Files
claude-code-skills-reference/deep-research/references/enterprise_analysis_frameworks.md
daymade 6d261ce801 feat(deep-research): V6.1 source accessibility policy and Counter-Review Team
- Correct source accessibility: distinguish circular verification (forbidden)
  from exclusive information advantage (encouraged)
- Add Counter-Review Team with 5 specialized agents (claim-validator,
  source-diversity-checker, recency-validator, contradiction-finder,
  counter-review-coordinator)
- Add Enterprise Research Mode: 6-dimension data collection framework
  with SWOT, competitive barrier, and risk matrix analysis
- Update version to 2.4.0
- Add comprehensive reference docs:
  - source_accessibility_policy.md
  - V6_1_improvements.md
  - counter_review_team_guide.md
  - enterprise_analysis_frameworks.md
  - enterprise_quality_checklist.md
  - enterprise_research_methodology.md
  - quality_gates.md
  - report_template_v6.md
  - research_notes_format.md
  - subagent_prompt.md

Based on "深度推理" case study methodology lessons learned.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-04 09:15:17 +08:00

136 lines
6.2 KiB
Markdown
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# Enterprise Analysis Frameworks
Apply these frameworks after completing the six-dimension data collection. Execute in order: SWOT → Competitive Barriers → Risk Matrix → Comprehensive Scoring.
## SWOT Analysis Template
Each SWOT entry MUST include evidence and source attribution.
```
| | Positive Factors | Negative Factors |
|--------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|
| **Internal** | **S (Strengths)** | **W (Weaknesses)** |
| | 1. {description} | 1. {description} |
| | • Evidence: {data/fact} | • Evidence: {data/fact} |
| | • Source: {citation} | • Source: {citation} |
| | • Impact: {assessment} | • Impact: {assessment} |
| | | |
| **External** | **O (Opportunities)** | **T (Threats)** |
| | 1. {description} | 1. {description} |
| | • Evidence: {trend/policy} | • Evidence: {pressure/risk} |
| | • Source: {citation} | • Source: {citation} |
| | • Probability: {assessment} | • Probability: {assessment} |
| | • Impact: {assessment} | • Impact: {assessment} |
```
**Requirements**:
- Each quadrant: 3-5 entries minimum
- Every entry must have evidence with source
- S/W must be data-backed (not opinions)
- O/T must include probability and impact estimates
**Strategic Implications Matrix** (generate after SWOT):
- **SO Strategy** (leverage strengths to capture opportunities): 1-2 specific recommendations
- **WO Strategy** (overcome weaknesses to seize opportunities): 1-2 specific recommendations
- **ST Strategy** (use strengths to counter threats): 1-2 specific recommendations
- **WT Strategy** (mitigate weaknesses to avoid threats): 1-2 specific recommendations
## Competitive Barrier Quantification Framework
7 barrier dimensions with weighted scoring:
| Dimension | Weight | Strong | Moderate | Weak |
|-----------|--------|--------|----------|------|
| **Network Effects** | 20% | 4.5 — Clear network effects (social platforms, marketplaces) | 3.0 — Exists but replaceable | 1.5 — Minimal network effects |
| **Scale Economies** | 15% | 4.0 — Unit cost drops 30%+ with scale | 2.5 — Cost drops 10-30% | 1.0 — Cost drops <10% |
| **Brand Value** | 15% | 4.0 — Category leader, high pricing power | 2.5 — Known brand, competitive | 1.0 — Commodity brand, price-sensitive |
| **Technology/Patents** | 15% | 4.0 — Core patents, hard to circumvent | 2.5 — Some patent protection | 1.0 — Peripheral patents only |
| **Switching Costs** | 15% | 4.0 — High lock-in (data, ecosystem) | 2.5 — Moderate switching friction | 1.0 — Low switching cost |
| **Regulatory Licenses** | 10% | 3.5 — Heavy regulation, hard to obtain | 2.0 — Standard regulatory requirements | 0.5 — Light regulation |
| **Data Assets** | 10% | 3.5 — Massive proprietary high-quality data | 2.0 — Some data accumulation | 0.5 — Limited or public data |
**Scoring**: Total = Σ(dimension score × weight)
**Rating Scale**:
| Score | Rating | Interpretation |
|-------|--------|---------------|
| ≥3.5 | A+ | Exceptional moat |
| ≥2.8 | A | Strong moat |
| ≥2.0 | B+ | Good moat |
| ≥1.5 | B | Moderate moat |
| ≥1.0 | C+ | Limited moat |
| <1.0 | C | Weak moat |
**Output format**: Present a scorecard table with each dimension's strength rating, raw score, justification (with evidence), and the weighted total with final rating.
## Risk Matrix Framework
Assess 8 mandatory risk categories:
### Risk Assessment Scales
**Probability**:
| Level | Range | Score |
|-------|-------|-------|
| High | >70% | 0.7-1.0 |
| Medium | 30-70% | 0.3-0.7 |
| Low | <30% | 0.0-0.3 |
**Impact**:
| Level | Description | Score |
|-------|-------------|-------|
| High | >30% revenue impact | 3 |
| Medium | 10-30% revenue impact | 2 |
| Low | <10% revenue impact | 1 |
**Risk Level**: Risk Value = Probability Score × Impact Score
| Color | Level | Threshold |
|-------|-------|-----------|
| Red | High risk | ≥2.5 |
| Yellow | Medium risk | 1.0 2.5 |
| Green | Low risk | <1.0 |
### 8 Mandatory Risk Categories
| # | Category | Typical Triggers |
|---|----------|-----------------|
| 1 | Market risk | Industry slowdown, demand shifts |
| 2 | Competitive risk | New entrants, incumbents pivoting |
| 3 | Technology risk | Tech obsolescence, disruption |
| 4 | Regulatory risk | Policy tightening, compliance cost |
| 5 | Financial risk | Cash flow stress, debt levels |
| 6 | Operational risk | Key talent loss, supply chain |
| 7 | Talent risk | Brain drain, recruiting difficulty |
| 8 | Geopolitical risk | Trade friction, data localization |
### Risk Table Format
| Category | Specific Risk | Probability | Impact | Risk Value | Level | Evidence/Triggers | Current Mitigations | Recommended Actions |
|----------|--------------|-------------|--------|------------|-------|-------------------|--------------------|--------------------|
**Requirements**:
- All 8 categories must be assessed (no skipping)
- Each risk entry must cite specific evidence or triggers
- Provide current mitigations AND recommended actions
- High risks: require immediate action plans
- Medium risks: require monitoring plans
- Low risks: require periodic review schedule
## Comprehensive Scoring (Final Section)
After completing SWOT, barriers, and risk matrix, generate a comprehensive scorecard:
```
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted | Key Evidence |
|-----------|-------|--------|----------|-------------|
| Business Quality | X/10 | 25% | | |
| Competitive Position | X/10 | 20% | | |
| Financial Health | X/10 | 20% | | |
| Growth Potential | X/10 | 15% | | |
| Risk Profile | X/10 | 10% | | |
| Management Quality | X/10 | 10% | | |
| **Total** | | 100% | **X/10** | |
```
Every score must reference specific evidence from the six-dimension data collection.