# Dimension Detail Template Reference

> This file contains the complete output templates for each dimension. The main SKILL.md file only retains concise guidelines; detailed format requirements are referenced here.

---

## Dimension 1 (WBS): PERT Three-Point Estimation + CPM Calculation

### PERT Three-Point Estimation

**Formula**: `t_E = (t_O + 4t_M + t_P) / 6`
- `t_O` = Optimistic: Best-case shortest duration
- `t_M` = Most Likely: Expected duration under normal conditions
- `t_P` = Pessimistic: Worst-case longest duration
- `t_E` = Expected: Weighted average baseline duration
- **Standard Deviation**: `σ = (t_P - t_O) / 6`

**Confidence Intervals**:
- **68% confidence**: `t_E ± σ`
- **95% confidence**: `t_E ± 2σ`

**WBS Output Format**:

```
[Project Root Task]
├── Phase 1: [Phase Name] (Day X-Y, Total E=X person-days, σ=X)
│    ├── 1.1 [Specific Action] O/Xd M/Xd P/Xd → E=X±σd → Output: [Deliverable]
│    ├── 1.2 [Specific Action] O/Xd M/Xd P/Xd → E=X±σd || → Output: [Deliverable]
│    └── 1.3 [Specific Action] O/Xd M/Xd P/Xd → E=X±σd → Output: [Deliverable]
├── Phase 2: [Phase Name] (Day X-Y, Total E=X person-days, σ=X)
│    └── ...
└── Phase N: [Phase Name] (Day X-Y, Total E=X person-days, σ=X)
     └── ...
```

### CPM Critical Path Method Calculation Tool

**Step 1: Build Task Dependency Network**

| Task ID | Task Name | Duration(E) | Predecessor | ES | EF | LS | LF | TF |
|:-------:|-----------|:-----------:|:-----------:|:--:|:--:|:--:|:--:|:--:|
| 1.1 | [Task] | X days | — | Day 0 | Day X | Day Y | Day Z | TF=LS-ES |
| 1.2 | [Task] | X days | 1.1 | Day X | Day Y | ... | ... | ... |

**CPM Calculation Formula**:
```
Forward Pass (start to finish):
  ES(first task) = 0
  ES(successor) = max{ EF of all predecessors }
  EF = ES + Duration

Backward Pass (finish to start):
  LF(last task) = EF(project) (i.e., total project duration)
  LS = LF - Duration
  LF(predecessor) = min{ LS of all successors }

Total Float: TF = LF - EF = LS - ES
```

**Step 2: Identify Critical Path**

> **Critical Path Rule**: **The chain of tasks where TF = 0 is the critical path**
>
> **Critical Path**: [Task A → Task B → Task C → ...]
> **Minimum Project Duration**: E = Σ(critical path task durations)
> **Duration Confidence Interval**: Based on PERT, 68%: E±σ days | 95%: E±2σ days

**Step 3: Float Time Classification**

| Float (TF) | Classification | Management Strategy | Resource Scheduling |
|:----------:|:-------------:|:--------------------|:-------------------|
| TF = 0 | **Critical Path** | Zero tolerance, priority resource allocation | Lock core personnel, no borrowing |
| 0 < TF ≤ 3 days | **Near-Critical** | Close monitoring, buffer reserved | Watch risks, prepare contingencies |
| 3 < TF ≤ 7 days | **Flexible** | Normal tracking | May redirect resources to critical path |
| TF > 7 days | **Loose** | Low-frequency checks | Resources can be borrowed for other tasks |

**Step 4: Critical Path Compression Options**

| Method | Use Case | Cost Impact | Risk |
|:-------|:---------|:-----------:|:----:|
| **Fast-tracking** | Overlap sequential tasks (e.g., start build before design complete) | Low | High (rework risk) |
| **Crashing** | Add resources to critical tasks (overtime/hiring) | Medium-High | Medium (team fatigue) |
| **Scope Reduction** | Cut non-Must features (MoSCoW Could/Won't items) | Low | Medium (feature gaps) |
| **Outsourcing/Parallel** | Subcontract work or add parallel workstreams | High | Low |

**Effort Estimation Rules**:
- Estimate separately by role type (designer/developer/tester independent)
- Include **communication overhead factor** (recommended 1.1x - 1.2x)
- Parallel tasks must note whether dependent resources conflict

---

## Dimension 3-B: Communication Management Plan Template

### Communication Matrix Template

| Stakeholder Group | Content | Frequency | Channel | Sender | Receiver | Feedback Required |
|:-----------------|:--------|:---------:|:-------:|:------:|:--------:|:-----------------:|
| [Executive] | Progress summary + key decisions | Weekly | Email + Meeting | PM | CEO/Stakeholders | Within 24h |
| [Execution Team] | Task assignment + progress sync | Daily | Standup/IM | TL | Team Members | Same day |
| [Client] | Milestone reports + deliverable acceptance | Per phase | Formal document | PM | Client | Within 3 business days |
| [Vendors] | Procurement needs + delivery confirmation | As needed | Email/Phone | Procurement | Vendor | Confirm delivery date |

