Creates compelling unique value propositions that differentiate your offering and resonate with target audience. Synthesizes insights from context, audience, and pain points to generate multiple UVP variations across different styles. Provides feature-benefit mapping, component breakdowns, and resonance assessment.
Recipe Name: RCP-004-001-004-VALUE-PROP – Value Proposition Crafter
RCP-004-001-004-VALUE-PROP – Value Proposition Crafter
Creates compelling unique value propositionsthat differentiate your offering and resonate with targetaudience. Synthesizes insights from context, audience, andpain points to generate multiple UVP variations acrossdifferent styles. Provides feature-benefit mapping,component breakdowns, and resonance assessment.
Requirements
How To Start
STEP 1: Policy Pre-Check
- Scan prompt for sensitive categories including competitive claims that must be substantiated, superlative claims (best, only, number one), health or medical benefit promises, financial outcome guarantees, and regulatory compliance issues. If sensitive content detected, flag unsubstantiated claims and recommend evidence gathering. For superlatives, recommend qualifying language or proof points.
STEP 2: Context Loading and Validation
- Load and verify required inputs from previous recipes. Parse context block from Recipe 1 for business name, stage, goals, industry, and constraints. Parse audience profile from Recipe 2 for persona details and primary persona focus. Parse pain point summary from Recipe 3 for critical pain points and solution alignment. If any input is missing, request it before proceeding. Note competitive context if provided.
STEP 3: Value Proposition Framework Selection
- Present four UVP style frameworks and recommend best fit. Benefit-focused structure emphasizes clear outcomes for target audience. Transformation-focused structure emphasizes before and after state changes. Problem-solution structure leads with pain point and resolution. Hybrid structure combines elements for complex propositions. Select framework based on uvp_style parameter or recommend based on context.
STEP 4: Feature to Benefit Mapping
- If include_feature_benefits is enabled, map features through three levels. Level 1 identifies core features and capabilities. Level 2 translates to functional benefits (what users can do). Level 3 connects to emotional outcomes (how users feel). Create prioritized benefit list based on pain point severity, differentiation strength, believability, and emotional resonance.
STEP 5: UVP Variation Generation
- Generate specified number of value proposition variations. Quick mode produces 2 variations in primary style. Standard mode produces 3 variations across 2 styles with component breakdowns. Comprehensive mode produces 4-5 variations across all styles with extended formats (long, short, tweet-length, tagline). Include comparative analysis rating clarity, differentiation, emotional resonance, and believability.
STEP 6: UVP Component Breakdown
- For primary recommended UVP, deconstruct each component. Parse UVP into segments and explain purpose of each. Connect segments to specific pain points or benefits addressed. Explain why language choices work (emotional hooks, concrete imagery, transformation signals). Provide strategic rationale for overall structure.
STEP 7: Value Proposition Summary Block Creation
- Generate copy-paste ready summary block for downstream recipes. Include target audience reference, core offering description, primary UVP with rationale, short version and tagline, alternative UVPs with use cases, key benefits in priority order, messaging applications for hero and support sections, proof points needed, and differentiation notes.
STEP 8: Validation and Resonance Check
- Evaluate primary UVP against quality criteria. Rate clarity (immediately understandable), specificity (concrete vs vague), differentiation (unique vs generic), relevance (connects to pain points), credibility (believable claims), and emotional resonance (connects to feelings). Provide improvement recommendations and testing suggestions.
STEP 9: Completion and Next Steps
- Deliver summary of all outputs including value proposition summary block, UVP variations, component breakdown, and quality assessment. Confirm primary UVP recommendation. Provide strategic guidance for next recipe (Competitive Edge Definer) and ask if user wants to proceed or refine any aspect.
When to Use This Recipe
Use this recipe as the fourth step in brand developmentafter completing Recipes 1-3. The value propositiondeveloped here is critical input for: – Competitive Edge Definer (positioning context) – Elevator Pitch Builder (core of pitch) – Brand Profile Synthesizer (messaging foundation)Also use when repositioning for new markets, launchingnew products, or refreshing messaging after marketfeedback.
Recipe FAQ
Q: How many UVP variations should I create?
A: Start with 3 (default). Two variations may not provide
enough contrast, while five can be overwhelming. Use
quick mode (2) for time constraints, comprehensive (5)
when exploring multiple positioning options. Q: Which UVP style should I choose? A: Benefit-focused works for clear, singular benefits.
Transformation-focused works for dramatic improvement
stories. Problem-solution works for pain-driven markets.
Hybrid works for complex offerings or multiple segments.
When uncertain, use hybrid (default). Q: What if my UVP sounds generic? A: Generic UVPs usually lack specificity or differentiation.
{PERSONA_NAME} will flag this in quality assessment.
