 30% | Requires org change, 6+ months | Cross-team effort, 1-3 months | Single team, <1 month | | Confidence | 30% | Hypothesis only, no data | Some supporting data | Strong evidence, proven elsewhere | **Priority Score Formula:** ``` Priority = (Impact x 0.4) + (Ease x 0.3) + (Confidence x 0.3) ``` **Priority Classification:** | Score Range | Priority | Action | |------------|---------|--------| | 8.0 - 10.0 | P0: Implement immediately | Must-do for next launch, assign owner this week | | 6.0 - 7.9 | P1: Implement next cycle | Plan for next launch, assign owner within 2 weeks | | 4.0 - 5.9 | P2: Backlog | Good ideas, queue for future improvement | | < 4.0 | P3: Monitor | Low confidence or low impact, revisit if new data | ### Step 5: Build the Next-Launch Playbook Compile all P0 and P1 improvements into an actionable playbook. **Next-Launch Playbook Template:** | # | Improvement | Priority | Owner | Deadline | Dependencies | Success Metric | Status | |---|------------|---------|-------|----------|-------------|---------------|--------| | 1 | | P0 | | | | | Not Started | | 2 | | P0 | | | | | | | 3 | | P1 | | | | | | | 4 | | P1 | | | | | | | 5 | | P1 | | | | | | **Assumptions to Revalidate:** | # | Assumption from This Launch | Was It Valid? | Updated Assumption | Validation Method | |---|---------------------------|-------------|-------------------|------------------| | 1 | | Yes/No/Partial | | | | 2 | | | | | | 3 | | | | | **Benchmarks Updated:** | Metric | Previous Benchmark | Actual This Launch | New Benchmark | Notes | |--------|-------------------|-------------------|--------------|-------| | | | | | | | | | | | | ### Step 6: Launch Comparison (Multi-Launch Trend) If prior launch debriefs exist, compare trends across launches. **Cross-Launch Comparison:** | Dimension | Launch N-2 | Launch N-1 | This Launch | Trend | Notes | |-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|-------|-------| | Overall LRI at gate G4 | | | | | | | Pipeline created (T+30) | | | | | | | Activation rate (T+30) | | | | | | | NPS (T+30) | | | | | | | Budget efficiency (ROI) | | | | | | | Debrief improvement adoption | | | | | | ## Output Save to `outputs/launch-debrief/` ### Deliverables: 1. **Launch Scorecard** -- Performance Index for every VITAL metric with actual vs target vs baseline, top 3 over/underperformances, and overall launch grade (A through F based on weighted Performance Index) 2. **Insights Report** -- Win analysis, loss analysis, customer feedback synthesis, and internal feedback synthesis with evidence-backed findings across messaging, channels, content, timing, and audience 3. **Root-Cause Analysis** -- 5-Whys analysis for each material underperformance, classified by error type (Strategy/Execution/Assumption/External/Timing), with controllability and fix-difficulty assessments 4. **Next-Launch Playbook** -- Prioritized improvement list (P0 through P3) using the Impact x Ease x Confidence scoring model, with owners, deadlines, dependencies, and updated benchmarks ## Chain Connections - **Receives from:** launch-pulse (actual metrics data), launch-command (gate scores, launch plan), budget-allocator (spend actuals), demand-engine (channel performance), battle-scanner (competitive context) - **Feeds back into:** All future launch cycles -- updated benchmarks flow to launch-pulse, process improvements flow to launch-command, messaging learnings flow to position-lock, channel learnings flow to demand-engine - **Enhanced by:** growth-loop (post-launch retention data), signal-radar (market context during launch window)