/scenario-compare Skill

Compare multiple scenarios with cost, timeline, complexity, and impact analysis.

When to Use This Skill

Use /scenario-compare when you need to evaluate and compare different architectural options:

• Compare baseline vs proposed scenarios
• Evaluate alternatives (e.g., AWS vs Snowflake BI tool options)
• Create decision matrices for technology choices
• Generate business case analysis
• Create executive briefings comparing options

Usage

/scenario-compare <primary-scenario> [comparisons] [options]

Parameters

Parameter	Description	Required
primary-scenario	Base scenario to compare against	Yes
comparisons	Comma-separated list of comparison scenarios	Yes (≥1)
--metrics	Which metrics to compare (cost, timeline, complexity, impact, risk)	Optional
--stakeholder	Audience (executive, technical, financial)	Optional
--horizon	Time horizon (1yr, 3yr, 5yr)	Optional
--format	Output format (markdown, spreadsheet, presentation)	Optional

Workflow

Phase 1: Define Scenarios

User specifies:

1. Primary scenario (baseline)

   • Can be "current-state" or existing Scenario note
   • Example: [[Scenario - Real-time Analytics Expansion]]

2. Comparison scenarios (alternatives)

   • Comma-separated: "Alternative 1, Alternative 2, Alternative 3"
   • Can be existing notes or user-described scenarios
   • Typically 2-3 alternatives for comparison

3. What to compare (optional)

   • Default: All metrics (cost, timeline, complexity, impact, risk)
   • Options:
     • cost - Setup and ongoing costs
     • timeline - Implementation duration and phases
     • complexity - Technical and operational difficulty
     • impact - Business benefit and risk
     • risk - Technical, organizational, financial risks
     • vendor - Vendor lock-in and independence
     • scalability - Growth potential

Phase 2: Extract Data

The skill:

1. Reads scenario notes

   • Extracts systems involved
   • Extracts costs and timelines
   • Extracts risks and benefits

2. Calculates derived metrics

   • 3-year and 5-year TCO
   • Implementation burn-down
   • Risk scores (0-10)
   • Complexity scores (0-10)

3. Normalizes for comparison

   • Converts all costs to annual equivalent
   • Aligns timeline phases
   • Scores non-numeric factors (1-10 scale)

Phase 3: Generate Comparison

Creates:

1. Comparison Matrix - Side-by-side table
2. Cost Analysis - Chart showing TCO
3. Timeline Gantt - Implementation schedule comparison
4. Complexity Scoring - Radar chart or bar chart
5. Risk Matrix - Impact vs Probability
6. Decision Table - Weighted scoring
7. Recommendation - Pro/con analysis with recommendation

Phase 4: Output

Generates markdown note with:

• Executive summary (1 page)
• Detailed comparison tables
• Charts and visualizations
• Risk analysis
• Go/No-Go decision criteria
• Recommended path forward

Examples

Example 1: Compare Baseline vs Real-time Expansion vs AWS QuickSight

/scenario-compare "current-state" "Real-time Analytics Expansion, AWS QuickSight Option" --metrics all --horizon 5yr

Prompts:

1. Primary scenario: "Current State (Baseline)"
2. Comparison: "Real-time Analytics Expansion"
3. Comparison: "AWS QuickSight Option"
4. Audience: Executive
5. Include risk analysis: Yes

Output: Scenario Comparison - Baseline vs Expansion vs QuickSight.md containing:

• Executive summary (£300K additional cost, £1.1M benefit = 367% ROI)
• 3 scenarios in side-by-side comparison matrix
• Cost breakdown by year (1yr, 3yr, 5yr)
• Timeline Gantt showing implementation phases
• Complexity radar chart (5 dimensions)
• Risk matrix (Probability vs Impact)
• Go/No-Go decision criteria
• Recommendation: "Proceed with Real-time Analytics Expansion"

Example 2: Compare Technologies for Analytics

/scenario-compare "Tableau (Current)" "Looker Option, AWS QuickSight, Alteryx" --metrics cost,complexity,vendor --stakeholder financial

Output: Financial-focused comparison showing:

• Licensing costs (Tableau vs Looker vs QuickSight vs Alteryx)
• Total cost of ownership (3-year)
• Infrastructure costs
• Training costs
• Support costs
• Vendor lock-in analysis
• Recommendation for cost-optimal solution

