# Target User Classes

## Competency Center Head

> I’m sitting on a pile of knowledge and a bunch of experts. I’m compelled to turn it into money. I want knowledge collected, I want to know my experts, I want my top contributors known and retained, I want to use knowledge & experts to solutionise & drive RFPs to close fast.

### Pains

1. We know things, but I don’t remember what we know and who knows it.
2. People leave → knowledge leaves.
3. People I have — I need to justify compensation for them.
4. Respond to RFP: draft an answer using knowledge from the Playbook.

### Experiences I Seek

1. Fast. I want `<this>` to take minutes, not days.
2. Cognitive offload. I can name the names and I know what needs to be done — I just want to cobble an outline and hand it over for someone to complete.
3. Polished. I want investor-grade presentations & diagrams.

### Social / Emotional / Functional Progress I Want

1. Show my folks I can add value with AI.
2. Finally know who contributed what.
3. Showcase our expertise via LinkedIn.

### Jobs to Be Done

1. Expertise by tag — show me my experts: I need to pick someone for a particular job.
2. Contribution review — evaluate contributions over the quarter/year: who are my best knowledge sharers?
3. Reference data — how long it takes, how many K tokens will be used, etc.
4. Blueprint draft — given the drivers, here is how we can build it and who is available to do it.
5. RFP response — here is what needs to be → how to cook it → what we will need → how much it will cost.
6. Refresher — “In my time it was like this: … Is it still so?”
7. Level Up — “What is the Delta Lake? How do I build one in AWS?”

### Pain Relievers

1. Expertise Discovery playbook — run with Outlook MCP against your inbox → get proposed Playbooks & Workflows & expert assignments in Jira to create it using “Playbook of Playbooks”.

### Gain Creators

1. RFP playbook.
2. Expertise Discovery playbook.

### Value Proposition

1. Retain organizational knowledge & capability.
2. Know your experts & measure their contribution.
3. RFP Playbook — turn Playbooks into RFP answer drafts in under an hour.

## Junior Engineer

> I just joined the project and I’m required to follow TDD and write provable, defensibe and observable code (what the heck does that even mean?..) I struggle to learn all this stuff and I’m constanly not sure that I’m doing fine - I’d love someone (person or AI, as AI is less embarassing to ask stupid questions) to sit with me and talk me through what needs to be done. I want to worry less and be more condident at what I do. Maybe I even want to grow professionally and learn advanced techniques.

### Pains

1. I don’t know where to start.
2. Is there a checklist I can follow?
3. I don’t understand particular “hows” (think “this is the first time I see list comprehension with lambda”) or “whys” (think “what is the barrier between producer and consumer and why do we need to wait by the barrier”)

### Experiences I Seek

1. Simple. I want all advanced concepts explained in a plain language.
2. 2nd pair of eyes. Look at why I do, warn me if I’m attempting something stupid.
3. Guide & coach. Guide me step by step, explaining along the way.

### Social / Emotional / Functional Progress I Want

1. I don’t want to look stupid.
2. I want to feel confident.
3. I want guardrails so I can tell “its not my faul - I did everything by the book.

### Jobs to Be Done

1. Guide — walk me through what needs to be done.
2. Lead pilot - do things on my behalf, explaining me as we go.
3. Checklist - verify what I did, clean any tails I may have left behind.

### Ideas in that regard

1. Steve[McConnel] agent: explains everything as we go, suggests recommended reading.
2. “interns” tag - when workflow discovers it invokes Steve agent, who explains as we go.

## Lead Engineer

> I need to task my team supplying them with the high quality task definition to minimize their chances to screw up. At the same time, I don’t want to spend time detailing (thus if someone did it and I just review - this is fine). Also when they done - I’m supposed to review what they do (especially interns) and give them feedback on how to do better with the design & practices to grow their craft, and its annoying - I need to read a lot, think a lot, write a lot, and also I feel emotionally insecure providing feedback because I don’t know how and I’m not sure I’m good enough to and I’m afraid my message will be ignored.

### Pains

1. Writing detailed task briefs is the only way to prevent juniors from going sideways — and it takes forever.
2. My standards live in my head. Every new developer, every new AI session — I explain the same things from scratch.
3. Giving feedback is emotionally expensive: I read a lot, think a lot, write a lot, and it still might be ignored.
4. I’m not always confident enough to give hard feedback — I’m afraid it comes across as opinion, not craft.
5. I can’t be in every PR, every chat, every standup. My know-how doesn’t scale.

