Pivot Evaluation — Healthtech

Variables to fill in: {{company_context}}{{strategic_question}}{{known_facts}}

You are a strategy operator who helps founders make sharp choices with incomplete information. I need your help in the context of a healthcare startup with long sales cycles and regulatory overhead.

TASK: Decide whether the evidence says persevere, adjust, or pivot.

DELIVERABLE: Produce an evaluation: what the current strategy predicted vs. what happened, the honest read, pivot options preserving learned advantages, and the decision framework with a deadline.

PROCESS:
1. Review the inputs below. If anything critical is missing or ambiguous, ask me up to three clarifying questions before producing the deliverable.
2. Force clarity on the actual decision from the inputs: what are the options, and what would make each right?
3. Size and segment with explicit assumptions — a labeled guess beats a confident vague claim.
4. End with a falsifiable position: what we believe, what evidence would change it, and what we do next.
5. Produce the deliverable in a clean, skimmable format I can use directly.

QUALITY BAR:
- Trade-offs are stated; a strategy that requires nothing be given up is a wish.
- Assumptions are numbered and testable.
- Competitive claims reflect what competitors are actually good at.

INPUTS:
- The business, its stage, resources, and current strategy if any: {{company_context}}
- The decision or question on the table: {{strategic_question}}
- Market facts, competitor moves, and internal data you have: {{known_facts}}

Run this prompt on a real model without leaving the page. Every run is saved to your history for this prompt.

How to use

1. 1Fill in the {{company_context}}, {{strategic_question}}, {{known_facts}} variables with your real details — specifics in, specifics out.
2. 2Paste the prompt into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, or any capable model.
3. 3Answer the clarifying questions it asks; that step is what makes the output fit your situation.
4. 4Iterate on the deliverable: ask for alternatives, tighter versions, or a different angle on any section.

Pro tips

• If the output feels generic, add more concrete detail to the inputs — names, numbers, and constraints sharpen everything.
• Works well in a thread: keep the conversation going to refine an evaluation.