Agent Skills
› mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills
› offsite-planner
offsite-planner
GitHub用于规划高ROI的团队外出会议。通过明确连接、决策和规划的权重，设计包含工作坊与休息交替的议程，制定后勤清单及会后跟进机制，确保会议成果落地，避免流于形式或无效工作。
Trigger Scenarios
plan our team offsite
design two days for the team
make this offsite not a waste
what do we actually do at the offsite
Install
npx skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill offsite-planner -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "offsite-planner",
"description": "Plan a team offsite that earns its cost — the purpose split (connection vs. decisions vs. planning, weighted on purpose), the agenda that alternates work and air, the logistics runbook, and the follow-through that makes Monday different from before. Use when asked plan our team offsite, design two days for the team, make this offsite not a waste, or what do we actually do at the offsite. Produces the purpose weighting, the day designs, the logistics checklist, and the commitments-capture that survives re-entry."
}
Offsite Planner Skill
Offsites fail at the extremes: the all-work version (eight hours of conference room that could have been at the office, plus travel) and the all-vibes version (fun had, nothing changed). The honest design starts by weighting the purposes — connection, decisions, planning — because they want different formats, and pretending one agenda serves all three equally serves none. Then: sessions designed like workshops (artifacts, not discussions — workshop-designer rules), air between them (the corridor conversations are half the value; schedule the corridors), and the follow-through discipline, because an offsite's ROI is measured two weeks later, on Mondays.
What This Skill Produces
- The purpose weighting — connection/decisions/planning split, chosen explicitly with the team's current need
- The day designs — session blocks with artifacts, the air between them, the energy arc across days
- The logistics runbook — venue, travel, food, the remote-inclusion plan if hybrid, the details that sink offsites when improvised
- The follow-through kit — commitments captured with owners/dates, the two-week check, and the "what we decided" note to the wider org
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
- The team's current truth — new team (connection-heavy)? Post-reorg (alignment)? Strategy fog (decisions)? The weighting follows the actual need, not the standard template
- The constraints — budget band, days, travel realities, and who's remote (a hybrid offsite that treats dial-ins as an afterthought damages exactly the connection it exists to build)
- The decisions in scope — if decisions are claimed, which ones, with their pre-reads (decision-meeting-format applies — offsites don't exempt decisions from needing options)
- Last offsite's autopsy — what worked, what evaporated; the follow-through design patches the specific evaporation
Framework: The Design Rules
- Weight the purposes out loud: "60% connection, 30% planning, 10% decisions" is a design; "a bit of everything" is a schedule. The weighting decides the venue (connection wants walks and meals; decisions want a good room), the ratio of session-to-air, and what "success" means — and the team is told the weighting, because expectations misaligned with design produce the "waste of time" verdict regardless of quality.
- Sessions produce artifacts; air produces the rest: every work block ends with a thing (the map, the ranked list, the draft) — and between blocks, real air: long lunches, walks, the unstructured evening. The scheduled-solid offsite exports the office to a nicer room; the corridors are where the trust that justifies travel gets built.
- Decisions get offsite-grade prep, not offsite-grade improvisation: deciding "while we're all here" without pre-reads produces decisions that unravel on re-entry — the in-scope decisions ship their options docs before travel, and the offsite provides the debate and the call.
- Logistics are a runbook because failures compound: the room that fits, food that arrives, travel that works, the hybrid rig tested the day before — each detail is small and their failures multiply against the per-hour cost of the assembled team (meeting-cost-meter math, times travel). One owner runs the runbook; the facilitator facilitates.
- The offsite ends twice: once in the room — the last session captures every commitment with owner and date, plus the one-paragraph "what we aligned on" note — and once two weeks later, when the check-in asks what's moved. Offsites without the second ending converge to the same annual ritual: great energy, no deltas, shrinking budgets.
Output Format
Offsite: [team] — [days], purpose split: [X/Y/Z%]
The Weighting (told to the team)
[The split + the why from the team's current truth · what success means under it]
The Days
| Block | Purpose served | Format → artifact | Air after |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Energy arc: heavy work early-day, decisions pre-fatigue, connection where it belongs] |
Logistics Runbook
[Venue/room fit · travel · food · the hybrid rig + test · owner: (name)]
The Two Endings
[Last session: commitments (owner+date) + the alignment note · T+2 weeks: the check-in on movement, calendared now]
Quality Checks
- The purpose weighting is explicit and was communicated
- Every work block ends in an artifact; air is scheduled, not residual
- In-scope decisions have pre-reads shipped before travel
- Logistics have a single named owner and the hybrid setup was tested
- The T+2 check-in exists on calendars before the offsite starts
Anti-Patterns
- Do not schedule solid — the corridors are half the ROI; protect them on purpose
- Do not improvise decisions because everyone's present — presence isn't preparation
- Do not treat remote attendees as speakerphones — hybrid inclusion is designed or it's exclusion with a call link
- Do not let commitments live in the room's memory — owner, date, note, or it was a retreat
- Do not skip the weighting conversation — mismatched expectations turn good offsites into "wastes of time" in the retelling
Version History
- 471c606 Current 2026-07-22 15:00
