nurture-value-factory

Nurture Value Factory

You pick value assets for nurture and route their build. The nurture program (nurture-architect) says when to give value and on which track. This skill decides what that value is, whether it needs to be a produced asset at all, and then dispatches the build to a skill that already exists.

The core point for a service company (as opposed to SaaS): the value that converts best is rarely a generic PDF. It is a sample of the real work: a mini-audit of the lead's own asset, a teardown, a marked-up drawing, a filled-in template. That is the service company's unfair advantage. Reach for it whenever the lead is engaged enough to justify one-to-one effort.

Language and voice

Answer the user and write specs in the user's language. If it is Ukrainian, use plain words and avoid anglicisms (value, lead scoring, follow-up, decision maker, stop filter). Tool names stay in Latin script.
The asset's own copy is written in the prospect's language (often English). Label it. Edit prose for AI tells before delivery; if installed, use anticopywriting-ai (pack gtm-skills).
Brand: an asset for a client company uses that company's design system or brand kit. An asset for the user's own business uses the user's brand. Never ship off-brand.

Hard rules (they override any borrowed template)

An asset is not always the answer. Often the value is a personal insight written straight into the email body: no download, no gate. Decide whether an asset is warranted before picking a type (Step 1).
Interest-based CTAs only. Neither the asset nor the message that delivers it asks for a call, a meeting or a slot. If installed, load cta-interest-based (pack outbound-engine-skills).
Every delivering message ends with a question (the soft CTA).
80/20. The asset teaches; it does not pitch. The company plug stays at 20% or less.
Never invent client data. No ICP tiers, offers or cases? Write "to confirm on discovery, not invented" and spec around the gap.
Reuse before rebuild. Inventory what the company already has (site, design system, proposals, earlier magnets, GTM audit) and repurpose before commissioning anything new. Log the reuse.
Confidentiality. Anything that could reach a public or shareable asset stays generic: no client names, no third-party vendor names.
Give away the method, sell the execution. The asset explains the what and the why in full and holds nothing back. The paid offer is doing it for them. An asset that makes clear how much time and effort the work takes is what earns the deal. If giving it away does not feel a little painful, it is probably not good enough.
Every asset names its impact, like a small contract. Before building, state the concrete outcome the lead gets from using it. No impact means no value: drop back to a body-copy insight. Delivering that impact is what earns the right to move the lead toward the offer. Most lead magnets fail at exactly this step.

Step 0: Gather inputs (do not invent)

From the user's brief and the company's documents (ICP, GTM audit, offers, earlier sequences, design system):

Input	Why it matters	If missing
Persona and buyer stage	picks the asset type	flag "to confirm on discovery"
Entry source / nurture track	shows intent (Researcher / Evaluator / "not now")	ask which track this touch belongs to
The ONE blocking objection	the asset must remove this and nothing else	infer from the stage and state the assumption
Fit × engagement score, if scored	decides reusable vs one-to-one (Step 3)	treat as low engagement → reusable
Existing asset inventory	reuse before rebuild	list what you found and the gaps
Assets the company does not know it has	the cheapest magnet is often already in hand	ask the four questions below
Design system / brand kit	the asset must be on brand	flag it; do not ship off brand

Hidden-asset check (run before commissioning anything new): Is there a network or community? Clear domain expertise? An existing best-practice guide, SOP or internal process document? Anything already written down from delivery work? A yes to any of these usually beats building from scratch: faster, and already proven. Log it as the reuse candidate.

Confirm in one line what you loaded. If the call came from a nurture-architect touch, take the track and touch theme as given and go straight to Step 1.

Read references/value-asset-library.md now. It holds the decision matrix, the asset-family crosswalk, the reuse rules, gating, and the full routing map. This file is the workflow; the library is the parts.

Step 1: Decide WHETHER an asset is needed

An asset is justified only if all of these hold:

The blocking objection is real and repeats across many leads (→ reusable asset), or the lead is valuable enough for one-to-one proof (→ personal asset).
One well-aimed insight in the message body would not do the job better and faster.
The company can produce it on brand without weeks of work, or it can be repurposed.

If an asset is not warranted, output the value as a body-copy brief (angle, the one proof point, interest CTA) and stop. Say why there is no asset. This is a valid and common outcome.

Step 2: Pick the asset TYPE

Two selectors used together: first the three-type test (by the shape of the solution), then the stage × objection matrix (by where the lead sits). They usually agree; when they do not, the objection wins.

2a. The three-type test (which kind of magnet fits the offer)

Type	Use when	Example
1. Make the problem visible	the lead does not feel the problem yet, and it gets worse with time	a site speed test, "when to switch vendors", a self-audit of their process
2. Sample / trial	the offer is a repeatable fix for a repeatable problem; give a limited taste	time-boxed free access, a sample deliverable, a mini-audit of their asset
3. Step 1 of X, free	the core offer is a multi-step process for a complex problem; give one real step	one module of a course, a calculator, a ready template, one stage of the audit

If the type is not obvious, run the yes/no checklist in the library (§0). For an engaged lead of a service company, type 2 (a sample of the real work) is almost always the strongest.

2b. Stage × objection matrix (the cheapest asset that clears the block)

Full matrix in the library. Short version:

Stage / track	Typical blocking objection	Asset family (cheapest that removes it)
Researcher: early, learning	"I don't see the problem or its size"	checklist · benchmark or report · framework visual · industry case
Evaluator: comparing vendors	"How do I choose / what does it cost / are we ready?"	ROI or cost calculator · readiness assessment · "how to choose a vendor" guide · comparison template
"Not now" / high engagement	"I can't see that YOU can do this"	mini-audit of their asset · teardown · sample deliverable · SOP · ready-to-use template

The library maps these to six asset families plus one service-company family. Pick one format: mixing an ebook, a video and a spreadsheet in one asset lowers its perceived value. Prefer the lowest-effort asset that still clears the objection.

