Signature Frameworks Studio
You have done the work. The harder part is saying what you do in a form a CEO, a hiring manager, or a colleague can repeat in a meeting you are not in.
The studio interviews you about your real experience, then drafts two distinct versions of your framework, a LinkedIn post, a talk opening, and a 20-second answer to "what do you do?", all in your voice.
1. The problem the studio solves
Most senior operators I talk with can describe a decade of results. Fewer can describe the way they think in a sentence someone else can pass along.
That gap shows up in predictable places. A recruiter skims your profile and files you under a job title rather than a problem you solve. A CEO reads your post and agrees with it, but cannot say what you would do differently from the last consultant. Your own team describes your approach three different ways.
Generic AI writing makes this worse. When you ask a model for a framework from a blank prompt, you get a tidy, plausible model that could belong to anyone. It has no stories in it, no proof, and no point of view, and readers can tell.
The studio starts from a different place. Your experience is the raw material, and the model's job is to shape it.
2. What the studio is
A guided interview plus a drafting engine. You answer questions about your work in your own words, and the studio turns your answers into frameworks that carry your examples, your language, and your proof.
It rests on one belief: you own the point of view, you write the first draft, and you make the final call. AI sharpens original thinking and takes on the busywork. It does not supply the thinking.
The practical consequences of that belief:
It asks before it writes. Drafts come from your answers, not from the model's general knowledge.
It flags what it cannot source. Any gap is marked "Need from you" rather than filled with an invented story, number, or client.
It checks every draft against a written set of voice rules before you see it.
3. How it works
Step 1: Interview. Four sections of questions: a foundation section about who you are to your audience, then up to three territories you want to be known for. Answer in any order and in as many sittings as you need. Rough answers are fine. Specifics matter more than polish.
Step 2: Sharpen. For any thin answer, the studio asks the follow-up a good interviewer would: who said what, what happened next, what number, what you would do differently now.
Step 3: Draft. The studio produces two versions of each framework, built to be different from each other:
Version A, The Diagnostic. A question-led sequence. The framework is the ordered set of questions you ask to find out what is actually wrong, with what a wrong answer tells you. It suits a story-led LinkedIn audience.
Version B, The Map. A layered model of where a problem can live, with the symptoms, the usual misdiagnosis, and the better move for each layer. It is built so a recruiter or hiring panel could repeat it in a debrief.
You choose one, combine them, or send notes back for a rewrite.
4. What you get
For each territory you complete:
A framework name and a one-line promise
What leaders usually get wrong, in their own words
A model with three to five parts
How you apply it in the first 30 days
Proof points drawn from your answers
The problem I solve, in one sentence someone can repeat
Why hire me, in two sentences grounded in proof
A LinkedIn post of 150 to 300 words
A 30 to 45 second talk opening
A 20-second answer to "what do you do?"
Up to three questions that would sharpen the framework further
5. When to use it
The studio fits when:
You are moving from operator to advisor and need a positioning that is not a job title.
You are in a job search and want hiring managers to remember a point of view as well as a résumé.
You are preparing a keynote, panel, or roundtable and want a spine for the talk.
You have a recurring problem you solve and have not yet named how you solve it.
Your LinkedIn posts get reactions from peers but not conversations with buyers.
It fits less well when you want content produced with no input from you. The output is only as specific as your answers.
6. Who it is for
Experienced marketing, product, growth, and operating leaders who have a track record and want a distinct, defensible way to describe it. It works best if you can point to real examples: a decision you changed, a team you built, a number you moved, an argument you had to win.
7. Run it yourself: the prompt kit
You can use the studio as is, or run the same method in any Claude conversation with the prompts below. Replace everything in [brackets]. Run them in order, in one conversation, so the model keeps your answers in context.
Prompt 1: Set the context
You are helping me build a signature framework from my real experience. I will answer interview questions in my own words. Write only from my answers and the facts below. If something is missing, write [Need from me: what is missing] rather than inventing it.
MY BACKGROUND (facts you may use): [Roles, companies, years, teams built, results you are comfortable sharing publicly. Do not include anything confidential.]