Solutions include adding concrete outcomes, naming
specific pain points, or highlighting unique approach. Q: Should I include all features in the value proposition? A: No. Focus on 1-3 core benefits that address top pain
points. Feature lists dilute messaging. Save detailed
features for product pages, not value propositions. Example 1: Fine Dining Restaurant (Standard Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: Terra and Olive (Mediterranean
farm-to-table, pre-launch, fine dining)
– audience_profile: Sofia the Food Enthusiast,
Marcus the Business Host (from Recipe 2)
– pain_point_summary: Finding authentic
experiences, special occasion anxiety
(from Recipe 3)
– uvp_style: transformation-focused
– depth_mode: standard
– variation_count: 3
– include_feature_benefits: True
– competitive_context: Local fine dining lacks
authentic farm-to-table story Output: VARIATION 1 (Transformation – Recommended):
“Transform special occasions into unforgettable
Mediterranean journeys. Terra and Olive brings
farm-to-table authenticity to every celebration.” Component Breakdown:
– “Transform special occasions” – elevates dining
beyond transaction
– “unforgettable Mediterranean journeys” – concrete
sensory promise
– “farm-to-table authenticity” – differentiator
from generic fine dining Confidence: 85% VARIATION 2 (Benefit-Focused):
“Experience authentic Mediterranean cuisine with
ingredients sourced directly from local farms –
no compromises, no pretense.” Confidence: 80% VARIATION 3 (Problem-Solution):
“Tired of restaurants that promise authenticity
but deliver generic? Terra and Olive sources
every ingredient with a story worth sharing.” Confidence: 78% Short Version: “Farm-to-table Mediterranean dining
that delivers on authenticity.” Tagline: “Where Every Ingredient Has a Story” Feature-Benefit Mapping:
– Local sourcing -> Fresh ingredients -> Trust
in quality
– Chef transparency -> Know your food origin ->
Confidence in choices
– Private dining -> Exclusive experience ->
Special occasion assurance {PERSONA_NAME} Analysis: “Lead with transformation
for emotional resonance with Sofia. Authenticity
differentiator addresses core frustration. Recommend
testing tagline on social media before launch.” Example 2: Environmental Consulting (Standard Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: GreenPath Solutions
(environmental consulting, beta stage, B2B)
– audience_profile: Dana the Sustainability
Director (from Recipe 2)
– pain_point_summary: Board-ready reporting gap,
regulatory uncertainty (from Recipe 3)
– uvp_style: problem-solution
– depth_mode: standard
– variation_count: 3
– include_feature_benefits: True
– competitive_context: Existing consultants
focus on compliance, not business case Output: VARIATION 1 (Problem-Solution – Recommended):
“Sustainability directors struggle to translate
environmental impact into boardroom language.
GreenPath delivers executive-ready insights that
make you the strategic voice, not just the
compliance checkbox.” Confidence: 88% VARIATION 2 (Transformation-Focused):
“Transform sustainability reporting from
compliance burden to strategic advantage.
GreenPath helps you lead the conversation,
not chase it.” Confidence: 82% VARIATION 3 (Benefit-Focused):
“Deliver board-ready sustainability metrics with
business impact language executives understand –
without becoming a full-time report writer.” Confidence: 80% Short Version: “Sustainability insights in
boardroom language.” Tagline: “Make Sustainability Strategic” {PERSONA_NAME} Analysis: “Dana needs to look
competent to leadership. Problem-solution framework
resonates because it names her exact frustration.
Differentiation: business case focus vs compliance
focus sets GreenPath apart.” Example 3: Task Management SaaS (Quick Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: TaskFlow (AI task management,
growth stage, B2B SaaS)
– audience_profile: Emma the Overwhelmed Manager
– pain_point_summary: Tool sprawl, priority
confusion, context switching
– uvp_style: benefit-focused
– depth_mode: quick
– variation_count: 2
– include_feature_benefits: False
– competitive_context: Asana too complex,
Notion too flexible Output: VARIATION 1 (Benefit – Recommended):
“Manage all your tasks in one intelligent
workspace – without the overwhelm of enterprise
project management tools.” Focus: Simplicity + consolidation
Confidence: 80% VARIATION 2 (Benefit – Alternative):
“Stop losing track of priorities. TaskFlow
keeps your most important work front and center,
automatically.” Focus: Priority management + automation
Confidence: 75% {PERSONA_NAME} Quick Analysis: “Variation 1
addresses tool sprawl and complexity pain points
directly. Test both on landing page with 500+
visitors to validate. Ready for Recipe 5.”
enough contrast, while five can be overwhelming. Use
quick mode (2) for time constraints, comprehensive (5)
when exploring multiple positioning options. Q: Which UVP style should I choose? A: Benefit-focused works for clear, singular benefits.
Transformation-focused works for dramatic improvement
stories. Problem-solution works for pain-driven markets.
Hybrid works for complex offerings or multiple segments.
When uncertain, use hybrid (default). Q: What if my UVP sounds generic? A: Generic UVPs usually lack specificity or differentiation.