Step 3: Reusable or one-to-one

Reusable (build once, send to many): the default for Researcher and Evaluator leads with low or medium engagement. It must be generic and gateable.
One-to-one proof (a mini-audit or teardown of their thing): reserved for high-engagement or near-SQL leads where the payoff justifies the effort. This is a service company's strongest nurture asset; spend it where a deal is close, not on cold names.

State which mode and why, tied to the fit × engagement read.

Step 4: Write the asset spec

A tight spec the build skill can execute. Fill every field, flag every gap, invent nothing:

Problem → solution → for whom: the problem in one sentence, the solution, the exact persona.
Type: 1, 2 or 3 from Step 2a.
Step by step (mostly type 3): the sequential steps of the process; mark which steps are given away and which stay in the paid offer.
Impact (the small contract): the concrete outcome the lead gets. If you cannot name one, go back to Step 1. This field is not optional.
Name: specific, believable, led by the format ("template", "calculator", "checklist", never "lead magnet"). Offer 3-5 title options; a quick poll of the user's network is a cheap way to pick.
Format and length: ONE format (a one-page checklist, a six-block visual, a web calculator, a three-page SOP...).
What is inside: 3-5 concrete takeaways (real substance, not placeholders). Quality bar in the library §0: a real case with a number, visuals over prose, a credible introduction.
CTA: interest-only; the delivering message ends on a question. The best next step is another asset that builds on this one.

Plus the delivery envelope:

Gate yes/no and fields: the minimum (email only unless the asset is high value); ungated for top-of-funnel reach. See the gating section in the library.
Delivery: instant, by email, or on a thank-you page (add a testimonial and one next step there), and how it lands in the nurture touch.
Stage, track and objection it serves.
Brand: the client's design system, or the user's own brand for their own assets.

Quality sets the ceiling on engagement. Do not ship a nice-to-have. If there is no hidden asset to build on, the effort is the price of a magnet that converts.

Step 5: Route to the build skill and invoke it

Match the spec to a build skill (full map in the library), then invoke that skill with the spec so the asset actually gets produced. The skills below are optional; use the ones installed.

Asset	Build with
Checklist, framework, benchmark, comparison as a visual (LinkedIn-shaped)	a visual or infographic builder you have (or a designer brief)
Guide, ebook, SOP, instruction, multi-page template	the docx skill, if available
Spreadsheet template, comparison sheet, tracker	the xlsx skill, if available
Calculator, assessment, readiness score, quiz, any interactive mini-tool	`free-tools` (pack `marketing-engine-skills`)
Planning and distributing a reusable magnet	`lead-magnets` (pack `marketing-engine-skills`)
Landing page or thank-you page for the magnet	`page-builder` (standalone repo), copy via `copywriting` (pack `marketing-engine-skills`)
Case study as the asset	`case-study-writer` (pack `account-management-skills`)
Webinar or event	`slide-deck-builder` (pack `sales-engine-skills`) plus a promo asset
Mini-audit or teardown of the lead's website copy	`website-copy-reframe` (pack `marketing-engine-skills`)
Teardown of a named account or its market	`account-dossier` (pack `account-management-skills`)
GTM-shaped mini-audit (one criterion, not the full audit)	`gtm-audit` (pack `gtm-strategy-skills`)
Client brand kit missing	`design-system-generator` (standalone repo), first
Near-deal, proposal-grade asset	`proposal-generator` (pack `sales-engine-skills`)
The delivering email or DM itself	`reply-objection-handler` (pack `outbound-engine-skills`) or the nurture track's own copy step

If the asset is for a client company and it has no design system yet, run design-system-generator first. Tell the user which skill you are dispatching to and why, then hand over the spec.

Step 6: Log it back into the nurture program

Attach the finished asset (or its spec and the build output) to the specific nurture touch in the nurture-architect program document: which track, which touch number, gated or not.
If it is reusable, add it to the company's asset inventory so later touches reuse it (this feeds Step 0).
Give the user a one-line recap: asset type, the objection it clears, the touch it fills, the build skill used, and any open data gap.

Where the program lives in Notion (connector available), update the page there; otherwise update the markdown program document.

Where this sits

nurture-architect      →   nurture-value-factory      →   build skills
  WHEN + which track        asset or not? which type?      produce the asset
                            spec + reuse check             (docx / free-tools / page-builder /
                            route to builder                website-copy-reframe / ...)

Upstream: nurture-architect (program); agency-signal-sourcer (pack gtm-skills, what triggered the lead); icp-builder (pack outbound-engine-skills) or the company's ICP document.
CTA rules: cta-interest-based. Voice: anticopywriting-ai.

Common pitfalls this skill prevents

Building a magnet when a sentence would do. Step 1 gates it.
A generic PDF for an engaged lead. Misses the sample-of-real-work advantage.
Rebuilding what exists. Skipping the inventory wastes effort.
Wrong-stage asset. An ROI calculator for a Researcher who does not feel the problem yet.
Format soup. Ebook plus video plus sheet in one asset. Pick one.
Over-gating top of funnel. A long form on an awareness asset. Email only, or ungated.
Pitch-heavy asset or call CTA. Breaks 80/20 and the interest-only rule.
Off-brand output. A client asset in someone else's colours.

Credits

Built by Victor Shulga for B2B service companies; the eight-step lead-magnet method, the three-type test and the asset-family taxonomy are his. The quality bar in the library (§0) is adapted from a free agency-growth guide, restated here in our own words.