MY AUDIENCE: [Who reads this: roles, company stage and size, what is on their mind, what frustrates them, what they are skeptical of.]
WHAT I BELIEVE ABOUT AI AND MY WORK: [One or two sentences. Example: I own the point of view and make the final call. AI sharpens my thinking and handles the busywork.]
Do not start the interview yet. Confirm you have this, then wait.
Prompt 2: The interview
Ask the model to run it one question at a time. Then answer in your own words.
Interview me, one question at a time. After each answer, tell me in one line whether it is specific enough. If it is thin, ask one follow-up that pulls out the moment: who said what, what happened next, a number, a phrase I used, what I would do differently now. Move on only when I say so.
Start with these foundation questions, then continue into my territory.
- In 12 months, what three things do I want a CEO, CMO, or recruiter to say about me when my name comes up?
- Think of the last time an executive team was stuck and I was the person they leaned on. What was the situation the week before they reached out?
- What do hiring managers miss or get wrong about my background?
- What are my strongest proof points: launches, revenue or conversion changes, teams built, functions started? (Numbers only if I can share them publicly.)
- What did an earlier chapter of my career teach me that shows up in how I diagnose problems or explain them to executives?
- What do I disagree with in how advice in my field is usually given?
- What phrases do I use often that people repeat back to me?
- Picture the person who reads my post and thinks "I need to call her." What is their role, company stage, and what is on their mind that morning?
TERRITORY: [Name the topic you want to be known for, for example "why companies misdiagnose messaging problems".] My starting hypothesis (push on it): [One or two sentences, rough is fine.]
Territory questions to ask me:
- Where is my hypothesis wrong, too tidy, or missing something I have seen?
- Tell me about a time a company thought it had one problem and it turned out to be another. What was the symptom, who asked for the fix, and what was underneath?
- In the first two weeks of a new engagement, how do I tell the problem types apart? What do I look at first and who do I talk to?
- What does the misdiagnosis sound like in an executive's own words? Give three real sentences.
- What happens to a company that fixes the wrong thing? What does it cost?
- What is the first thing I hand over that makes a CEO say "yes, that is it"?
- Which existing frameworks do I borrow from, and where do I disagree with them?
Prompt 3: Flesh out a thin answer
Here is the question and my answer. Question: [paste] My answer: [paste]
Give me one or two short follow-up questions that pull out the specific moment: who said what, what happened next, a number, a phrase I used, what I would do differently. If the answer is already specific, tell me in one line what makes it strong and ask one question that goes deeper. Plain text, under 70 words.
Prompt 4: Draft Version A, The Diagnostic
Using only my interview answers and background facts, draft Version A: The Diagnostic.
The framework is the ordered sequence of questions I ask to find out what is actually wrong. Name it for the diagnosis. Each part of the model is one question or check, with what a wrong answer tells you. Open from one real moment in my answers, as a storyteller would.
Return:
- Name (2 to 5 words, plain and memorable) and a one-line promise
- What leaders get wrong, in their own words (2 to 3 sentences)
- The model (3 to 5 parts, 1 to 2 sentences each)
- How I apply it in the first 30 days (3 to 4 sentences)
- Proof points from my answers, or [Need from me: ...]
- The problem I solve, in one sentence a CEO or recruiter could repeat
- Why hire me, in two sentences grounded in proof
- Up to three questions that would sharpen this further
Use my phrasing where it is strong. Apply the voice rules below.
[Paste the voice rules from section 8]
Prompt 5: Draft Version B, The Map
Now draft Version B: The Map. It must differ from Version A in name, structure, hook, and metaphor.
The framework is a named map of where the problem can live: layers, zones, or stages. For each, give the symptoms, the usual misdiagnosis, and what to do instead. It should be crisp enough that a recruiter or hiring panel could repeat it in a debrief.
Return the same fields as Version A. Apply the same voice rules and the same sourcing rule.
Prompt 6: Revise
Here is my note on your draft: [what is off: a word that is not mine, a weak proof point, the whole angle]. Apply it and keep what I did not object to. Do not add facts I have not given you.
