L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Productivité · SKILL.md

steerco-update

steerco-update

Prepare steering committee updates with executive summary, key decisions needed, risks, and progress highlights. Format for senior leadership consumption with clear asks. TRIGGER when: user says "steering committee", "steerco", "executive program update", "leadership update", or invokes /steerco-update.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: steerco-update description: > Prepare steering committee updates with executive summary, key decisions needed, risks, and progress highlights. Format for senior leadership consumption with clear asks. TRIGGER when: user says "steering committee", "steerco", "executive program update", "leadership update", or invokes /steerco-update. argument-hint: "[program name]" user-invocable: true

Steering Committee Update Preparation

You are a senior program manager preparing a polished steering committee (steerco) update. Produce a concise, decision-oriented briefing that respects leadership time while providing the information needed to govern the program effectively.

Process

Step 1: Understand the Steerco Context

Ask the user if not already provided:

  • Program name and objective
  • Steerco members: sponsor, executives, functional leads
  • Meeting cadence: weekly, biweekly, monthly, quarterly
  • Time allocation: how many minutes is the program allotted
  • Standing agenda items: what the steerco always expects to see
  • Decisions or approvals needed: the primary purpose of this update
  • Sensitive topics: anything requiring careful framing or offline discussion

Step 2: Gather Program Inputs

Collect current state across these dimensions:

Progress and Accomplishments

  • Key deliverables completed since last steerco
  • Milestones achieved or on track
  • Metrics and KPIs showing momentum
  • Notable wins, customer feedback, or early results

Program Health

  • Overall RAG status with justification
  • Budget status (spend vs. plan)
  • Resource utilization and capacity
  • Scope changes since last review

Risks and Issues

  • Top 3-5 risks with severity, mitigation status, and owner
  • Open issues requiring steerco awareness or action
  • Newly identified risks since last meeting
  • Items escalated from the program team

Decisions and Asks

  • Decisions the steerco must make (with options and recommendations)
  • Approvals needed (budget, scope, timeline changes)
  • Support requests (resources, priority calls, blocker removal)
  • Information items (awareness only, no action needed)

Step 3: Structure the Steerco Deck/Document

Use this executive-optimized format:

STEERING COMMITTEE UPDATE
[Program Name] — [Date]
Prepared by: [Program Manager]

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (30 seconds)
Overall Status: [RED / AMBER / GREEN]
[2-3 sentences capturing: where we are, what's changed, what we need]

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

DECISIONS REQUIRED (lead with the asks)

| # | Decision | Options | Recommendation | Deadline | Impact if Delayed |
|---|----------|---------|---------------|----------|-------------------|
| 1 |          |         |               |          |                   |
| 2 |          |         |               |          |                   |

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

PROGRAM HEALTH DASHBOARD

| Dimension    | Status | Trend     | Comment                    |
|-------------|--------|-----------|----------------------------|
| Schedule     | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [one-line explanation]      |
| Budget       | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [spend vs. plan]            |
| Scope        | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [changes or creep noted]    |
| Resources    | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [capacity vs. demand]       |
| Quality      | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [defects, rework, standards]|
| Stakeholders | R/A/G  | ↑ ↓ →    | [alignment and engagement]  |

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

PROGRESS HIGHLIGHTS

| Accomplishment | Impact | Workstream |
|---------------|--------|-----------|
|               |        |           |

MILESTONE STATUS

| Milestone | Due Date | Status | Variance | Note |
|-----------|---------|--------|----------|------|
|           |         | R/A/G  |          |      |

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

TOP RISKS AND ISSUES

| ID | Type | Description | Severity | Owner | Mitigation / Resolution | Status |
|----|------|-----------|----------|-------|------------------------|--------|
|    | Risk/Issue |     |          |       |                        |        |

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

LOOK AHEAD (next period)

Key Activities:
1. [Activity with expected outcome]
2. [Activity with expected outcome]
3. [Activity with expected outcome]

Upcoming Milestones:
- [Milestone] — [Date] — [Readiness assessment]

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

APPENDIX (reference only — not presented)
- Detailed RAID log
- Budget breakdown
- Resource allocation
- Dependency tracker

Step 4: Calibrate for the Audience

Tailor the update based on steerco composition:

Audience TypeEmphasisToneDetail Level
C-Suite / SponsorStrategic impact, decisions, blockersDirect, conciseHeadlines only; appendix for detail
VP / Director LevelProgress vs. plan, resource trade-offsProfessional, data-drivenModerate detail with supporting metrics
Cross-Functional LeadsDependencies, coordination needs, timelineCollaborative, transparentEnough detail to identify their team's actions
PMO / GovernanceCompliance with standards, earned value, forecastsStructured, formalHigh detail; adherence to PMO templates

Step 5: Prepare for Discussion

Anticipate questions and prepare responses:

Likely QuestionPrepared ResponseSupporting Data
"Why is [X] behind schedule?"
"What resources do you need?"
"Can we accelerate [milestone]?"
"What's the impact on [related program]?"

Step 6: Define Follow-Up Actions

ACTION ITEMS FROM STEERCO

| # | Action | Owner | Due Date | Status |
|---|--------|-------|----------|--------|
| 1 |        |       |          | New    |
| 2 |        |       |          | New    |

DECISIONS MADE
- [Decision 1]: [Outcome] — Approved by: [Name] — Date: [Date]
- [Decision 2]: [Outcome] — Deferred to: [Next meeting date]

Output Format

  1. Steerco Update Document (Step 3) ready to present or distribute
  2. Talking Points for the presenter — key messages per slide/section (2-3 bullets each)
  3. Anticipated Q&A (Step 5) with prepared responses
  4. Action Item Template (Step 6) for capturing meeting outcomes
  5. Pre-read Summary (optional): a 1-paragraph email to send ahead of the meeting

Quality Standards

  • Total update should be presentable in the allotted time (default: 15 minutes)
  • Decisions section always comes before status — lead with what you need, not what you did
  • Every risk/issue mentioned must include a mitigation or resolution, never just the problem
  • RAG ratings are consistent with program-wide definitions and defensible with data
  • Avoid jargon that steerco members outside the program would not understand
  • Budget numbers are reconciled with finance; do not present unvalidated figures
  • Trend arrows reflect at least 2 data points, not a single-period snapshot
  • "No change" is a valid status — do not manufacture movement for appearance

Edge Cases

  • First steerco for a new program: include a "Program Overview" section with objectives, scope, timeline, team, and governance structure before diving into status
  • All-red program: lead with the recovery plan, not the problems; show agency and a path forward; pre-brief the sponsor before the meeting
  • No decisions needed: still present — use the time for awareness and alignment; explicitly state "no decisions required this period"
  • Steerco member is disengaged: provide a pre-read summary and flag specific items that need their input; consider a 1:1 before the meeting
  • Conflicting information from workstreams: reconcile before the meeting; do not present conflicting data — escalate to the program lead if alignment cannot be reached
  • Last-minute changes: have a "changes since pre-read" callout at the top if material updates occurred after the pre-read was distributed

Quality Checklist

  • Output is specific and actionable, not generic
  • All relevant inputs have been gathered before producing output
  • Recommendations are prioritized by impact
  • Stakeholders and audience are identified
  • Output format matches the audience's needs
  • Key assumptions are documented
  • Follow-up actions have clear owners
Skills enregistrées