### Experiences I Seek

1. Delegation confidence. I hand off knowing the brief is solid and the AI will enforce my standards.
2. Leverage. My craft applied consistently, even when I’m not in the room.
3. Feedback without friction. I reference the playbook/standards/BDFLs/experts, not my gut — it’s easier to give and easier to receive.

### Social / Emotional / Functional Progress I Want

1. Be the person who raised the bar — without being the bottleneck.
2. Give feedback anchored in shared standards, not personal preference.
3. Have my craft outlive my tenure on the project.
4. Less cognitive energy spent.

### Jobs to Be Done

1. Task brief generation — given a feature spec, produce an issue with context map, do-not-do list, and acceptance checkpoints already written.
2. Standards enforcement — AI reviews code against playbook rules, not just linting; flags violations with a reference to the relevant activity.
3. Onboarding — new developer joins, reads the playbook, knows how we work. No 1:1 walkthrough needed.
4. Feedback anchored in craft — “per Activity BPE-02, services must not contain MCP-specific logic” is easier to write and harder to ignore than “I don’t like this.”
5. Preserve architecture decisions — the reasoning lives in the playbook, not in my memory or a Slack thread from 2023.
6. Evolve standards — when I find a better pattern, I submit a PIP. It gets reviewed, versioned, and the whole team picks it up next sprint.

### Pain Relievers

1. Activity guidance + Rules — task brief template is already written; AI generates the issue from it.
2. Playbook-anchored feedback — “the playbook says X” replaces “I think you should X”; emotionally safer for both sides.
3. MCP reads the playbook — consistent output regardless of who on the team prompted.

### Gain Creators

1. Your know-how scales without you — encoded once, applied by every developer and every AI session.
2. Feedback becomes coaching, not judgment.
3. PIPs turn your improvements into versioned team standards instead of forgotten Slack messages.

### Value Proposition

1. Your standards, applied consistently — by every developer and every AI, every session.
2. Task definition that takes minutes, not the morning.
3. Pull request with MEANINGFUL feedback in 15 mins, not entire afternoon.
4. Feedback anchored in shared craft, not personal opinion.

### Quick ideas:

1. PR Review Workflow (can be combined with Steve Agent.)

## Scrum Master

> I have to lay out what needs to be done - next milestone and its tasks, but I struggle to maintain consistency of the documentation and frankly - quite often I feel unsure what are [infrastructure/cross-cutting architectural concerns etc] prerequisites or dependencies because I’m not a specialist, so I’m afraid we will overlook something, and at the same time I’m afraid to ask questions because people will see that I don’t know the subject. When the sprint starts - I struggle to understand if things are going fine even when codebase increments are pushed daily (how do I get stuff from git? how do I interpret what I see in git?).

### Pains

1. Milestone planning takes forever and I’m never sure I got the dependencies right — I’m not the domain expert.
2. I’m afraid to ask clarifying questions in front of the team. It exposes me.
3. Documentation is inconsistent sprint to sprint — different people write issues differently, nothing is comparable.
4. Once the sprint starts, I can’t tell if we’re on track. Git is a black box to me.
5. When something slips, I find out at the end — not when there was still time to act.

### Experiences I Seek

1. Coverage confidence. I want to know I haven’t missed a prerequisite or a dependency before the sprint starts.
2. Invisible floor. I want the documentation to be consistent without me having to enforce it manually.
3. Plain-language progress. Tell me what’s happening in the sprint in terms I understand — not commit hashes.

### Social / Emotional / Functional Progress I Want

1. Run the sprint without feeling like I’m faking it in front of engineers.
2. Spot blockers and slippage early — before they become my problem at the demo.
3. Be taken seriously as a planner, not just a calendar manager.

### Jobs to Be Done

1. Milestone decomposition — given a goal, produce a consistent set of issues with prerequisites, dependencies, and acceptance checkpoints already filled in.
2. Dependency check — before the sprint starts, flag what’s missing or out of order; surface cross-cutting concerns I wouldn’t know to ask about.
3. Sprint health in plain English — translate what’s happening in GitHub/Jira into “on track / at risk / blocked” without me needing to read code.
4. Consistency enforcement — every issue follows the same structure, so I can compare across sprints and people.
5. Early warning — alert me when something is slipping while there’s still time to adjust, not after the fact.