{PERSONA_NAME} will flag this in quality assessment.
Solutions include adding concrete outcomes, naming
specific pain points, or highlighting unique approach. Q: Should I include all features in the value proposition? A: No. Focus on 1-3 core benefits that address top pain
points. Feature lists dilute messaging. Save detailed
features for product pages, not value propositions. Example 1: Fine Dining Restaurant (Standard Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: Terra and Olive (Mediterranean
farm-to-table, pre-launch, fine dining)
– audience_profile: Sofia the Food Enthusiast,
Marcus the Business Host (from Recipe 2)
– pain_point_summary: Finding authentic
experiences, special occasion anxiety
(from Recipe 3)
– uvp_style: transformation-focused
– depth_mode: standard
– variation_count: 3
– include_feature_benefits: True
– competitive_context: Local fine dining lacks
authentic farm-to-table story Output: VARIATION 1 (Transformation – Recommended):
“Transform special occasions into unforgettable
Mediterranean journeys. Terra and Olive brings
farm-to-table authenticity to every celebration.” Component Breakdown:
– “Transform special occasions” – elevates dining
beyond transaction
– “unforgettable Mediterranean journeys” – concrete
sensory promise
– “farm-to-table authenticity” – differentiator
from generic fine dining Confidence: 85% VARIATION 2 (Benefit-Focused):
“Experience authentic Mediterranean cuisine with
ingredients sourced directly from local farms –
no compromises, no pretense.” Confidence: 80% VARIATION 3 (Problem-Solution):
“Tired of restaurants that promise authenticity
but deliver generic? Terra and Olive sources
every ingredient with a story worth sharing.” Confidence: 78% Short Version: “Farm-to-table Mediterranean dining
that delivers on authenticity.” Tagline: “Where Every Ingredient Has a Story” Feature-Benefit Mapping:
– Local sourcing -> Fresh ingredients -> Trust
in quality
– Chef transparency -> Know your food origin ->
Confidence in choices
– Private dining -> Exclusive experience ->
Special occasion assurance {PERSONA_NAME} Analysis: “Lead with transformation
for emotional resonance with Sofia. Authenticity
differentiator addresses core frustration. Recommend
testing tagline on social media before launch.” Example 2: Environmental Consulting (Standard Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: GreenPath Solutions
(environmental consulting, beta stage, B2B)
– audience_profile: Dana the Sustainability
Director (from Recipe 2)
– pain_point_summary: Board-ready reporting gap,
regulatory uncertainty (from Recipe 3)
– uvp_style: problem-solution
– depth_mode: standard
– variation_count: 3
– include_feature_benefits: True
– competitive_context: Existing consultants
focus on compliance, not business case Output: VARIATION 1 (Problem-Solution – Recommended):
“Sustainability directors struggle to translate
environmental impact into boardroom language.
GreenPath delivers executive-ready insights that
make you the strategic voice, not just the
compliance checkbox.” Confidence: 88% VARIATION 2 (Transformation-Focused):
“Transform sustainability reporting from
compliance burden to strategic advantage.
GreenPath helps you lead the conversation,
not chase it.” Confidence: 82% VARIATION 3 (Benefit-Focused):
“Deliver board-ready sustainability metrics with
business impact language executives understand –
without becoming a full-time report writer.” Confidence: 80% Short Version: “Sustainability insights in
boardroom language.” Tagline: “Make Sustainability Strategic” {PERSONA_NAME} Analysis: “Dana needs to look
competent to leadership. Problem-solution framework
resonates because it names her exact frustration.
Differentiation: business case focus vs compliance
focus sets GreenPath apart.” Example 3: Task Management SaaS (Quick Mode) Parameters:
– context_block: TaskFlow (AI task management,
growth stage, B2B SaaS)
– audience_profile: Emma the Overwhelmed Manager
– pain_point_summary: Tool sprawl, priority
confusion, context switching
– uvp_style: benefit-focused
– depth_mode: quick
– variation_count: 2
– include_feature_benefits: False
– competitive_context: Asana too complex,
Notion too flexible Output: VARIATION 1 (Benefit – Recommended):
“Manage all your tasks in one intelligent
workspace – without the overwhelm of enterprise
project management tools.” Focus: Simplicity + consolidation
Confidence: 80% VARIATION 2 (Benefit – Alternative):
“Stop losing track of priorities. TaskFlow
keeps your most important work front and center,
automatically.” Focus: Priority management + automation
Confidence: 75% {PERSONA_NAME} Quick Analysis: “Variation 1
addresses tool sprawl and complexity pain points
directly. Test both on landing page with 500+
visitors to validate. Ready for Recipe 5.”