Example 3: Compare Cloud Providers for Migration

/scenario-compare "AWS (Current)" "Azure Option, GCP Option" --horizon 5yr --metrics cost,complexity,risk

Output: Detailed 5-year analysis including:

• Cloud service costs (compute, storage, networking)
• Migration effort and cost
• Ongoing operational cost
• Complexity (architecture, skills required)
• Risk factors (vendor changes, regional availability)

Comparison Metrics

Cost Analysis

Calculates for each scenario:

Setup Cost
  + Hardware/Infrastructure
  + Software licenses
  + Integration/Migration

Annual Ongoing Cost
  + Compute
  + Storage
  + Licensing
  + Staffing
  - Cost reductions

3-Year TCO = Setup + (Annual × 3)
5-Year TCO = Setup + (Annual × 5)

Creates comparison chart:

• Bar chart (3 scenarios)
• Line chart (cost over 5 years)
• Waterfall chart (cost components)

Timeline Analysis

For each scenario:

1. Implementation phases (Q1, Q2, Q3, etc.)
2. Critical path (longest dependency chain)
3. Resource requirements (headcount per phase)
4. Key milestones (go-live, cutover, stabilization)
5. Risk timeline (points of highest risk)

Creates Gantt chart showing all scenarios aligned.

Complexity Analysis

Scores each scenario on:

1. Technology stack (0-10)

   • Number of new technologies
   • Integration complexity
   • Support skill requirements

2. Operational (0-10)

   • New processes required
   • Monitoring/alerting complexity
   • Disaster recovery planning

3. Vendor dependency (0-10)

   • Single vendor lock-in
   • Integration with existing systems
   • Migration difficulty if switching

4. Data movement (0-10)

   • ETL/ELT complexity
   • Data quality requirements
   • Performance optimization

5. User training (0-10)

   • Number of users impacted
   • Tool learning curve
   • Process change management

Creates radar chart with 5 dimensions.

Risk Analysis

For each scenario:

1. Technical risks (e.g., new technology unproven)
2. Organizational risks (e.g., skill gaps, team capacity)
3. Financial risks (e.g., cost overruns, lower ROI)
4. Schedule risks (e.g., resource unavailability, delays)
5. Vendor risks (e.g., licensing changes, product discontinuation)

Scores each risk:

• Probability (1-5): Unlikely, Possible, Likely, Very Likely, Certain
• Impact (1-5): Negligible, Moderate, Significant, Major, Critical

Creates risk matrix with probability vs impact.

Benefit Analysis

For each scenario:

1. Quantified benefits (£/year)

   • Revenue increase
   • Cost savings
   • Risk reduction
   • Productivity gain

2. Qualitative benefits

   • Competitive advantage
   • User satisfaction
   • Technical debt reduction
   • Flexibility/extensibility

Calculates ROI = (Benefits - Costs) / Costs

Stakeholder Perspectives

The skill tailors output based on stakeholder:

Executive (CFO/CEO)

• Focus: Cost, timeline, business value
• Format: 1-page summary, key metrics, recommendation
• Charts: Cost comparison, ROI, risk heat map
• Decision: Go/No-Go with business case

Technical (CTO/Architecture)

• Focus: Complexity, risk, technical alignment
• Format: Detailed architecture, decision rationale
• Charts: Technology stack comparison, complexity radar
• Decision: Architecture suitability

Financial (Finance Director)

• Focus: 5-year TCO, cash flow, payback period
• Format: Detailed financial analysis, assumptions
• Charts: Cost by year, payback period, NPV
• Decision: Budget allocation

Project (Program Manager)

• Focus: Timeline, resources, milestones, schedule risk
• Format: Detailed Gantt, resource plan, critical path
• Charts: Implementation timeline, burn-down
• Decision: Feasibility and resource needs

Output Sections

Section 1: Executive Summary (1 page)

Recommendation: [Proceed with Scenario X] / [Further evaluation needed] / [Do not proceed]

Key Metrics:
- Setup Cost: £XXX
- Annual Cost: £XXX/year
- Implementation Timeline: X months
- ROI: XXX%
- Payback Period: X months

Top 3 Reasons:
1. [Primary benefit]
2. [Secondary benefit]
3. [Differentiator vs alternatives]

