5 Claude Prompts for Executive Summaries & Client Reports

<task>Write an executive summary of our consulting engagement findings for the client's C-suite.</task>

<context>
Project: [e.g., Customer retention diagnostic for a B2B SaaS company]
Duration: [e.g., 6 weeks]
Key findings:
- [e.g., 62% of churn occurs within the first 90 days — onboarding is the primary driver]
- [e.g., Customers who complete all 5 onboarding milestones have 3x higher retention than those who complete fewer than 3]
- [e.g., Customer success team is reactive — 80% of touchpoints are triggered by customer complaints, not proactive outreach]
- [e.g., No formal health scoring exists — at-risk accounts are identified by gut feel, not data]
- [e.g., Competitor benchmarking shows top performers assign dedicated CSMs to accounts >$50K ARR]
Recommendations: [e.g., Redesign onboarding to a milestone-based program, implement a customer health score, restructure CS team from pooled to dedicated model for top-tier accounts]
Expected impact: [e.g., Reduce first-90-day churn by 40-50%, representing $2.1M in preserved ARR annually]
Audience: [e.g., CEO and VP Customer Success]
</context>

<instructions>
- Follow the pyramid principle: lead with the core recommendation, then supporting evidence
- First paragraph: the headline finding and what to do about it (this is what gets read)
- Second paragraph: 3-4 key findings with specific data points that support the recommendation
- Third paragraph: recommended actions with expected impact and timeline
- Final paragraph: clear next steps and what you need from the client to move forward
- Write for a CEO who has exactly 3 minutes before a board meeting
- Every sentence should earn its place — if it does not inform a decision, cut it
</instructions>

<avoid>
- Restating the project scope or methodology — they hired us, they know what we did
- Hedging language: "we believe," "it appears," "it seems likely"
- More than 4-5 key findings — prioritize ruthlessly
- Recommendations without expected impact quantified
</avoid>

<task>Write a strategy memo recommending a course of action based on our analysis.</task>

<context>
Client: [e.g., Regional logistics company, $150M revenue, 800 employees]
Topic: [e.g., Whether to acquire a last-mile delivery startup or build the capability internally]
Analysis completed:
- [e.g., Build option: $8M over 24 months, need to hire 40 people, technology build from scratch]
- [e.g., Acquire option: Target company valued at $12M, already has technology platform and 60-person team, operating in 3 of client's 5 markets]
- [e.g., Last-mile is the fastest-growing segment — 28% CAGR in client's markets]
- [e.g., Client's current last-mile partnerships cost $4.2M/year and have declining service quality]
- [e.g., Integration risk: Target's culture is startup-oriented, client is process-driven]
Recommendation direction: [e.g., Acquire — speed to market and existing technology outweigh integration risk and higher upfront cost]
</context>

<instructions>
- Structure as: Bottom Line Up Front (2-3 sentences), Situation, Analysis (subsections for each key factor), Recommendation, Risks & Mitigations, and Next Steps
- Analysis should present both options fairly before building the case for the recommendation
- Include a comparison framework: cost, time-to-market, capability quality, risk
- Risks section should have 3 specific risks with concrete mitigation strategies
- Next steps should be assignable in a steering committee meeting
- Write with confidence — state conclusions directly, do not hedge
</instructions>

<format>
Professional memo format with clear section headers. Use bullet points for data and comparisons, prose for analysis and recommendations. Target 3 pages equivalent.
</format>

<task>Write the narrative talking points and slide notes for a board presentation on our engagement findings.</task>

