home / skills / menkesu / awesome-pm-skills / quality-speed

quality-speed skill

safe

This skill helps balance quality and speed by applying craft vs speed criteria to features, refactoring decisions, and moat-building details.

npx playbooks add skill menkesu/awesome-pm-skills --skill quality-speed

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (1)

SKILL.md

2.1 KB

---
name: quality-speed
description: Decides when quality matters vs move fast, based on Dylan Field (Figma) craft philosophy and Brian Chesky (Airbnb) details obsession. Use when balancing shipping speed with excellence, deciding if refactoring is needed, or determining which details create moats vs which to skip.
---

# Quality vs Speed Framework

## When This Skill Activates

Claude uses this skill when:
- Deciding "should I refactor this before shipping?"
- Balancing craft quality vs speed
- Evaluating if details matter for this feature
- Choosing between polish and iteration

## Core Frameworks

### 1. Craft Creates Moats (Source: Dylan Field, Figma)

**When Quality Matters:**
- Core product experience
- Competitive differentiators
- Brand touchpoints
- High-frequency use

**When Speed Matters:**
- Internal tools
- Experiments
- Non-core features

### 2. The Details Decision Matrix

```
                    │ USER-FACING │ INTERNAL
────────────────────┼─────────────┼──────────
CORE PRODUCT        │ HIGH CRAFT  │ MEDIUM
NON-CORE FEATURE    │ MEDIUM      │ LOW
EXPERIMENT          │ LOW         │ LOW
```

---

## Action Templates

### Template: Quality Assessment

```markdown
# Feature: [Name]

## Context
- User-facing: [yes/no]
- Core product loop: [yes/no]
- Frequency of use: [daily/weekly/monthly]
- Competitive advantage: [yes/no]

## Quality Level Decision

**HIGH CRAFT:**
- Time investment: [X days]
- Polish areas: [list]

**MOVE FAST:**
- Ship threshold: [works, looks okay]
- Time budget: [X days]

## Decision: [HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW craft]
```

---

## Quick Reference

### ⚡ Quality-Speed Checklist

**High Craft Signals:**
- [ ] Core product loop
- [ ] User-facing and frequent
- [ ] Competitive differentiator
- [ ] Brand moment

**Move Fast Signals:**
- [ ] Internal tool
- [ ] One-time use
- [ ] Experiment
- [ ] Behind the scenes

---

## Key Quotes

**Dylan Field:**
> "AI makes design, craft, and quality the new moat for startups."

**Brian Chesky:**
> "Leaders are in the details, but only the details that matter."

Overview

This skill helps product teams decide when to prioritize quality and craft versus shipping fast. It blends Dylan Field’s view that craft creates defensible moats with Brian Chesky’s focus on obsessing over the right details. Use it to make repeatable, pragmatic trade-offs about refactors, polish, and scope.

How this skill works

The skill evaluates features across axes: user-facing vs internal, core loop vs auxiliary, frequency, and competitive impact. It maps those inputs to three craft levels (high, medium, low) and recommends time budgets, polish areas, or minimum ship thresholds. Actionable templates and a quick checklist make decisions explicit, repeatable, and easy to communicate to stakeholders.

When to use it

Deciding if a refactor is necessary before shipping
Balancing polish vs iteration for a new feature
Prioritizing design and engineering effort across the roadmap
Evaluating which details create lasting competitive advantage
Planning experiments and determining acceptable quality for MVPs

Best practices

Start with the feature context: user-facing, core loop, frequency, competitive advantage
Default to high craft for the core product loop and brand moments; default to move-fast for experiments and internal tools
Define a clear ship threshold for move-fast work (e.g., "works and looks okay") to avoid scope creep
Document polish areas and time budgets in the Quality Assessment template so trade-offs are visible
Review decisions post-launch to validate whether quality assumptions created expected outcomes

Example use cases

A checkout redesign: mark HIGH craft because it’s user-facing, frequent, and a competitive lever
An internal admin dashboard: choose MOVE FAST with limited polish and a short time budget
A hypothesis-driven experiment: ship low craft to gather fast learnings, then iterate on winners
A performance refactor affecting the core loop: invest medium-to-high craft due to frequency and user impact
A brand landing page: prioritize high craft for first impressions and conversion

FAQ

How do I decide between medium and high craft?

Ask if the feature is in the core product loop, used frequently, and a potential competitive differentiator. If most answers are yes, choose high craft; if mixed, choose medium and limit polish scope.

Can we change the decision after shipping?

Yes. Treat initial choices as experiments: measure user impact and iterate. If an area shows clear value, elevate craft and allocate refactor time.