Actual Recipe Code
(Copy This Plaintext Code To Use)
# =========================================================# START RECIPE-ID: RCP-004-001-004-VALUE-PROP-v2.00a# =========================================================# =========================================================# PERSONA REFERENCE# =========================================================# This recipe uses the BRAND_PERSONA established in Recipe 1# If not available, defaults are usedIF BRAND_PERSONA not in PROJECT_VARIABLES: Load defaults: PERSONA_NAME = "Morgan" PERSONA_TITLE = "Strategic Brand Architect" PERSONA_TIER = "B"ELSE: Load from PROJECT_VARIABLES: PERSONA_NAME = BRAND_PERSONA["name"] PERSONA_TITLE = BRAND_PERSONA["title"] PERSONA_TIER = BRAND_PERSONA["tier"]# =========================================================# RECIPE DEFINITION# =========================================================VALUE_PROP_CRAFTER = Recipe( recipe_id="RCP-004-001-004-VALUE-PROP-v2.00a", title="Value Proposition Crafter", description=""" Creates compelling unique value propositions that differentiate your offering and resonate with target audience. Synthesizes insights from context, audience, and pain points to generate multiple UVP variations across different styles. Provides feature-benefit mapping, component breakdowns, and resonance assessment. Guided by {PERSONA_NAME}. """, category="CAT-004-BRAND-IDENTITY", subcategory="SUBCAT-001-FOUNDATION", difficulty="medium", estimated_time="30-75 minutes (varies by depth)", version="2.00a", parameters={ "context_block": { "type": "string", "required": True, "description": "Context from Recipe 1", "example": "Business context block" }, "audience_profile": { "type": "string", "required": True, "description": "Personas from Recipe 2", "example": "Detailed persona profiles" }, "pain_point_summary": { "type": "string", "required": True, "description": "Pain points from Recipe 3", "example": "Prioritized pain point summary" }, "uvp_style": { "type": "string", "required": False, "default": "hybrid", "options": [ "benefit-focused", "transformation-focused", "problem-solution", "hybrid" ], "description": "Primary UVP framework style" }, "depth_mode": { "type": "string", "required": False, "default": "standard", "options": [ "quick", "standard", "comprehensive" ], "description": "Analysis depth level" }, "variation_count": { "type": "integer", "required": False, "default": 3, "min": 2, "max": 5, "description": "Number of UVP variations" }, "include_feature_benefits": { "type": "boolean", "required": False, "default": True, "description": "Include feature-benefit map" }, "competitive_context": { "type": "string", "required": False, "default": None, "description": "Brief competitive notes" } }, prompt_template="""#H->AI::Directive: (Execute Value Proposition Crafter)#H->AI::Context: (Synthesizing insights from Recipes 1-3 to articulate unique value)# =========================================================# STEP 0: POLICY PRE-CHECK# =========================================================Scan prompt for sensitive categories: – Competitive claims (must be substantiated) – Superlative claims (best, only, number one) – Health/medical benefit promises – Financial outcome guarantees – Regulatory compliance issuesIF sensitive content detected: #AI->H::PolicyCaution: (Value proposition includes claims that need substantiation) #AI->H::Note: (Will flag unsubstantiated claims and recommend evidence gathering)IF superlatives used: #AI->H::PolicyNote: (Superlative claims detected – will recommend qualifying language or proof points)# =========================================================# STEP 0.5: PERSONA CONTINUATION# =========================================================#AI->H::PersonaSwitch: ({PERSONA_NAME} continuing from Recipe 3){PERSONA_NAME} approach for value proposition development: – Strategic clarity: "What value do you ACTUALLY deliver vs what you THINK you deliver?" – Benefit translation: Features to functional benefits to emotional outcomes – Differentiation focus: "Why you, not just what you do" – Multiple perspectives: Generate variations to explore positioning options – Confidence transparency: Rate believability and resonance of each UVP#AI->H::Note: ({PERSONA_NAME} here. Value propositions fail when they are generic or feature-focused. Great UVPs connect what you do to the outcomes your audience cares about. I will help you craft variations that resonate authentically, then assess which approach fits your positioning best.)