Back to Details

eol-process

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

EOL Process

EOL流程

Purpose

目的

Run a product retirement end to end: decide whether to do it, align the people who can stop it, build the operational plan, ready the teams who will face customers, announce it, and close it out properly. Six phases with decision points between them.
The governing goal, and the sentence worth keeping in your head the whole way through: lose the product without losing the customer. Most of what follows exists to protect the second half of that sentence.
This is an orchestration skill. It doesn't replace the artifact skills — it tells you which one to reach for, when, and what has to be true before you move on.
端到端执行产品退役流程：决定是否启动退役、协调可能叫停流程的相关人员、制定执行计划、让直面客户的团队做好准备、发布公告并妥善收尾。流程包含六个阶段，各阶段间设有决策节点。
核心目标，也是整个过程中需牢记的准则：**放弃产品，但不流失客户。**后续大部分流程都是为了保障后半句的实现。
这是一项流程编排技能，它不会替代单一产出物的技能——而是告诉你何时选用何种技能，以及进入下一阶段前需满足哪些条件。

Input

输入

Works best with: The product being retired and where you currently are — considering it, decided, mid-plan, or already announced and struggling.
Also useful: Scale (customers, revenue, contracts), whether a replacement exists, and who already knows.
Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended 
ARGUMENTS:
line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.
Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The process opens by establishing what's being retired and where you are in it, then routes you to the right phase. If you're mid-sunset and something is going wrong, say so — the diagnostic in "Entering Mid-Stream" finds the skipped phase.
Example invocations:
  • Run the full EOL process for our legacy reporting module — decision made, nothing else started.
  • We announced a sunset three weeks ago and Support is drowning. What did we skip?
最佳搭配： 待退役的产品及当前所处阶段——正在考虑退役、已决定退役、规划中、已发布公告但遇到困难。
补充信息： 规模（客户数量、营收、合同情况）、是否有替代产品、以及已知情的人员。
调用时提供的任何信息——技能名称后的文本、粘贴的上下文内容、或附加的
ARGUMENTS:
行——均视为已提供的答案，可直接使用并跳过对应问题，无需重复询问。
完全无输入也可行。 流程会先明确待退役产品及当前所处阶段，再引导至对应阶段。若你处于退市中期且遇到问题，直接说明即可——"中途介入"环节的诊断会找出被跳过的阶段。
调用示例：
  • 为我们的旧版报表模块执行完整EOL流程——已决策，尚未启动其他工作。
  • 我们三周前发布了退市公告，客服团队不堪重负。我们跳过了哪个环节？

Key Concepts

核心概念

The Six Phases

六个阶段

#PhaseQuestion it answersPrimary artifact
1DecideShould we retire this, and how big is this?Readiness assessment + intensity level
2AlignWho can stop this, and what do they know that we don't?Stakeholder sequence
3PlanWhat has to happen, when, and who owns it?Phase-gated checklist
4PrepareAre our people ready before our customers hear?Internal enablement pack
5AnnounceWhat do customers hear, and when?Customer EOL message
6CloseDid we finish, and what did we learn?Post-EOL review
Phase 6 is the one everyone skips. It's also the phase that makes your next sunset cheaper. Budget for it up front, because nobody volunteers for it afterward.
序号阶段要解答的问题核心产出物
1决策我们是否应该退役该产品？影响范围有多大？就绪评估+强度等级
2对齐谁能叫停流程？他们有哪些我们不知道的信息？利益相关方沟通序列
3规划需要做什么？何时完成？由谁负责？分阶段管控清单
4准备在客户知情前，内部团队是否已做好准备？内部赋能包
5公告客户将收到什么信息？何时收到？客户EOL通知
6收尾我们是否完成了全部工作？有哪些经验教训？退市后复盘报告
第六阶段是所有人都会跳过的环节，但它能让下一次退市成本更低。 提前为该阶段预留资源，因为退市后没人会主动承担这项工作。

This Is a Route, Not a Pipeline

这是一条路径，而非流水线

Every skill in this suite stands alone. None requires another to have run first. This process is a recommended route through independent stops, not a conveyor belt — which means:
  • You can enter at any phase. Decision already made and defensible? Start at Phase 2.
  • You can skip phases when the level justifies it. A Level 1 sunset often collapses 2 through 4 into a single afternoon.
  • You can go backwards, and sometimes must. Phase 2 routinely sends you back to Phase 1 — a Legal finding or a Sales commitment can invalidate the decision. That's the process working, not failing.
  • Nothing hands off a format. Carrying context between phases means telling the next skill "Level 2" and pasting what you have. There's no schema to preserve.
The order earns its keep because each phase surfaces what the next one needs. Deviate deliberately, not accidentally.
本套件中的每项技能均可独立运行，无需依赖其他技能。本流程是推荐的独立环节行进路径，而非传送带——这意味着：
  • 可从任意阶段切入：已做出合理决策？直接从第二阶段开始。
  • 可按需跳过阶段：当强度等级允许时，1级退市通常可将第2至第4阶段压缩为一个下午的工作。
  • 可回溯阶段，有时甚至必须回溯：第二阶段常会引导你回到第一阶段——法务发现或销售承诺可能会使原决策失效。这是流程正常运作的表现，而非失败。
  • 无固定格式传递：阶段间传递上下文只需告知下一技能"等级2"并粘贴已有内容即可，无需遵循特定 schema。
阶段顺序的价值在于每个阶段都会为下一阶段提供所需信息。请刻意调整顺序，而非意外偏离。

