Consulting prompts

Structure before the call.

I am a [type] consultant meeting a prospective client in [industry] about [problem area]. Design a discovery call framework: 5 opening questions to understand the current situation, 5 diagnostic questions to find root causes, 3 questions about what they've already tried, 2 about organisational readiness, and 1 closing question about their real decision criteria. Keep the questions open and non-leading.

The real problem underneath.

Here are my notes from a client discovery session (anonymised): [paste]. Pull out the stated problem versus the likely underlying problem, the top three root-cause hypotheses, the constraints and politics I should respect, and the two questions I still need answered before scoping the work.

The scaffolding, not the data.

Act as a diagnostic consultant. Given this situation, [describe anonymised], build a simple diagnostic framework: the three or four areas I should assess, what 'good' versus 'broken' looks like in each, and the evidence I'd need to gather to judge it. Keep it something I could run in a two-week diagnostic.

One question, clearly scoped.

Turn this vague client ask into a sharp problem statement: [paste]. Rewrite it as a single, specific question the engagement will answer, name what's in and out of scope, and list the assumptions baked into how they framed it that we should test.

Questions tuned per role.

Draft a stakeholder interview guide for a [type] project. I'll speak to [roles]. For each role, give me three tailored questions that get at their real priorities and concerns, and one question designed to surface disagreement between functions.

Scope creep starts here.

Draft a statement of work for a [type] engagement based on these notes (anonymised): [paste]. Include objectives, scope and explicit out-of-scope items, approach and phases, deliverables, timeline, roles, and assumptions. Make the out-of-scope and assumptions sections thorough, since that's where scope creep starts.

Lead with their problem.

Write a proposal narrative for [client situation, anonymised]. Structure it as: their problem in their words, why it matters now, our approach in three phases, what they'll walk away with, and why us. Confident and specific, no filler, and lead with their problem, not our credentials.

Each phase, a decision.

Help me structure a phased approach for solving [problem]. Break it into a diagnostic phase, a design phase, and an implementation-support phase, and for each give the key activities, the output, and the decision the client makes at the end of it before we proceed.

Tie the fee to outcome.

I need to explain my pricing to a client who thinks the fee is high. The engagement is [describe]. Draft a value-based rationale that ties the fee to the outcome and the cost of not solving the problem, acknowledges it's an investment, and stays confident without being defensive.

Structure a messy problem.

Break this problem into a MECE issue tree: [describe the problem]. Structure it as mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive branches down two levels, and for each bottom branch note the analysis or data I'd need to resolve it. Tell me if any branch overlaps or if I've missed a whole area.

Rank what changes the answer.

Act as a strategy consultant. Turn this question, [paste], into three or four testable hypotheses, and for each give the 'so what' if it's true, the fastest way to test it, and what evidence would prove it wrong. Rank them by which would most change the recommendation.

The right tool, not the loudest.

Which framework fits this problem best: [describe]? Suggest two or three relevant strategy frameworks, explain in one line why each fits or doesn't, and warn me where forcing the framework would distort the actual situation. I want the right tool, not the most impressive-sounding one.

The skeleton of the argument.

Structure a [market entry / cost reduction / growth] analysis for [situation, anonymised]. Lay out the key questions to answer in order, the analyses under each, and the decision the whole thing builds toward. Leave the numbers to me; I just want the skeleton of the argument.

Compare fairly, pick nothing.

Help me build a simple options analysis. The decision is [describe], and the options are [list]. For each option, structure the upside, the downside, the cost, and the key risk, then suggest the two or three criteria that should actually decide it. Don't pick a winner; help me compare fairly.

Confident versus verify, marked.

Act as a research analyst. Give me a structured briefing on [industry or topic] for a client project: the way the industry makes money, the main players and their positioning, the forces reshaping it, and the open debates. Mark clearly where you're confident versus where I must verify with a current source, and do not invent figures.

Consensus, disagreement, traceable.

Synthesise these expert interview notes into findings (anonymised): [paste]. Give me the points of consensus, the genuine disagreements, the non-obvious insights, and the implications for our recommendation. Keep who said what separable so I can trace a claim back.

Five things that matter.