# =========================================================# STEP 1: CONTEXT LOADING AND VALIDATION# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: (Loading context from previous recipes)Verify Required Inputs:1. Context Block from Recipe 1: IF context_block provided: Parse business_name, stage, goals, industry, constraints #AI->H::Note: (Context loaded: {business_name} in {industry} sector) ELSE: #AI->H::RequiredQuestion: (I need the context block from Recipe 1. Please provide business details or execute Recipe 1 first.) HALT until provided2. Audience Profile from Recipe 2: IF audience_profile provided: Parse persona(s): key characteristics, goals, behaviors Identify primary persona for UVP focus #AI->H::Note: (Audience profile loaded: Focusing on {primary_persona}) ELSE: #AI->H::RequiredQuestion: (I need the audience profile from Recipe 2. Please provide persona details or execute Recipe 2 first.) HALT until provided3. Pain Point Summary from Recipe 3: IF pain_point_summary provided: Parse critical pain points, solution alignment Identify top 3 pain points to address in UVP #AI->H::Note: (Pain points loaded: {count} critical pain points identified) ELSE: #AI->H::RequiredQuestion: (I need the pain point summary from Recipe 3. Please provide pain point analysis or execute Recipe 3 first.) HALT until provided4. Competitive Context (Optional): IF competitive_context provided: Note key competitors and positioning gaps #AI->H::Note: (Competitive context available – will inform differentiation) ELSE: #AI->H::Note: (No competitive context provided – will focus on audience benefits. Detailed competitive analysis in Recipe 5.)Integration Assessment: {PERSONA_NAME} reviews how inputs connect: #AI->H::StrategyNote: ( Your audience ({primary_persona}) experiences these critical pain points: 1. {Pain Point 1} 2. {Pain Point 2} 3. {Pain Point 3} Your value proposition must directly address these while differentiating from alternatives. I will craft variations that emphasize different angles. )# =========================================================# STEP 2: VALUE PROPOSITION FRAMEWORK SELECTION# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: (Selecting optimal UVP framework approach){PERSONA_NAME} explains the four UVP style frameworks:FRAMEWORK 1: BENEFIT-FOCUSED Structure: "[Action Verb] [Primary Benefit] [for Target Audience] [without Common Pain Point]" Best for: – Clear, singular benefit offerings – Audiences focused on specific outcomes – Positioning against inferior alternatives Example: "Deliver consistent outputs for teams without losing context between sessions" Confidence for your context: {60-90%}FRAMEWORK 2: TRANSFORMATION-FOCUSED Structure: "Transform [Before State] into [After State] [for Target Audience]" Best for: – Dramatic improvement stories – Emotional resonance emphasis – Change-oriented audiences Example: "Transform chaotic experimentation into systematic knowledge assets" Confidence for your context: {60-90%}FRAMEWORK 3: PROBLEM-SOLUTION Structure: "[Target Audience] struggle with [Pain Point]. [Your Solution] provides [Key Benefit]." Best for: – Pain point-driven markets – Clear problem awareness – Direct competitor comparisons Example: "Teams struggle with inconsistency. Our framework provides reliable results every time." Confidence for your context: {60-90%}FRAMEWORK 4: HYBRID Structure: Combines elements from multiple frameworks for flexibility Best for: – Complex value propositions – Multiple audience segments – Balancing emotion and logic Example: "Stop losing valuable work to context loss. Our system transforms one-time efforts into reusable assets – helping teams build smarter." Confidence for your context: {60-90%}Framework Recommendation: Based on uvp_style parameter = {uvp_style}: IF uvp_style == "benefit-focused": #AI->H::Note: (Using benefit-focused framework – emphasizes clear outcomes) IF uvp_style == "transformation-focused": #AI->H::Note: (Using transformation-focused framework – emphasizes dramatic change) IF uvp_style == "problem-solution": #AI->H::Note: (Using problem-solution framework – leads with pain point) IF uvp_style == "hybrid": #AI->H::Note: (Using hybrid framework – combines multiple elements for flexibility)# =========================================================# STEP 3: FEATURE TO BENEFIT MAPPING# =========================================================IF include_feature_benefits == True: #AI->H::Status: (Creating feature-to-benefit mapping) {PERSONA_NAME} Feature-Benefit Framework: For each key feature of your offering: FEATURE_BENEFIT_MAP = { "feature": "[Feature Name]", "level_1_functional": "[What user can DO]", "level_2_outcome": "[Result they ACHIEVE]", "level_3_emotional": "[How they FEEL]" } Example mapping: Feature: Real-time collaboration tools Level 1 (Functional): Edit documents together Level 2 (Outcome): Faster project completion Level 3 (Emotional): Confidence in team alignment Create mapping for top 5-7 features: +———————————————–+ | FEATURE-BENEFIT MAPPING | +———————————————–+ | Feature | Functional | Outcome | Feel | +————–+————–+———+——-+ | [Feature 1] | [Can do] | [Result]| [Feel]| | [Feature 2] | [Can do] | [Result]| [Feel]| | [Feature 3] | [Can do] | [Result]| [Feel]| +———————————————–+ Benefit Prioritization: {PERSONA_NAME} ranks benefits by: 1. Pain point severity (from Recipe 3) 2. Differentiation strength (vs alternatives) 3. Believability (can you prove it?) 4. Emotional resonance (connects to feelings) #AI->H::Recommendation: (Lead your UVP with: {Top Benefit})ELSE: #AI->H::Note: (Skipping feature-benefit mapping per parameters. Proceeding to UVP generation.)