# Sinatra Test Worksheet A structured worksheet for applying the Sinatra Test (Chapter 4 CREDIBLE, *Made to Stick*) as a pass/fail gate on a candidate hero example. Use this when Step 4 of the SKILL.md process needs a deeper treatment than the three-question summary. --- ## The Test, Stated Formally > An example passes the Sinatra Test when ONE example alone is enough to establish credibility in a given domain — because the example represents the hardest case the domain can throw at you. Origin: "If you can make it there, you'll make it anywhere" — the Sinatra lyric about New York City. The book's defining example: a security contractor with the Fort Knox contract is in the running for any security contract. The Safexpress/Harry Potter case is the operational example: one sentence about delivering the final Harry Potter book to 6,000 Indian bookstores in a single day, sealed, passed the entire due-diligence conversation for enterprise logistics buyers. --- ## Worksheet: Run This For Each Candidate Hero Example ### Candidate: _____________________________________________ ### Domain: _____________________________________________ (What category of claim does this example establish credibility for?) --- ### Question 1 — Is this the hardest case in the domain? If the audience heard only this one example and nothing else, would they concede that the rest of the category follows? **Pass if:** - The case is self-evidently the top of the difficulty ranking the audience would apply. - A reasonable person hearing it would think "well, if they can do THAT, they can do anything." **Fail if:** - The case is merely a good example, not the hardest example. - The audience would accept it as evidence but still ask "what about harder cases?" **Verdict:** PASS / FAIL **Reasoning:** _______________________________________________ --- ### Question 2 — Is the hard part legible without explanation? Can the audience see WHY it was hard without a setup paragraph? The Sinatra effect is lost if you have to explain. **Pass if:** - A single phrase captures the hardness ("Fort Knox" / "Harry Potter launch day, 6,000 stores, sealed" / "drank a beaker of H. pylori"). - A layperson in the audience gets it on first read. **Fail if:** - You must write three sentences of context before the case lands. - The audience would say "OK, but was that actually hard?" **Verdict:** PASS / FAIL **Reasoning:** _______________________________________________ --- ### Question 3 — Is it verifiable? Can the audience check the claim if they wanted to? A Sinatra hero that fails a two-minute Google search is worse than no Sinatra at all — discovery turns it from proof into liability. **Pass if:** - The case is public, documented, and survives basic search. - The audience could independently confirm the key facts. **Fail if:** - The reference is anonymized AND the anonymization hides the verification pathway. - Key details are embellished or cannot be sourced. - The customer has asked not to be discussed. **Verdict:** PASS / FAIL **Reasoning:** _______________________________________________ --- ## Final Verdict | Question | Verdict | |---|---| | Q1: Hardest case | PASS / FAIL | | Q2: Legibly hard | PASS / FAIL | | Q3: Verifiable | PASS / FAIL | **OVERALL:** All three must pass. - **If all three PASS** → This is a Sinatra Test hero. Lead the credibility stack with it. Cut redundant supporting evidence. - **If any FAIL** → Do NOT use as lead. See replacement decision tree below. --- ## Replacement Decision Tree (If Sinatra Fails) ### IF Question 1 failed (not the hardest case) → **Search the inventory for a harder case.** If one exists but the user skipped it because it was "boring" or "small logo," reconsider — the audience's hardness ranking often differs from the seller's. If no harder case exists, fall through to Question 2's failure path (the inventory lacks a Sinatra candidate entirely). ### IF Question 2 failed (hard part not legible) → **Try to rephrase the case into a phrase the audience recognizes instantly.** Safexpress did not say "we ran a challenging logistics operation"; they said "we delivered the final Harry Potter book to 6,000 Indian bookstores in one day, sealed." The rephrase is the whole skill — find the one noun-phrase the audience already flags as hard. → **If no rephrase works:** the case is not Sinatra material. Fall back to category #3 (vivid details) or #1 (testable credentials) from the SKILL.md preference order. ### IF Question 3 failed (not verifiable) → **Attempt anonymization with a verifiable pathway.** "A top-3 global bank, consumer login, 400M accounts" is anonymized but the audience can verify the class. "A Fortune 500 customer" is anonymized and unverifiable — do not use. → **If anonymization fails:** treat as a Vivid Detail instead of a Sinatra hero, pair with a testable credential, and abandon the "one overwhelming case" lead strategy. ### IF NO candidate in the inventory passes all three questions → **Do NOT fabricate a Sinatra hero.** The most damaging credibility mistake is inflating a weak case into a hero that the audience sniffs out. → **Fall back to multi-source credibility:** combine a testable credential + a vivid convincing detail + an illustrated statistic. Three moderately strong categories outperform one inflated Sinatra. → **Alternative:** shrink the claim. If no evidence passes Sinatra, the claim is often stronger than the proof supports. Tightening the claim until the inventory is genuinely sufficient is the honest move. --- ## Common Anti-Patterns **Sinatra Inflation.** The user wants their best customer to pass the test and is willing to argue for it. Rule: if you have to argue, it fails. The test is whether the audience recognizes the hardness instantly, without framing. Three extra sentences of context is a flunk. **The Retro-Sinatra.** The user picks a case that was hard BEFORE the audience had context, but the audience now takes that capability for granted. "We handled the 2015 holiday peak" does not land in 2026 — the peak is old news. A Sinatra hero must be currently legibly hard. **The Insider Sinatra.** The case is legibly hard to the seller's own team but not to the audience. Sellers consistently underestimate how much domain knowledge they have that the audience does not. Always test the case on someone outside the seller's domain before trusting the legibility verdict. **The Unverifiable Boast.** A named customer reference that the customer has asked not to be discussed publicly. Using it anyway is a breach and a credibility bomb on discovery. Either secure explicit permission to name the customer, or use the Vivid Details fallback path instead.