### Escalation Matrix

| Level | Definition | Escalation Target | Response Time | Action |
|:-----:|:-----------|:-----------------:|:-------------:|:-------|
| **L1 - Routine** | Planned task delay < 1 day | Team internal | Same day | Team Lead coordinates resources |
| **L2 - Warning** | Critical path delay / cost variance > 5% | Project Manager | Within 4 hours | PM reallocates + notifies executives |
| **L3 - Severe** | Scope change / cost overrun > 15% / critical risk triggered | Decision-makers (CCB) | Within 2 hours | Emergency review meeting |
| **L4 - Critical** | Project may fail / major safety incident | Top decision-maker | Immediately | Activate contingency plan + external support |

### Meeting Management Norms

| Meeting Type | Frequency | Duration | Required Attendees | Optional | Output |
|:------------:|:---------:|:--------:|:------------------:|:--------:|:------:|
| Daily Standup | Workdays | 15min | Core execution team | — | Today's blocker list |
| Weekly | Weekly | 1h | PM + Role Leads | Relevant stakeholders | Weekly report + next week plan |
| Milestone Gate | Key milestones | 2h | All core members | Executive | Go/No-Go decision |
| CCB Review | As needed | 1h | CCB members | CR initiator | Change approved/rejected |

### Communication Tool Selection Guide

| Scenario | Recommended | Alternative | Not Recommended |
|:---------|:-----------|:-----------|:---------------|
| Real-time collaboration | Slack/Lark/DingTalk | WeChat Work | Email |
| Document sharing | Notion/Confluence/Wiki | Google Docs | Local files |
| Video conferencing | Zoom/Tencent Meeting/Lark | Teams | Phone |
| Progress tracking | Jira/Tapd/Teambition | Excel spreadsheets | Verbal reports |
| Formal approval | OA system/DingTalk Approval | Signed documents | IM messages |

---

## Dimension 9-B: Revision Mode Delta Report Template

```markdown
### Revision Report Δv{N} → v{N+1}

*   **Revision Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
*   **Initiator**: [Role/Name]
*   **Revision Type**: Local revision / Full recalculation / Change-driven

#### Change Summary

| Dimension | Change | Before | After | Impact Scope |
|:---------:|--------|:------:|:-----:|:------------:|
| WBS | [Specific change] | [Original] | [New] | [Affected downstream tasks] |
| Cost | [Specific change] | [Original] | [New] | [Budget reallocation] |
| Risk | [New/closed risk] | — | [New status] | [Risk register update] |

#### Impact Chain

> **Root Cause Change**: [User's original modification request]
>
> **Primary Impact** (direct): [Dimension A changes]
>
> **Secondary Impact** (cascading): [Dimensions B/C requiring sync updates]

#### Version Snapshot

| Module | Current Version | Updated This Revision |
|:-------|:--------------:|:--------------------:|
| Goal Statement (SMART) | vX.X | ✅ / — |
| WBS Decomposition | vX.X | ✅ / — |
| RACI Matrix | vX.X | ✅ / — |
| Risk Register | vX.X | ✅ / — |
| Budget | vX.X | ✅ / — |
| Go/No-Go Recommendation | vX.X | ✅ / — |

#### Pending Confirmations (if applicable)

- [ ] [Question requiring user confirmation 1]
- [ ] [Question requiring user confirmation 2]
```

**Revision Mode Rules**:

| Scenario | Treatment | Output Format |
|:---------|:----------|:-------------|
| Number adjustments only (duration/budget/headcount) | Direct correction + annotation | Delta Report |
| Add/remove subtasks | Update WBS → cascade update cost/risk/critical path | Local recalculation |
| Project objective change | Return to Phase 1 for re-clarification | Full regeneration |
| Add stakeholders/roles | Update stakeholder table + RACI matrix | Local update |
| Scope reduction > 30% | Trigger MoSCoW re-prioritization + full recalculation | Complete vN+1 |

---

## Agile Mode: Sprint Decomposition Template

### Sprint Planning Structure

```
[Product Backlog] (user stories prioritized)
├── Epic-A: [Large feature module]
│    ├── Story A.1: As [role], I want [feature], so that [value] (Sprint 1)
│    ├── Story A.2: As [role], I want [feature], so that [value] (Sprint 2)
│    └── Story A.3: As [role], I want [feature], so that [value] (Sprint 3)
├── Epic-B: [Large feature module]
│    └── Story B.1: ... (Sprint 2 ||)
└── Technical Debt: [Tech debt repayment] (Sprint N)
```

