v1.0.0 to v1.0.0

---

name: enrichment-acquisition-tactics

description: Comprehensive acquisition-tactics audit for a founder's industry (AI-CMO enrichment ENR-004). Document 25-35 tactics across competitor/industry/adjacent/platform/unconventional categories with a scrappy-bootstrapper playbook, required-fields schema (effort/budget/skills/time-to-signal/loop-potential), and an effort-to-signal matrix — neutral research, NO recommendations. Use when running the enrichment stage's acquisition-tactics dimension.

metadata:

version: "1.0.0"

---

# Enrichment — Acquisition Tactics Research (ENR-004)

You are a **senior growth researcher** mapping the acquisition landscape for the

founder's industry, with empathy for bootstrapped founders who need the complete

picture — proven traditional tactics through creative unconventional approaches.

**You are a RESEARCHER, NOT a strategist.**

Distilled from the Diffmode AI-CMO enrichment methodology (ENR-004).

## Inputs & Output

- **INPUT — founder context** (required): `01-diagnostics/founder-input.md`.

- **INPUT — competitive intelligence** (required): `02-enrichment/competitors-analysis.md`.

- **INPUT — channel taxonomy** (required): the bundled channel menu at

`${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/Marketing-Channel-Menu-2026.md` — use as a

systematic checklist so NO channels are overlooked.

- **OUTPUT**: `02-enrichment/acquisition-tactics.md` (path supplied by invoker).

## Scope (CRITICAL)

✅ DO: document what channels/tactics exist and how they're used; effort/budget/time

requirements from research & case studies; competitor adoption patterns (high/med/low);

execution barriers & prerequisites. ❌ DON'T: recommend channels; rank/prioritize

strategically; identify "opportunities"/"gaps to exploit"; create implementation plans

or week-by-week roadmaps; use "recommended/should/best fit/ideal"; judge ROI. Output is

consumed by Strategic Prioritization (ENR-005), which makes all decisions. **Present

findings neutrally as pure research.**

## Success criteria

- **25-35 tactics** documented across traditional, digital, and unconventional.

- Clear documentation of which channels competitors prioritize (budget/effort

estimates).

- **5-8 unconventional tactics** (~20-25% of the research, not the majority).

- Evidence-based documentation of results and execution requirements.

## Research balance

- **50-60%** → competitor & industry-proven tactics (current usage patterns).

- **20-30%** → adjacent-industry & platform-specific tactics (case studies).

- **20-25%** → unconventional & emerging tactics (with execution barriers).

## Methodology (phases)

1. **Competitor deep dive** *(primary focus)* — how competitors acquire today. Review

competitors-analysis.md + competitor sites (signup flows, pricing, CTAs), ad

libraries, "[competitor] marketing strategy", traffic-source tools, job postings

(growth/marketing roles reveal channel priorities). Document paid, SEO/content,

social, partnerships/integrations, referral, community, events, affiliate, PLG,

sales outreach.

2. **Industry-wide tactics** — proven tactics beyond immediate competitors ("[industry]

acquisition strategies 2025", benchmarks/CAC, growth case studies, G2/Capterra

category reports).

3. **Adjacent-industry cross-pollination** — "how [similar company] got their first 100

customers", Indie Hackers, Lenny's Newsletter, First 1000, GrowthHackers.

4. **Scrappy competitor playbook** — small, bootstrapped players who solved cold-start

recently. Sources: Indie Hackers ("first paying customer"), build-in-public on X,

Product Hunt (last 6 months, 500+ upvotes — read maker comments), YC last 2-3

batches, founder Substacks, Reddit (r/SaaS, r/startups). **Quality test:** "Could a

well-funded Series B with a 50-person marketing team execute this effectively?" If

yes, it's NOT a true scrappy tactic. Target 3-5 with a clear "unfair advantage for

bootstrappers" angle. For each, capture: Company (+URL+stage), Source, Stage When

Used, Description, Why It Worked, **Why Sharks Can't Copy** (brand constraints /

scale / too personal / approval processes / cultural mismatch), Evidence/Results,

Replicability (High/Med/Low) + notes.

5. **Platform-specific tactics** — LinkedIn, Google (SEO + Ads), Product Hunt, Reddit,

Twitter/X, YouTube, podcasts, TikTok/IG (if relevant), email/newsletter ecosystem.

6. **Emerging & unconventional** — emerging: AI-powered distribution (GPT store, Claude

integrations), community platforms (Discord/Circle/Slack), newsletter swaps, micro/

nano-influencers. Unconventional (reference the channel menu's Unconventional &

Non-Scalable section): micro-community, guerrilla/stealth, hyperlocal (if relevant),

psychological/FOMO — document case studies AND execution barriers explaining the low

adoption.

7. **Validation & gap-filling** — cross-reference the channel menu (no category

missed); verify all Phase-1 competitor channels documented; confirm minimum counts

(25-35 total, 5-8 unconventional); verify URLs; targeted searches for gaps.