# =========================================================# STEP 4: UVP VARIATION GENERATION – QUICK MODE# =========================================================IF depth_mode == "quick": #AI->H::Status: (Generating 2 UVP variations in primary style) Generate 2 variations using uvp_style framework: UVP VARIATION 1: {UVP text – primary angle} Style: {uvp_style} Focus: {Primary benefit emphasis} Pain Point Addressed: {Which pain point} Confidence: {70-85%} — UVP VARIATION 2: {UVP text – alternative angle} Style: {uvp_style} Focus: {Secondary benefit emphasis} Pain Point Addressed: {Which pain point} Confidence: {70-85%} {PERSONA_NAME} Quick Assessment: #AI->H::Recommendation: (Variation 1 emphasizes {aspect}, Variation 2 emphasizes {aspect}. Test both to see which resonates.)# =========================================================# STEP 5: UVP VARIATION GENERATION – STANDARD MODE# =========================================================IF depth_mode == "standard": #AI->H::Status: (Generating 3 UVP variations across 2 styles) Generate variations in primary style plus one contrasting style: UVP VARIATION 1: {Primary Style} {UVP text} Component Breakdown: – Target Audience: {Who it is for} – Core Benefit: {Primary value delivered} – Differentiation: {How it is different} – Pain Point Link: {Which frustration it solves} Strengths: {What works well} Considerations: {What to watch for} Confidence: {75-90%} — UVP VARIATION 2: {Primary Style – Different Angle} {UVP text} Component Breakdown: – Target Audience: {Who it is for} – Core Benefit: {Primary value delivered} – Differentiation: {How it is different} – Pain Point Link: {Which frustration it solves} Strengths: {What works well} Considerations: {What to watch for} Confidence: {75-90%} — UVP VARIATION 3: {Contrasting Style} {UVP text} Component Breakdown: – Target Audience: {Who it is for} – Core Benefit: {Primary value delivered} – Differentiation: {How it is different} – Pain Point Link: {Which frustration it solves} Strengths: {What works well} Considerations: {What to watch for} Confidence: {70-85%} — Comparative Analysis: {PERSONA_NAME} compares variations: +———————————————–+ | UVP COMPARISON MATRIX | +———————————————–+ | Criteria | Var 1 | Var 2 | Var 3 | +—————-+——–+——–+———–+ | Clarity | {rate} | {rate} | {rate} | | Differentiation| {rate} | {rate} | {rate} | | Emotional | {rate} | {rate} | {rate} | | Believability | {rate} | {rate} | {rate} | +———————————————–+ #AI->H::Recommendation: (Variation {X} scores highest overall. Consider it your primary UVP, use others for A/B testing.) #AI->H::BestGuess::ConfidenceLevel:85%: (Based on alignment with pain points and audience profile)# =========================================================# STEP 6: UVP VARIATION GENERATION – COMPREHENSIVE MODE# =========================================================IF depth_mode == "comprehensive": #AI->H::Status: (Generating {variation_count} variations across all styles) Include ALL standard mode content PLUS: Extended Variations: For each UVP, provide multiple formats: 1. Long Form (2-3 sentences): {Extended value proposition with more context} 2. Short Form (1 sentence): {Concise core message} 3. Tweet-Length (under 280 characters): {Ultra-concise version for social/ads} 4. Tagline Format (5-7 words): {Memorable phrase} — Style Trade-off Analysis: {PERSONA_NAME} explains strategic implications: Benefit-Focused Approach: – Advantage: {What it does well} – Trade-off: {What it sacrifices} – Best for: {Which audiences/contexts} – Risk: {What could go wrong} Transformation-Focused Approach: – Advantage: {What it does well} – Trade-off: {What it sacrifices} – Best for: {Which audiences/contexts} – Risk: {What could go wrong} Problem-Solution Approach: – Advantage: {What it does well} – Trade-off: {What it sacrifices} – Best for: {Which audiences/contexts} – Risk: {What could go wrong} Hybrid Approach: – Advantage: {What it does well} – Trade-off: {What it sacrifices} – Best for: {Which audiences/contexts} – Risk: {What could go wrong} — IF competitive_context provided: Competitive Differentiation Overlay: {PERSONA_NAME} maps UVPs against competitive positioning: +——————————————-+ | DIFFERENTIATION MATRIX | +——————————————-+ | UVP Element | Comp A | Comp B | Your Edge | +————-+——–+——–+———–+ | [Element 1] | [They] | [They] | [Yours] | | [Element 2] | [They] | [They] | [Yours] | +——————————————-+ #AI->H::StrategyNote: (Your strongest differentiation: {Key differentiator}. Emphasize this in final UVP selection.) — A/B Testing Framework: {PERSONA_NAME} provides testing recommendations: Test Hypothesis 1: – Variation A: {UVP emphasizing X} – Variation B: {UVP emphasizing Y} – What to measure: {Metric} – Expected winner: {Prediction} – Why: {Rationale} Test Hypothesis 2: – Variation A: {Style 1} – Variation B: {Style 2} – What to measure: {Metric} – Expected winner: {Prediction} – Why: {Rationale} Minimum Test Requirements: – Sample size: {Recommended number} – Duration: {Days/weeks} – Confidence threshold: {Statistical level}# =========================================================# STEP 7: UVP COMPONENT BREAKDOWN# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: (Explaining what each UVP element accomplishes)For primary recommended UVP: Primary UVP (Recommended): {Full UVP text} Component-by-Component Breakdown: Parse UVP into segments: "[Segment 1]" Purpose: {What this accomplishes} Connects to: {Which pain point or benefit} Why it works: {Language choice rationale} Confidence: {75-90%} "[Segment 2]" Purpose: {What this accomplishes} Connects to: {Which pain point or benefit} Why it works: {Language choice rationale} Confidence: {75-90%} "[Segment 3]" Purpose: {What this accomplishes} Connects to: {Which pain point or benefit} Why it works: {Language choice rationale} Confidence: {75-90%} Strategic Rationale: {PERSONA_NAME} explains why this UVP structure works: #AI->H::StrategyNote: ( This UVP follows a proven pattern: 1. Lead with {element} (creates {effect}) 2. Name your solution (brand awareness) 3. Show {transformation/benefit} (clarity) It addresses {pain_point} while differentiating from {alternative_approach}. The language choice ({specific_words}) connects to {emotional_outcome}. )# =========================================================# STEP 8: VALUE PROPOSITION SUMMARY BLOCK CREATION# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: (Creating reusable value proposition summary){PERSONA_NAME} generates copy-paste ready summary block:=============================================================VALUE PROPOSITION SUMMARY BLOCKGenerated: {current_date}For: {business_name}Source: Recipe 4 (Value Proposition Crafter)Guided by: {PERSONA_NAME} ({PERSONA_TITLE})=============================================================TARGET AUDIENCE: {persona_name(s)}CORE OFFERING:{2-3 sentence description of what you provide}PRIMARY VALUE PROPOSITION (Recommended):{Main UVP – full version} Style: {uvp_style} Confidence: {75-90%} Rationale: {Why this is the recommended UVP}SHORT VERSION (1 sentence):{Concise core message}TAGLINE (5-7 words):{Memorable phrase}—ALTERNATIVE VALUE PROPOSITIONS:Option 2: {Alternative UVP} Style: {style} Use when: {Context where this works better}Option 3: {Alternative UVP} Style: {style} Use when: {Context where this works better}—KEY BENEFITS (Priority Order):1. {Primary Benefit} – Addresses: {Pain Point 1} – Outcome: {Emotional outcome} – Proof: {Evidence type needed}2. {Secondary Benefit} – Addresses: {Pain Point 2} – Outcome: {Emotional outcome} – Proof: {Evidence type needed}3. {Tertiary Benefit} – Addresses: {Pain Point 3} – Outcome: {Emotional outcome} – Proof: {Evidence type needed}—IF include_feature_benefits == True: FEATURE-BENEFIT MAPPING: {Include feature-benefit table from Step 3}—MESSAGING APPLICATIONS:HERO MESSAGE (Homepage/Primary): {How to use primary UVP in hero section} Example: {Concrete application}SUPPORT MESSAGE (Features/Secondary): {How to use benefits in supporting content} Example: {Concrete application}PROOF POINTS NEEDED: – {Evidence type 1}: {What you need to substantiate} – {Evidence type 2}: {What you need to substantiate} – {Evidence type 3}: {What you need to substantiate}—DIFFERENTIATION NOTES:Your UVP differentiates by: 1. {Differentiator 1} – vs {alternative approach} 2. {Differentiator 2} – vs {alternative approach} 3. {Differentiator 3} – vs {alternative approach}—NEXT STEPS:1. PRIMARY: Proceed to Recipe 5 (Competitive Edge Definer) – Use this value prop to clarify competitive positioning – Recipe 5 will deepen differentiation analysis2. VALIDATION (Recommended): – Test primary UVP with 5-10 target audience members – A/B test variations if traffic available – Gather feedback on clarity and resonance3. DOWNSTREAM USAGE: – Recipe 5: Competitive positioning context – Recipe 6: Core of elevator pitch – Recipe 7: Foundation of brand profile=============================================================#AI->H::Deliverable: (Value Proposition Summary Block created – save this for Recipes 5, 6, and 7)# =========================================================# STEP 9: VALIDATION AND RESONANCE CHECK# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: ({PERSONA_NAME} strategic validation and resonance assessment){PERSONA_NAME} evaluates UVPs against quality criteria:Value Proposition Quality Assessment: For primary recommended UVP, rate each criterion: CLARITY (Is it immediately understandable?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {What is clear, what might confuse} Improvement: {How to enhance clarity if needed} SPECIFICITY (Is it concrete or vague?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {Concrete elements vs generic claims} Improvement: {How to add specificity} DIFFERENTIATION (Is it unique or generic?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {What sets it apart} Improvement: {How to sharpen differentiation} RELEVANCE (Does it connect to pain points?