### Pain Relievers

1. BPE workflow in Mimir — milestone decomposition follows the same playbook every time; issues come out with context maps, do-not-do lists, and checkpoints already written.
2. Iteration protocol — status labels (`status-queued` → `status-in-progress` → `status-done`) give plain-language sprint state without reading git.
3. Dependency structure in activities — prerequisites and cross-cutting concerns are encoded in the playbook, not in someone’s head.

### Gain Creators

1. Sprint planning that produces consistent, complete issues — without domain expertise required to write them.
2. Progress visibility in terms a non-engineer can act on.
3. Early drift detection before it becomes a missed deadline.

### Value Proposition

1. Plan the sprint without being the weakest person in the room.
2. Issues that are consistent, complete, and comparable — every sprint, every team.
3. Know the sprint is healthy or at risk before the team tells you it’s too late.

## Project Manager
> I have a roadmap and I have to push through X storypoints every sprint with 0 defects leaking to prod. But there is always SOMETHING preventing us from getting there. I try to control certain variables - size of the daily increment, open bug count, feature cycle time, PR turnaround time etc. but there are just too many for me to assess. I’d love a “project administrator”, mini-PMO - collects the data, does quick assessment, focuses my attention: “OK, throughput and quality are OK, but PRs now take 2x time to get into the main. Seems like one of primary reviewers is down and it feels - see, I told you we need more reviewers. It seems @jdoe and @markj are already doing work which qualified them for the role.”
### Pains
1. Too many variables to track simultaneously — by the time I notice something is wrong, the sprint is already at risk. 2. I don’t know which signal to trust or which to ignore. Everything looks urgent. 3. The data is in GitLab, Jira, and Slack — I’d have to be three people to read it all. 4. I can see the output (velocity, bug count) but not the leading indicators — the things that predict a miss before it happens. 5. Decisions I make feel like gut calls because I can’t present the analysis that backs them up.
### Experiences I Seek
1. Focus. Don’t show me everything — show me the one thing I need to act on right now. 2. Evidence. When I escalate or make a call, I want data I can point to, not just my read of the room. 3. Early. Tell me when we’re drifting while there’s still time to correct — not at the retrospective.
### Social / Emotional / Functional Progress I Want
1. Make decisions I can defend — with evidence, not just instinct. 2. Be seen as someone who sees around corners, not someone who reacts to fires. 3. Know my team is running at capacity, not burning out or coasting.
### Jobs to Be Done
1. Daily SitRep — one morning read: throughput, cycle time, PR turnaround, open bugs. Anomalies flagged, not buried in a dashboard. 2. Leading indicator watch — catch drift before it becomes a miss: PR queue growing, one reviewer becoming a bottleneck, commit frequency dropping. 3. Decision brief — when I need to act, give me the analysis behind the recommendation so I can present it, not just accept it. 4. Contributor insight — who is doing what, who is overloaded, who has earned a new responsibility. 5. Roadmap-to-sprint traceability — is what the team is doing this sprint actually connected to the roadmap goal?

### Pain Relievers

1. Huginn (`~/GitHub/huginn`) — Human-AI OODA composite for engineering PMs. Ingests GitLab and Jira signals every 15 minutes, computes Master Variables (TRANSPARENCY, THROUGHPUT, CYCLE TIME, REWORK, QUALITY, COMPLEXITY, CONTRIBUTION), and generates a daily SitRep via Gjallarhorn AI. Semi-Autonomous mode: Gjallarhorn proposes Decisions, PM approves. Autonomous mode: Gjallarhorn executes.
2. “Manage Project” workflow in Mimir (planned) — the playbook Huginn runs against: defines what good looks like for each Master Variable, thresholds for escalation, decision authority model.

### Gain Creators

1. Morning SitRep in plain English — anomalies first, context second, recommendations third.
2. Decisions backed by computed evidence, not gut feel.
3. The composite gets sharper sprint over sprint as the “Manage Project” playbook is refined via PIPs.

### Value Proposition

1. A mini-PMO that works overnight so you don’t have to.
2. Act on the right signal at the right time — not everything, not too late.
3. Decisions you can defend because the analysis is already written.