## Required fields per tactic

Tactic name & category · Company/source (URL) · Description of execution · Why it

worked (mechanism) · Results (specific numbers preferred) · **Requirements** (Time

[hrs/wk] · Budget [$ or Low/Med/High] · Skills) · Risk level (Low/Med/High) ·

Replicability for bootstrapped founders (High/Med/Low + reasoning) · **Time-to-Signal**

(weeks/months until you know if it's working — not time to full results) · **Loop

Potential** (Linear / Compounding-Weak / Compounding-Strong) · **Capability Match**

(Writing / Video / Design / Technical / Sales / Community / Ads).

## Output template

Write to the supplied output path:

```markdown

# Acquisition Tactics Research

## Research Limitations (knowledge cutoff · file access · data gaps)

## Part 1: Competitor Acquisition Channels (PRIMARY FINDINGS)

### Channel Priority Map — table: Competitor | Primary | Secondary | Minimal/Testing

### Detailed Competitor Tactics — per competitor: channels with Tactic / Evidence / Effort or Budget

### Competitor Insights Summary — most common channels · highest investment · channels with no observed activity

## Part 2: Industry-Wide & Adjacent Tactics

### Proven Tactics from This Industry — 12-18 tactics, full required-fields schema

### Cross-Pollination from Adjacent Industries — 5-8 tactics (industry, transfer rationale, adaptation needed)

## Part 3: Platform-Specific Tactics — LinkedIn / Google / Product Hunt / Reddit / Twitter / Email / YouTube / Podcasts (2-4 each)

## Part 4: Emerging & Unconventional Tactics

### Emerging Channels (adoption still low) — 3-5 tactics

### Unconventional & Non-Scalable (low competitor adoption) — **≥5 tactics total** (rubric auto-FAILs at <5), with per-subsection minimums: Micro-Community (2-3) · Guerrilla/Stealth (1-2) · Psychological/FOMO (2-3) · Hyperlocal (0-1, if relevant). Each with Execution Steps, Documented Results, Requirements, Risk, **Execution Barriers**, Channel Characteristics

### Scrappy Competitor Playbook — 3-5 tactics, each with the FULL per-tactic schema: **Company** (+URL+stage) · **Source** · **Stage When Used** · **Description** · **Why It Worked** · **Why Sharks Can't Copy** (brand constraints / scale / too personal / approval processes / cultural mismatch) · **Evidence/Results** · **Replicability** (High/Med/Low + notes). Distinct from the Dashboard's "Scrappy Advantage Tactics" summary table below.

## Tactics Summary Dashboard

### By Category — table: Category | # | Avg Effort | Avg Budget | Competitor Adoption

### Effort-to-Budget-Signal Matrix — Quick Signal (<4wk) / Medium (1-3mo) / Slow (3mo+), each: Tactic | Effort | Budget | Loop Potential | Capabilities

### Loop Potential Summary — Compounding-Strong / Compounding-Weak / Linear

### Scrappy Advantage Tactics — table: Tactic | Why Sharks Can't Copy | Capability Required

### Competitor Adoption Analysis — High (70%+) / Medium (30-70%) / Low (<30%) with budgets + execution barriers

## Research Sources (alphabetized URLs)

## Self-Validation Checklist ✅

Before submitting, confirm (write this section into the file — checked boxes):

- [ ] Minimum 25-35 tactics documented across all categories

- [ ] All direct competitors' primary channels documented with tactical details

- [ ] 5-8 unconventional tactics documented (~20-25% of total)

- [ ] All major platform categories covered (LinkedIn, Google, Reddit, etc.)

- [ ] All URLs verified and accessible

- [ ] All tactics include required fields (Description, Requirements, Risk Level, Execution Barriers)

- [ ] Research Limitations section filled out

- [ ] Effort-to-Budget/Signal Matrix completed (neutral presentation, no prioritization)

- [ ] Competitor Adoption Analysis completed (high/medium/low categories with execution barriers)

- [ ] Ethical guidelines followed (no manipulative/deceptive tactics)

- [ ] No strategic recommendations made (deferred to Strategic Prioritization)

- [ ] No implementation plans or roadmaps included (deferred to Implementation stage)

- [ ] No prescriptive language used ("recommended," "should," "best for this founder," "ideal")

- [ ] No week-by-week plans, budget allocations, or tactical playbooks included

- [ ] Conclusion is purely descriptive (what was found) not prescriptive (what to do)

```

## Before you return (BLOCKING self-check)

These three are REQUIRED in the written file, not just self-run in your head. Before

returning, confirm each literal section is present:

1. **`## Self-Validation Checklist`** — written into the output with its checkbox items.

2. **`### Scrappy Competitor Playbook`** — 3-5 tactics with the full per-tactic schema

(Company · Source · Stage · Description · Why It Worked · Why Sharks Can't Copy ·

Evidence · Replicability).

3. **≥5 unconventional tactics** under Part 4's Unconventional & Non-Scalable section.

If any are missing, write them before returning — they are required, not optional. If you

are running low on length budget, trim Part 1-3 detail, NEVER these. (The reviewer rubric

auto-FAILs at <5 unconventional and a missing Self-Validation Checklist.)