Top 3 Risks:
1. [Primary risk]
2. [Secondary risk]
3. [Mitigation]

Section 2: Comparison Matrix

Table with all scenarios:

• Cost (setup, annual, 3yr, 5yr)
• Timeline (months, phases)
• Complexity (1-10 score)
• Business benefit (quantified)
• Risk level (Low/Medium/High)
• Implementation path

Section 3: Detailed Analysis

For each metric (cost, timeline, complexity, risk):

1. Detailed breakdown
2. Calculation methodology
3. Assumptions
4. Sensitivities (what if cost is +20%?)

Section 4: Go/No-Go Criteria

Decision gates:

| Criterion | Required | Status | Notes |
|-----------|----------|--------|-------|
| Budget approval | ✓ | ❓ TBD | Need £XXX |
| Resources available | ✓ | ❓ TBD | Need X engineers |
| Executive sponsorship | ✓ | ❓ TBD | Pending approval |
| Technology readiness | ✓ | ✅ Ready | All technologies proven |
| Business case | ✓ | ✅ Strong | £X ROI justifies cost |

Section 5: Risk Mitigation

For each risk identified:

1. Probability
2. Impact
3. Mitigation strategy
4. Contingency plan
5. Owners

Section 6: Recommendation

Final recommendation with:

1. Primary recommendation (which scenario)
2. Rationale (why this one)
3. Prerequisites (what must be true)
4. Timeline for decision
5. Next steps if approved
6. Next steps if rejected

Options

Filter Metrics

/scenario-compare "baseline" "alternative" --metrics cost,timeline

Show only specific metrics for focused comparison.

Time Horizon

/scenario-compare "baseline" "alternative" --horizon 5yr

Calculate TCO over 1yr, 3yr, 5yr, or 10yr.

Detail Level

/scenario-compare "baseline" "alternative" --detail executive

• executive - 1-page summary, high-level metrics
• detailed - Full analysis with assumptions
• comprehensive - Include all sensitivities and scenarios

Include Sensitivities

/scenario-compare "baseline" "alternative" --sensitivities yes

Show impact of ±20% cost, ±3-month schedule, etc.

Comparison Weighting

/scenario-compare "baseline" "alternative" --weights "cost:40, timeline:30, risk:30"

Custom weighting for Go/No-Go score calculation.

Integration with Other Skills

The /scenario-compare skill works with:

• /diagram - Generate before/after diagrams for scenarios
• /impact-analysis - Analyze detailed impacts
• /architecture-report - Include comparison in architecture documentation
• /cost-optimization - Identify cost savings across scenarios

Output Format Examples

Cost Comparison Chart

Scenario          Setup    Annual   3-Year TCO   5-Year TCO
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Baseline          £0       £10.9M   £32.7M       £54.5M
Proposed          £234K    £11.2M   £34.0M       £56.4M
Alternative       £280K    £11.4M   £34.9M       £57.9M

Timeline Gantt

2026 Timeline
Q1 │Q2 │Q3 │Q4 │
─────────────────
[Baseline - No change ongoing ─────────────────────►]
[Proposed ─ Streamlit ─┬─ Looker ─┬─ Scale ──►]
[Alternative ─ QuickSight ─┬─ Decom ─►]

Risk Matrix

         Impact
         Low  Medium  High
P    Low  ●
r         ●    ●
o  Medium      ●
b         ●
High      ●

Error Handling

If comparison fails:

1. Check scenarios exist
2. Suggest creating missing scenarios
3. Offer to compare vs. textual descriptions
4. Fall back to simple comparison matrix (text only)

Examples from This Vault

• [[Canvas - Scenario Comparison]] - Baseline vs Expansion vs QuickSight
• [[Scenario - Real-time Analytics Expansion]] - Proposed scenario details

Next Steps

After creating scenario comparison:

1. Share comparison with stakeholders
2. Collect feedback on weightings
3. Conduct go/no-go decision meeting
4. If approved: Create implementation plan (/project <scenario>)
5. If rejected: Archive scenario with rejection reason (/archive)

---

Invoke with: /scenario-compare <baseline> <alternatives>

Example: /scenario-compare "current-state" "Real-time Expansion, AWS QuickSight" → Generates detailed comparison