<context>
Presentation topic: [e.g., Findings and recommendations from the operational efficiency assessment]
Board audience: [e.g., 7-member board including 3 independent directors, 2 investor representatives, CEO, and CFO]
Presentation structure (slides):
- Slide 1: [e.g., Engagement overview and objectives]
- Slide 2: [e.g., Current state: key performance gaps identified]
- Slide 3: [e.g., Root cause analysis — what is driving the gaps]
- Slide 4: [e.g., Benchmarking — how the company compares to peers]
- Slide 5: [e.g., Recommendations — three strategic initiatives]
- Slide 6: [e.g., Financial impact and investment required]
- Slide 7: [e.g., Implementation roadmap and timeline]
- Slide 8: [e.g., Next steps and decision points for the board]
Key data points: [e.g., Operating costs 22% above benchmark, 3 root causes identified, $4.8M annual savings opportunity, $1.2M implementation investment, 18-month payback period]
</context>

<instructions>
- For each slide, provide: (1) the key message in one sentence, (2) 3-4 talking points the presenter should make, and (3) the transition to the next slide
- Board members think in terms of risk, return, and governance — frame accordingly
- Financial slides should lead with the return, then the investment, then the payback
- Recommendations should be framed as strategic decisions for the board, not operational details
- Anticipate the 2-3 questions each slide is likely to generate and prepare brief answers
- Keep talking points concise — boards lose patience with long narratives
</instructions>

<avoid>
- Operational jargon that a non-executive board member would not understand
- Slides with more than one key message
- Presenting recommendations as fait accompli — boards want to feel they are making the decision
</avoid>

<task>Write the narrative for a key section of our consulting findings report.</task>

<context>
Section topic: [e.g., Current State Assessment — Customer Journey Analysis]
Section purpose: [e.g., Document the customer journey from first contact through Year 1, highlighting where the experience breaks down]
Key findings for this section:
- [e.g., 7 distinct handoffs between sales close and first customer success check-in — each handoff introduces a 2-3 day delay]
- [e.g., Onboarding email sequence is generic — same 8 emails regardless of customer segment, use case, or contract size]
- [e.g., Product training is offered once — customers who miss the window have no alternative path to activation]
- [e.g., First CS check-in happens at Day 45 — but 40% of at-risk customers show disengagement signals by Day 21]
- [e.g., Customer feedback surveys have a 12% response rate — too low to be actionable]
Supporting data: [e.g., We analyzed 340 customer journeys from the past 12 months and conducted 18 interviews with CS team members and 12 interviews with customers]
</context>

<instructions>
- Write a compelling 4-6 paragraph narrative that walks the reader through the findings
- Open with the headline finding that frames the section
- Use specific data points throughout — this is not an opinion piece
- Include direct observations or interview themes where applicable (anonymized)
- Close with the implications for the broader engagement
- Write for a dual audience: the executive sponsor who will skim, and the project team who will study the details
</instructions>

<format>
Report section format with a section header, narrative prose, and inline data references. Include 1-2 callout boxes for the most striking data points. Target 500-700 words.
</format>

<task>Review this consulting deliverable draft and identify specific ways to strengthen it.</task>

<context>
Document type: [e.g., Executive summary / Strategy memo / Findings report section]
Target audience: [e.g., CEO and CFO]
Draft:
[Paste your draft deliverable text here]
</context>

<instructions>
Evaluate this draft on the following criteria and provide specific, actionable feedback:

1. **Pyramid structure:** Does it lead with the conclusion? If not, how should it be reorganized?
2. **Data density:** Are claims supported by specific data points? Flag any assertions that need data support.
3. **Audience alignment:** Is the framing appropriate for the target audience? What would a CEO care about that is missing?
4. **Scannability:** Can a busy executive get the key messages from headers and first sentences alone?
5. **Recommendation clarity:** Are the recommended actions specific, prioritized, and quantified?
6. **Tone and confidence:** Is the writing direct and confident, or does it hedge unnecessarily?
7. **Length and efficiency:** Are there sentences that add words without adding information?

For each issue you identify, provide:
- The specific text that needs improvement
- Why it is weak
- A rewritten version that demonstrates the improvement
</instructions>

<avoid>
- Generic praise — this is a working review, not a compliment
- Suggesting style changes that are purely preference rather than quality improvement
- Rewriting the entire document — focus on the 5-7 highest-impact changes
</avoid>