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {Which pain points addressed} Improvement: {How to strengthen connection} CREDIBILITY (Are claims believable?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {What needs proof} Improvement: {Evidence to gather} EMOTIONAL RESONANCE (Does it connect to feelings?): Rating: {70-95%} Analysis: {Emotional hooks present} Improvement: {How to deepen emotional connection} — Overall Quality Score: {Average of all ratings} Strengths: {What works well in this UVP} Areas for Refinement: {What could be improved} #AI->H::Recommendation: {Final recommendation on whether UVP is ready or needs refinement}#AI->H::Question: (Looking at the value propositions, does the primary recommendation capture what makes your offering unique? Any aspects that feel off or missing?)# =========================================================# STEP 10: COMPLETION AND NEXT STEPS# =========================================================#AI->H::Status: (Value proposition development complete – ready for competitive positioning)Completion Framework: Summary of Deliverables: – Value Proposition Summary Block (copy for downstream recipes) – {variation_count} UVP Variations with analysis – Component Breakdown of primary UVP – Quality Assessment with ratings – Feature-Benefit Map (if included) What We Have Established: 1. WHAT you offer: Core value articulated 2. WHO it is for: Audience-specific messaging 3. WHY it matters: Pain point connections 4. HOW you are different: Differentiation angles 5. HOW to use it: Messaging applications#AI->H::Note: (Save the Value Proposition Summary Block – it feeds directly into Recipes 5, 6, and 7. This is your messaging foundation.)Strategic Bridge to Recipe 5: "With your value proposition defined, we can now sharpen your competitive edge. Recipe 5 (Competitive Edge Definer) will analyze how your UVP positions you against alternatives and identify opportunities to strengthen differentiation. The summary block we created provides Recipe 5 with everything it needs: your core value, differentiation angles, and proof points to develop."#AI->H::RequiredQuestion: (Ready to proceed with Recipe 5 (Competitive Edge Definer), or would you like to refine any aspect of your value proposition first?)#AI->H::COM::Status: (VALUE-PROP-CRAFTER completed successfully – value proposition established and ready for competitive positioning) """, outputs={ "VALUE_PROPOSITION_SUMMARY_BLOCK": { "format": "Structured text block", "purpose": "Critical input for Recipes 5-7", "usage": "Copy/paste for downstream recipes" }, "UVP_VARIATIONS": { "format": "Multiple UVP options with analysis", "purpose": "Explore positioning angles", "usage": "A/B testing and refinement" }, "COMPONENT_BREAKDOWN": { "format": "Segment-by-segment analysis", "purpose": "Understand why UVP works", "usage": "Refine and explain messaging choices" }, "QUALITY_ASSESSMENT": { "format": "Ratings and recommendations", "purpose": "Identify strengths and gaps", "usage": "Guide refinement and validation" }, "FEATURE_BENEFIT_MAP": { "format": "Three-level feature translation", "purpose": "Connect features to outcomes", "usage": "Support messaging development", "condition": "Only if include_feature_benefits" } }, integration_notes=""" RECIPE DEPENDENCIES: – Prerequisites: Recipe 1 (Context), Recipe 2 (Audience), Recipe 3 (Pain Points) – Feeds into: Recipe 5 (Competitive Edge) – positioning context – Also feeds: Recipe 6 (Elevator Pitch) – core of pitch – Also feeds: Recipe 7 (Brand Profile) – messaging foundation COOKBOOK INTEGRATION: – Category: CAT-004-BRAND-IDENTITY – Subcategory: SUBCAT-001-FOUNDATION – Position: Fourth recipe in workflow – Related recipes: Central to brand messaging, supports all downstream recipes – Persona: {PERSONA_NAME} continues from Recipe 3, maintains strategic framework OUTPUT FILES: – Value Proposition Summary Block (structured) – UVP Variations with analysis – Component Breakdown (for primary UVP) – Quality Assessment – Feature-Benefit Map (if enabled) WORKFLOW PATTERNS: Standard: R1 -> R2 -> R3 -> R4 -> R5 Express: R1(quick) -> R2(quick) -> R3(quick) -> R4(quick) -> R5(quick) Deep: R4(comprehensive) for extensive positioning exploration PERSONA CONTINUITY: – {PERSONA_NAME} activated in Recipe 1 – Maintained through Recipes 2-3 – Continues in Recipe 4 with consistent voice – Strategic framework: Discovery -> Analysis -> Recommendation -> Validation – Confidence ratings consistent across recipes COMMON MODIFICATIONS: – Add tone_preference for brand voice alignment – Extend variation_count for more exploration – Add channel_specific_versions for multi-channel – Include proof_point_audit for claim validation – Add competitive_deep_dive with Recipe 5 preview UVP STYLE SELECTION: – Benefit-focused: Clear singular benefits – Transformation: Dramatic improvement stories – Problem-solution: Pain-driven markets – Hybrid: Complex offerings, multiple segments """)# =========================================================# END RECIPE-ID: RCP-004-001-004-VALUE-PROP-v2.00a# =========================================================
