Skip to main content
NEW · APP STORE Now on iOS · macOS · iPad Android & Windows soon GET IT
Prompts McKinsey Strategy Decision Analyzer Framework

general user analysis template risk: low

McKinsey Strategy Decision Analyzer Framework

The prompt directs the model to act as a McKinsey Strategy Consultant and Game Theorist, performing a multidimensional analysis of a decision between options using Opportunity Cost…

PROMPT 

ROLE: Act as a McKinsey Strategy Consultant and Game Theorist.

SITUATION: I must choose between ${option_a} and ${option_b} (or more).
ADDITIONAL CONTEXT: [INSERT DETAILS, FEARS, GOALS].

TASK: Perform a multidimensional analysis of the decision.

ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK:

Opportunity Cost: What do I irretrievably sacrifice with each option?

Second and Third Order Analysis: If I choose A, what will happen in 10 minutes, 10 months, and 10 years? Do the same for B.

Regret Matrix: Which option will minimize my future regret if things go wrong?

Devil's Advocate: Ruthlessly attack my currently preferred option to see if it withstands scrutiny.

Verdict: Based on logic (not emotion), what is the optimal mathematical/strategic recommendation?

INPUTS

option_a REQUIRED

First decision option

e.g. buy the house

option_b REQUIRED

Second decision option

e.g. rent an apartment

additional_context REQUIRED

Details, fears, and goals relevant to the decision

e.g. I fear market crash, goal is long-term stability

REQUIRED CONTEXT

  • descriptions of decision options
  • additional context including details, fears, goals

ROLES & RULES

Role assignments

  • Act as a McKinsey Strategy Consultant and Game Theorist.

EXPECTED OUTPUT

Format
structured_report
Schema
markdown_sections · Opportunity Cost, Second and Third Order Analysis, Regret Matrix, Devil's Advocate, Verdict
Constraints
  • Structure output using ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK sections: Opportunity Cost, Second and Third Order Analysis, Regret Matrix, Devil's Advocate, Verdict
  • Base Verdict on logic not emotion

SUCCESS CRITERIA

  • Perform a multidimensional analysis of the decision.
  • Analyze opportunity cost for each option.
  • Conduct second and third order analysis for each option.
  • Evaluate regret matrix.
  • Act as devil's advocate on preferred option.
  • Provide logic-based verdict.

FAILURE MODES

  • May incorporate emotion into verdict.
  • Might insufficiently explore long-term effects.
  • Could fail to ruthlessly challenge preferred option.

CAVEATS

Dependencies
  • Requires values for ${option_a} and ${option_b}
  • Requires additional context details, fears, and goals.
Missing context
  • Explicit output format (e.g., headings for sections).
  • Handling instructions for cases with more than two options.
Ambiguities
  • Framework assumes binary choice (A and B) despite situation allowing 'or more' options.
  • 'Multidimensional analysis' not precisely defined beyond listed framework elements.

QUALITY

OVERALL
0.90
CLARITY
0.95
SPECIFICITY
0.90
REUSABILITY
0.95
COMPLETENESS
0.85

IMPROVEMENT SUGGESTIONS

  • Add 'Structure your response with clear headings for each framework section.'
  • Modify framework to 'For each option (A, B, etc.), perform...' to handle multiple options.
  • Explicitly include game theory elements like 'Payoff matrix or Nash equilibrium analysis' in the framework.

USAGE

Copy the prompt above and paste it into your AI of choice — Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or anywhere else you're working. Replace any placeholder sections with your own context, then ask for the output.

MORE FOR GENERAL USER