$npx -y skills add aitytech/agentkits-marketing --skill problem-solvingApply systematic problem-solving techniques for marketing challenges including campaign complexity (simplification cascades), creative blocks (collision-zone thinking), recurring campaign patterns (meta-pattern recognition), assumption constraints (inversion exercise), audience s
| 1 | # Marketing Problem-Solving |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Systematic techniques for solving complex marketing challenges, breaking through creative blocks, and optimizing campaigns. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | ## Language & Quality Standards |
| 6 | |
| 7 | **CRITICAL**: Respond in the same language the user is using. If Vietnamese, respond in Vietnamese. If Spanish, respond in Spanish. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | **Standards**: Token efficiency, sacrifice grammar for concision, list unresolved questions at end. |
| 10 | |
| 11 | --- |
| 12 | |
| 13 | ## When to Use This Skill |
| 14 | |
| 15 | Apply problem-solving techniques when facing: |
| 16 | - **Campaign Complexity Spirals** - Campaign keeps adding features/channels, becoming unwieldy |
| 17 | - **Creative Innovation Blocks** - Stuck in conventional approaches, need breakthrough ideas |
| 18 | - **Recurring Campaign Patterns** - Same issues appearing across multiple campaigns |
| 19 | - **Assumption Constraints** - Limited by industry "truths" or conventional wisdom |
| 20 | - **Audience Scale Uncertainty** - Unclear how strategy scales from niche to mass market |
| 21 | - **General Stuckness** - Progress halted, unclear how to move forward |
| 22 | |
| 23 | ## Core Techniques |
| 24 | |
| 25 | ### 1. Simplification Cascades |
| 26 | **Problem:** Campaign complexity spiraling out of control |
| 27 | |
| 28 | **When to use:** |
| 29 | - Campaign has too many channels, messages, or touchpoints |
| 30 | - Team overwhelmed by execution complexity |
| 31 | - Budget spread too thin across tactics |
| 32 | - Message diluted across too many variations |
| 33 | |
| 34 | **How it works:** |
| 35 | 1. List all campaign elements (channels, messages, segments, assets) |
| 36 | 2. Identify the 20% that drives 80% of results |
| 37 | 3. Ruthlessly cut the rest |
| 38 | 4. Reassess and repeat if still complex |
| 39 | |
| 40 | **Marketing example:** |
| 41 | ``` |
| 42 | Problem: Product launch campaign across 8 channels, 15 assets, 4 segments |
| 43 | ↓ Simplification Round 1 |
| 44 | Focus: Top 3 channels (email, LinkedIn, blog), 6 core assets, 2 key segments |
| 45 | ↓ Simplification Round 2 |
| 46 | Core: Email + LinkedIn, 3 assets (landing page, case study, email sequence), 1 primary segment |
| 47 | Result: Focused execution, better results, manageable workload |
| 48 | ``` |
| 49 | |
| 50 | **See:** `./references/simplification-cascades.md` |
| 51 | |
| 52 | --- |
| 53 | |
| 54 | ### 2. Collision-Zone Thinking |
| 55 | **Problem:** Creative blocks, conventional approaches not working |
| 56 | |
| 57 | **When to use:** |
| 58 | - Campaign ideas feel generic or uninspired |
| 59 | - Competitor campaigns all look similar |
| 60 | - Need differentiation and breakthrough positioning |
| 61 | - Stuck in industry best practices that don't work |
| 62 | |
| 63 | **How it works:** |
| 64 | 1. Identify two unrelated domains/industries |
| 65 | 2. Force collision: "What if [industry A] met [industry B]?" |
| 66 | 3. Extract unexpected insights |
| 67 | 4. Apply to your marketing challenge |
| 68 | |
| 69 | **Marketing example:** |
| 70 | ``` |
| 71 | Challenge: B2B SaaS email campaign feels boring |
| 72 | Collision: "What if enterprise software marketing met sneaker drops?" |
| 73 | Insights: Scarcity, hype, exclusive access, community building |
| 74 | Application: Limited beta access campaign, waitlist with perks, exclusive Slack community |
| 75 | Result: 3x higher engagement, viral social sharing |
| 76 | ``` |
| 77 | |
| 78 | **See:** `./references/collision-zone-thinking.md` |
| 79 | |
| 80 | --- |
| 81 | |
| 82 | ### 3. Meta-Pattern Recognition |
| 83 | **Problem:** Same issues recurring across campaigns |
| 84 | |
| 85 | **When to use:** |
| 86 | - Different campaigns failing in similar ways |
| 87 | - Repeated performance issues across channels |
| 88 | - Team making same mistakes |
| 89 | - Need to identify root cause vs symptoms |
| 90 | |
| 91 | **How it works:** |
| 92 | 1. Document 3+ instances of similar failures |
| 93 | 2. Look for deeper pattern beneath surface issues |
| 94 | 3. Address root cause, not symptoms |
| 95 | 4. Create system to prevent recurrence |
| 96 | |
| 97 | **Marketing example:** |
| 98 | ``` |
| 99 | Surface problems: |
| 100 | - Email campaign: Low open rates |
| 101 | - Social campaign: Low engagement |
| 102 | - Content campaign: Low traffic |
| 103 | |
| 104 | Meta-pattern discovered: Weak audience understanding |
| 105 | Root cause: No buyer persona research or validation |
| 106 | Solution: Comprehensive persona development process |
| 107 | Prevention: Mandatory persona validation before any campaign |
| 108 | ``` |
| 109 | |
| 110 | **See:** `./references/meta-pattern-recognition.md` |
| 111 | |
| 112 | --- |
| 113 | |
| 114 | ### 4. Inversion Exercise |
| 115 | **Problem:** Constrained by industry assumptions or "best practices" |
| 116 | |
| 117 | **When to use:** |
| 118 | - Conventional approaches failing |
| 119 | - Industry "rules" limiting creativity |
| 120 | - Need to challenge assumptions |
| 121 | - Market leader doing opposite of conventional wisdom |
| 122 | |
| 123 | **How it works:** |
| 124 | 1. State current assumption: "We must do |