Here is a pile of research and notes for [project]: [paste]. Distil it into the five things that actually matter for the client's decision, drop the interesting-but-irrelevant, and flag the single biggest gap in what we know so far.

Every pattern gets a so-what.

Turn this raw data description into a set of insights, not just observations: [describe the data and any figures I provide]. For each pattern, tell me the 'so what' for the client and what it would mean for the recommendation. Only use the numbers I give you.

Every headline tells the story.

Build a slide-by-slide storyline for a client deck. The core recommendation is [state it], the audience is [describe], and the supporting evidence is [list]. Use a pyramid structure where each slide headline is a full sentence that tells part of the story, so the headlines read as a coherent argument on their own. Give me the headline and the point of each slide.

For the page they'll read.

Turn this long report or analysis into a tight executive summary: [paste]. One page, leading with the recommendation and the three reasons behind it, then the key risks and the ask. Written for a busy executive who will read only this page.

A point, not a label.

Rewrite these weak slide headlines so each one states a point instead of a topic: [paste headlines]. A good headline should be a sentence a reader could agree or disagree with, not a label like 'Market Overview'. Keep them tight and skimmable.

Which slides carry the argument.

I have 40 slides and 20 minutes. Here's the deck outline: [paste]. Tell me which slides carry the argument and belong in the main flow, which should move to an appendix, and the tightest path through the story if I'm cut to ten minutes.

Land it as a decision.

Draft the 'so what' and the recommended next steps to close a deck about [topic]. Make the next steps specific, owned, and time-bound, and make the closing land as a clear decision for the client to make, not a vague summary.

Who could quietly kill it.

Build a stakeholder map for this engagement: [describe the players and dynamics, anonymised]. For each stakeholder, note their likely position, what they care about, their influence, and how I should engage them. Flag who could quietly kill the project and how to bring them along.

Read in thirty seconds.

Draft a weekly client update from these notes: [paste]. Structure it as progress, what's next, decisions or input needed, and any risks. Confident and honest about anything slipping, skimmable, and written so a busy sponsor gets it in thirty seconds.

Clear without the attack.

I need to deliver an unwelcome finding to a client who is invested in the current approach: [describe]. Help me frame it so the message is clear but not an attack, grounded in evidence, and paired with a path forward, so they can hear it without getting defensive.

The point that moves each holdout.

Help me build the case for change to win over a skeptical leadership team. The change is [describe], the resistance is [describe]. Draft the argument in their terms, addressing their specific objections, with the one point most likely to move each holdout.

Where it's most likely to stall.

Draft an implementation roadmap for [initiative]. Break it into phases with the key workstreams, owners, milestones, dependencies, and the early wins to build momentum. Flag the two or three points most likely to stall and what would keep them moving.

Participatory, not a presentation.

Design a half-day client workshop to [objective, e.g. align on priorities]. Give me the agenda with timings, the exercises and how to run each, the outputs, and how to handle a dominant voice or a stalled discussion. Make it participatory, not a presentation.

Practical, not a textbook.

Draft a lightweight change-management plan for [change]. Cover who's affected and how, the communication plan, the likely resistance and how to address it, and how we'll know it's actually sticking. Keep it practical for a mid-size organisation, not a textbook.

Where accountability is doubled up.

Turn this project into a clear RACI and status structure: [describe the workstreams and people]. Lay out who's responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed for each workstream, and flag any activity where accountability is unclear or doubled up.

Repels bad-fit clients too.

Help me sharpen my consulting positioning. I help [who] achieve [what] by [how]. Rewrite it into a clear one-line positioning, three proof points, and a short 'who this is not for', so it repels bad-fit clients as much as it attracts good ones.

Honest, no invented metrics.

Turn this engagement into a case study for my site (anonymised): [paste the situation, my approach, and the result]. Structure it as challenge, approach, outcome, focus on the decisions and the impact, and keep every claim honest with no invented metrics.

A practitioner, not a brochure.

Draft a LinkedIn post sharing one genuine insight from my consulting work on [topic]. Lead with a specific, slightly contrarian observation, back it with reasoning, and end with a question. Sound like a practitioner with a point of view, not a brochure.