### Sprint Standard Template

```markdown
### Sprint [N]: [One-sentence Sprint goal]

*   **Timebox**: [Start date] - [End date] (2 weeks)
*   **Sprint Goal**: [Single objective for this iteration]
*   **Team Capacity**: [Headcount] × [Effective workdays] = [Total story points]

**Commitment**:
| Story ID | User Story | Points | DoD | Owner |
|:--------:|-----------|:------:|-----|:-----:|
| A.1 | [Story description] | 3pt | [Checklist] | [Name] |
| A.2 | [Story description] | 5pt | [Checklist] | [Name] |

**Deliverables**:
- [Demonstrable feature increment]
- [Updated documentation]
- [Potential Technical Debt log]

**Review Gate Entry Criteria**:
- [ ] All Committed Stories meet DoD
- [ ] Verified via Demo
- [ ] No blocking bugs
```

---

## Change Request (CR) Template

```markdown
### Change Request CR-#[Number]

*   **Change Title**: [One-sentence summary]
*   **Initiator**: [Name/Role]
*   **Date Submitted**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
*   **Change Type**: Scope / Schedule / Budget / Quality / Stakeholder
*   **Business Justification**: [Why is this change needed?]
*   **Change Description**: [What specifically is changing?]
*   **Urgency**: 🟢 Routine / 🟡 Urgent / 🔴 Critical (blocking)
*   **Impact Assessment**:
    *   Scope: [Affected WBS items]
    *   Schedule: [+/- X days]
    *   Cost: [+/- $X]
    *   Risk: [New/eliminated risks]
*   **Recommended Action**: [Proposed resolution]
*   **Attachments**: [Supporting documents/screenshots/data]
```

---

## Retrospective Report Template (KPT Model)

```markdown
### [Project/Phase Name] Retrospective Report

**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Participants**: [List]
**Facilitator**: [Name]

#### Keep
*   [What went well 1] — Evidence: [Data/feedback]
*   [What went well 2] — Evidence: [Data/feedback]

#### Problem
*   [Issue encountered 1] — Root cause: [5-Why or Ishikawa conclusion]
*   [Issue encountered 2] — Root cause: [5-Why or Ishikawa conclusion]

#### Try
*   [Method to try next time 1] — Addressing Problem 1
*   [Method to try next time 2] — Addressing Problem 2

#### Data Comparison
| Metric | Baseline | Actual | Variance | Root Cause |
|--------|:--------:|:------:|:--------:|:----------:|
| Total Duration | X days | Y days | ±Z% | [Reason] |
| Total Cost | $X | $Y | ±Z% | [Reason] |
| [Key KPI] | X | Y | ±Z% | [Reason] |

#### Lessons Learned Archive
*   **Reusable Experience**: [ID + Title + Description] → Store in [Knowledge base category]
*   **Pitfall Guide**: [ID + Title + Description] → Store in [Knowledge base category]
```

---

## Global / Cross-Cultural Mode: Detailed Reference

### Timezone Coordination Matrix

| Team Location | Working Hours (Local) | UTC Offset | HQ Overlap Window | Coordination Advice |
|:-------------|:--------------------:|:----------:|:-----------------:|:-------------------|
| [HQ / Beijing] | 09:00-18:00 | +8 | Baseline | Core decisions in this window |
| [Europe Office] | 09:00-17:00 | +1/+2 | 16:00-18:00 (Beijing) | Daily 1h sync meeting |
| [NA Office] | 09:00-17:00 | -5/-8 | 23:00-01:00 (Beijing) | Async collaboration + weekly meeting |

### Regulatory Compliance Checklist

| Jurisdiction | Key Requirements | Project Impact | Verification Action |
|:------------|:----------------|:-------------|:-------------------|
| **EU (GDPR)** | Data subject rights + cross-border transfer restrictions | User data storage and processing | Data flow diagram review |
| **China** | Data Security Law + Personal Information Protection Law | Localized storage + cross-border approval | Cybersecurity assessment |
| **US (CCPA)** | California consumer privacy rights | Privacy policy + Do Not Sell option | Legal counsel review |
| **Southeast Asia** | Varying data localization requirements | Regional deployment architecture | Local legal confirmation |

### Cross-Cultural Communication Adaptation (Hofstede Model)

| Cultural Dimension | High-Score Examples | Low-Score Examples | PM Impact | Strategy |
|:-----------------:|:-------------------:|:-----------------:|:---------:|:--------|
| Power Distance | China/Malaysia | Denmark/Israel | Decision-making process | High distance: formal approval chains; Low: flat discussions |
| Uncertainty Avoidance | Japan/Greece | Singapore/Jamaica | Planning detail needs | High avoidance: more detailed WBS and risk plans |
| Individualism vs. Collectivism | US/Australia | China/South Korea | Team motivation | Individualism: personal KPIs; Collectivism: team recognition |
| Long-term vs. Short-term Orientation | China/Japan | US/UK | Goal-setting horizon | Long-term: accepts delayed returns; Short-term: quick milestones |