Prompt of the Week
Creative Director Campaign Generator
Phase 1: Concept Mastery — Summarize Epstein’s definitions of kind and wicked learning environments in ≤ 200 words each. Identify at least three diagnostic criteria that reliably distinguish kind from wicked problems (e.g., feedback speed, rule clarity, repeatability). Provide two classic examples of each problem type outside the GTM world (sports, medicine, chess, entrepreneurship, etc.) to anchor the concept. Cite primary sources: Range, relevant academic papers Epstein references, plus any updated literature post-2019 that refines or challenges the model.
Output Format: bulleted definitions; table of diagnostic criteria (columns: Criterion | Kind Score | Wicked Score | Explanation); short example blurbs (~75 words each); reference list (APA or MLA).
Phase 2: GTM Analysis & Charting — Evaluate the following GTM layers (feel free to add others):
Marketing – demand gen, brand building, SEO/Content, paid acquisition, product marketing, community, lifecycle/retention.
Sales – SDR/BDR prospecting, discovery & demo, negotiation, forecasting, pipeline management.
Customer Success – onboarding, adoption coaching, renewals, expansion, support ticket deflection, health-score analytics.
For each layer, list 5–10 high-impact strategies or tactics currently used by leading SaaS or tech companies. Classify each tactic as Kind, Wicked, or Hybrid. If Hybrid, briefly note which elements are kind-like vs. wicked-like. Justify every classification in 1–2 sentences, tying back to the diagnostic criteria from Phase 1. Recommend one management approach (e.g., playbooks, experimentation cadence, skill development) best suited to each category and explain why.
Output Format: produce a matrix with columns → GTM Function | Strategy/Tactic | Kind / Wicked / Hybrid | Key Diagnostic Signals | Recommended Management Approach.
Follow the matrix with a concise narrative (≤ 500 words) highlighting observed patterns (e.g., data-heavy, algorithmic tactics skew kind vs. trust-building interactions skew wicked) and implications for org design, KPI selection, and talent development.
Style & Depth Guidelines: MBA-level rigor; clear, practitioner-friendly language; use sub-headings and bullets for readability; avoid fluff. Reference data where available (benchmarks, case studies) but flag gaps openly. Limit Phase 1 ≈ 700 words and Phase 2 ≈ 1,500 words (± 15%).
Citation & Verification: Inline-cite facts or data; append a final reference list of all works cited.
Deliverable: return the full report in Markdown, ready for immediate use or further editing.