technical-roadmaps

Turn an engineering strategy into a written Technical Roadmap Pack (Rumelt-style strategy: Diagnosis/Guiding Policy/Coherent Actions, roadmap table, initiative briefs, and alignment cadence). Use for technical roadmap, tech roadmap, engineering roadmap, architecture roadmap. Category: Engineering.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "technical-roadmaps" with this command: npx skills add liqiongyu/lenny_skills_plus/liqiongyu-lenny-skills-plus-technical-roadmaps

Technical Roadmaps

Scope

Covers

  • Turning “technical work” (architecture, platform, reliability, tech debt) into a written strategy + roadmap that stakeholders can critique and improve.
  • Applying Richard Rumelt’s strategy frame (Diagnosis → Guiding policy → Coherent actions) to engineering planning.
  • Producing a roadmap that is executable (owners, milestones, dependencies, risks, metrics), not a vague wishlist.
  • Aligning a technical roadmap with product/business constraints (quarters, launches, compliance/security, capacity).

When to use

  • “Create a technical/engineering/architecture roadmap for the next 2–4 quarters.”
  • “We need a written technical strategy and a roadmap we can review with leadership.”
  • “We have many tech-debt/platform initiatives; turn them into a prioritized plan with dependencies and milestones.”
  • “Our tech roadmap keeps being misunderstood—write it down so we can debug alignment.”

When NOT to use

  • The problem/outcome is unclear (use problem-definition first).
  • You need to choose which product bets matter most (use prioritizing-roadmap or ai-product-strategy).
  • You only need delivery dates, milestone tracking, and RAG governance (use managing-timelines).
  • You need a deep platform strategy / ecosystem design (use platform-strategy).

Inputs

Minimum required

  • Audience + decision: who this roadmap is for (Eng leadership, Execs, Product) and what decisions it must enable.
  • Time horizon + format: e.g., 6 months / 12 months; Now-Next-Later vs quarterly.
  • Current-state diagnosis inputs: top pain points, reliability/latency/cost signals, incident themes, scaling constraints, key architectural bottlenecks.
  • Constraints: capacity assumptions, compliance/security requirements, platform constraints, non-negotiables.
  • Candidate initiatives: known platform/architecture/tech-debt items (even a rough list).

Missing-info strategy

  • Ask up to 5 questions from references/INTAKE.md.
  • If answers aren’t available, proceed with explicit assumptions and list them under Open questions.

Outputs (deliverables)

Produce a Technical Roadmap Pack in Markdown (in-chat; or as files if the user requests):

  1. Technical Strategy (Rumelt): Diagnosis → Guiding policy → Coherent actions (template: references/TEMPLATES.md)
  2. Roadmap table (Now/Next/Later or quarters) with owners, dependencies, milestones, confidence, and metrics
  3. Initiative briefs for the top 3–6 roadmap items (1 page each)
  4. Dependency + risk register (top cross-team deps, key risks, mitigations)
  5. Alignment + governance plan (review cadence, update rules, decision owners, comms template)
  6. Risks / Open questions / Next steps (always included)

Expanded guidance: references/WORKFLOW.md

Workflow (7 steps)

1) Intake + audience alignment

  • Inputs: User request; references/INTAKE.md.
  • Actions: Confirm the audience, horizon, and roadmap “shape” (quarters vs Now/Next/Later). Identify the decision the roadmap must enable (funding, sequencing, headcount, trade-offs).
  • Outputs: Intake summary + explicit assumptions + open questions list (if any).
  • Checks: You can state: “This roadmap is for <audience> to decide <decision> over <horizon> using <format>.”

2) Write the strategy (Rumelt: Diagnosis → Guiding policy → Coherent actions)

  • Inputs: Current-state signals; constraints; product/business context.
  • Actions: Draft a written strategy using the Rumelt structure. Keep it concrete: name the constraints and trade-offs.
  • Outputs: Technical Strategy section using references/TEMPLATES.md.
  • Checks: A reader can answer: “What’s the problem?”, “What’s our approach?”, “What actions are we taking (and not taking)?”

3) Build the initiative inventory (candidate “coherent actions”)

  • Inputs: Candidate initiative list; strategy; incidents/metrics; architecture notes.
  • Actions: Normalize initiatives into a table (theme, outcome, why now, dependencies, effort, risk). Merge duplicates; split overly broad items.
  • Outputs: Initiative inventory (draft roadmap backlog).
  • Checks: Each item has an outcome + a “why now” tied back to the Diagnosis/Guiding policy.

4) Prioritize + sequence (make trade-offs explicit)

  • Inputs: Inventory; constraints; dependencies; capacity assumptions.
  • Actions: Prioritize based on: (a) alignment to strategy, (b) risk reduction, (c) enabling product work, (d) cost/effort, (e) dependency criticality. Sequence via dependencies and “first unlocks.”
  • Outputs: Ranked list + sequencing rationale + explicit non-goals/cut list.
  • Checks: You can justify the top 3 items in 1–2 sentences each, including what you deprioritized.

5) Convert into a roadmap (quarters or Now/Next/Later) with execution detail

  • Inputs: Ranked list; sequencing; calendar constraints.
  • Actions: Create the roadmap table with owners, milestones, dependencies, confidence, and success metrics. Add “decision gates” where uncertainty is high.
  • Outputs: Roadmap table + milestone highlights.
  • Checks: A team could start execution without guessing owners/dependencies; high-uncertainty items have a gate (spike/RFC/prototype).

6) Draft initiative briefs + alignment plan

  • Inputs: Roadmap; top items; stakeholder map.
  • Actions: Write 1-page briefs for the top 3–6 items and a comms/governance plan (review cadence, update rules, decision owners).
  • Outputs: Initiative briefs + alignment/governance section (templates in references/TEMPLATES.md).
  • Checks: Stakeholders know when/how the roadmap will change and what inputs trigger a refresh.

7) Quality gate + finalize

  • Inputs: Full draft pack.
  • Actions: Run references/CHECKLISTS.md and score with references/RUBRIC.md. Ensure Risks / Open questions / Next steps are present with owners and dates where possible.
  • Outputs: Final Technical Roadmap Pack.
  • Checks: The pack is “debuggable”: written, coherent, measurable, and reviewable.

Quality gate (required)

Examples

Example 1 (platform scaling): “We’re seeing reliability issues and slow delivery. Create a 2-quarter technical roadmap and strategy we can review with leadership.”
Expected: a Rumelt-structured strategy plus a sequenced roadmap with owners, dependencies, milestones, and metrics.

Example 2 (architecture modernization): “We need an architecture roadmap to migrate off a legacy monolith while still shipping product features.”
Expected: explicit trade-offs, dependency-aware sequencing, decision gates, and a governance cadence to keep alignment.

Boundary example: “Write a detailed project plan with dates for every task for the next 6 months.”
Response: use managing-timelines for delivery planning; this skill is for strategy → roadmap (themes/initiatives/milestones), not task-level scheduling.

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

General

measuring-product-market-fit

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

conducting-user-interviews

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

writing-north-star-metrics

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

scoping-cutting

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review