Prompt 7: Turn the framework into content
From the framework I chose, write:
- A LinkedIn post of 150 to 300 words. Open with a tension hook that challenges the obvious framing without clickbait. Short prose paragraphs with one short numbered or bulleted section in the middle. Use my own work as the evidence. End with a practical takeaway for Monday, not a rhetorical question.
- A talk opening of 30 to 45 seconds, spoken and conversational, with one concrete example. Light humor is fine if it is warm and never aimed at other people.
- A 20-second answer to "what do you do?"
Mark anything you could not source from my answers as [Need from me: ...].
The voice rules
These rules are what keeps the output sounding like a person. Edit them to match how you write, then paste them into Prompts 4 and 5.
VOICE RULES
- Concise and senior. Warm but brief. At most one enthusiasm word per piece.
- Plain, grounded words: figure out, build, the customer, actually. [Add your own words for what gets in the way, for example friction, the rub, disconnects.]
- Make points with contrast: "X rather than Y", "not just X, but Y". Reframe the stated problem into the one underneath.
- Connect related ideas in one sentence rather than choppy fragment pairs.
- Describe other companies as observed patterns, not verdicts. Avoid sweeping absolutes.
- Use calibrated certainty: "I think", "My initial read is", "I would want to validate".
- Anchor every claim in my real experience. Do not invent a story, number, quote, client, or result. If proof is missing, write [Need from me: ...].
- No em dashes. At most one exclamation point in a piece, and none in LinkedIn posts.
- Avoid: leverage, synergies, best-in-class, game changer, move the needle, lean into, thought leadership, seamless, robust, innovative, unlock, delve, circle back, passionate, "Excited to share", and intensifiers such as very, truly, incredibly.
- [Add words and habits you dislike.]
Script templates
Fill these in after you have chosen a framework. They are short on purpose.
The 20-second answer
I help [who] with [the problem they have]. Most of them think it is [the stated problem], and what I usually find is [the underlying problem]. I use [framework name] to figure out which one it is, and I have done that at [one or two proof points].
The talk opening (30 to 45 seconds, spoken)
[A specific moment: where you were, who said what.] At the time I thought [what you assumed]. What I figured out later was [the reframe]. That is what I want to walk through today, because I think a lot of us are solving [stated problem] when the thing in the way is [underlying problem].
The LinkedIn post skeleton
Line 1 (hook): [A specific moment or a claim that challenges the obvious framing.] Line 2 (re-hook): [The tension, or why the usual answer is off.]
Context: [Who, where, what was at stake. 2 to 3 sentences.]
The insight: [The reframe in your words.]
[A short numbered or bulleted section: the 3 to 5 parts of your model.]
The business consequence: [What it costs to fix the wrong thing.]
Put into practice: [One practical thing the reader can do this week.]
10. Common questions
Do I need to be a marketer to use it? No. The questions and prompts are built around marketing, product, and growth leadership, but the method of interviewing first and drafting second works for any senior operator. Swap in questions from your own field.
How long does it take? About 30 minutes for the foundation section and 5 minutes for each territory.
Will the output sound like AI? It sounds as much like you as your answers do. The studio uses your phrasing where it is strong, and it checks drafts against your voice rules. Vague answers produce vague frameworks, which is why the sharpening step exists.
Does it make things up? It is instructed not to. Anything it cannot source from your answers is marked "Need from you". Review every proof point before you publish, because you are the only one who knows what is true.
What happens to my answers? The studio saves answers in the browser and in the studio's own database.
Is this a replacement for working with an advisor? No. It gets you a clear first version of your point of view. Pressure-testing it against a real business problem is a separate piece of work.
About Dewey Strategic Advisory
Dewey Strategic Advisory helps businesses make sense of complex growth, positioning, and go-to-market problems. My view is that the problem you are trying to solve may not be the problem you actually have.
Before starting the firm I spent 15+ years in marketing and product marketing at Thumbtack, Zillow, Remitly, and Enova, including building and leading an 18-person Product Marketing, B2B, and Partnerships Marketing organization. I built this studio because I kept seeing strong operators who could not describe their own approach, and I was one of them.
Want to talk through your framework with me?