Right-Size the Whole Process

按需调整流程规模

Not all EOLs play out the same. The process compresses or expands with the sunset:
Level 1 — LightLevel 2 — StandardLevel 3 — Heavy
Typical scopeFeature, internal tool, APICommercial product, active customersRevenue-critical, hardware, regulated
Elapsed timeDays to weeks6-12 months12-24 months
Phase 2 stops3-47-810+
Phase 3 gates2-3 phases, no gate criteria4-5 phases with gatesAll 6 phases, gates with approvers
Phase 4 outputSupport FAQ+ Sales points, objections, escalation+ Channel brief, training
Phase 5 messageBrief noticeStandard with phase tableFull, phased, with compliance
Phases 2-4Often collapse into one sittingDistinct, sequentialDistinct, with their own workstreams
Level 2 is the default. Set the level in Phase 1, and let it size everything downstream. Never default to Level 3 — process theater on a small sunset teaches everyone to ignore the process on a big one.
并非所有EOL流程都完全相同。 流程会根据退市规模压缩或扩展：
1级——轻量2级——标准3级——重量级
典型范围功能模块、内部工具、API商用产品、活跃客户营收核心产品、硬件、受监管产品
耗时数天至数周6-12个月12-24个月
第二阶段沟通对象3-4个7-8个10个以上
第三阶段管控节点2-3个阶段，无管控标准4-5个带管控节点的阶段全部6个阶段，带审批人的管控节点
第四阶段产出客服FAQ+ 销售话术、异议处理、升级路径+ 渠道简报、培训
第五阶段通知简短通知含阶段时间表的标准通知完整分阶段通知，符合合规要求
第2-4阶段常压缩为单次会议独立、按顺序推进独立且拥有各自工作流
2级为默认等级。 在第一阶段确定等级，后续所有阶段将据此调整规模。切勿默认选用3级——对小型退市过度执行流程会让所有人在大型退市时忽视流程。

Entering Mid-Stream

中途介入

Most people find this skill in the middle of a sunset, often a troubled one. Symptoms map to the phase that got skipped:
SymptomPhase skippedWhat to do now
"Legal just found a contract problem"2 (Align)Stop. Return to Phase 1 — the decision may not survive
"Sales says they promised this forever"2 (Align)Inventory field commitments before any further comms
"Support is drowning in tickets"4 (Prepare)Ship the FAQ and escalation ladder today; backfill the rest
"Customers say they never heard"5 (Announce)Re-announce with dates; the first notice didn't land
"Nobody knows who owns what"3 (Plan)Build the checklist; unowned items are the failure
"We shut it off and things broke"3 (Plan)Downstream readers were never inventoried
"We did it and learned nothing"6 (Close)Run the review now — memory decays fast
大多数人会在退市过程中（通常是遇到问题时）发现这项技能。症状对应被跳过的阶段：
症状被跳过的阶段应对措施
"法务刚发现合同问题"2（对齐）暂停流程。回到第一阶段——原决策可能无法成立
"销售称曾承诺永久提供该产品"2（对齐）先梳理所有现场承诺，再推进任何沟通
"客服工单堆积如山"4（准备）立即发布FAQ和升级路径；后续补充其他内容
"客户称从未收到通知"5（公告）重新发布通知并明确时间；首次通知未触达客户
"没人知道谁负责什么"3（规划）制定管控清单；无人负责的事项就是问题所在
"我们关停产品后出现故障"3（规划）从未梳理下游依赖方
"我们完成了退市，但未总结任何经验"6（收尾）立即开展复盘——记忆会快速消退

Facilitation Source of Truth

引导沟通的参考标准

Use 
workshop-facilitation
 as the interaction protocol when running any phase conversationally. Give the heads-up, take context dumps, offer numbered choices, and let people bail to a specific phase.
当以对话形式推进任意阶段时，使用
workshop-facilitation
作为交互协议。提前告知、收集上下文、提供编号选项、允许跳转至特定阶段。

Anti-Patterns (what this is NOT)

反模式（本流程不适用的场景）

  • Not a project plan. It sequences decisions and artifacts, not tasks and resources.
  • Not mandatory in full. Six phases at Level 1 is the ceremony failure this suite exists to prevent.
  • Not a substitute for the conversations. Phase 2 is people talking, not a document.
  • Not one-directional. Going back to Phase 1 is a success condition, not a rollback.
  • 不是项目计划：它编排的是决策和产出物，而非任务和资源。
  • 无需强制完整执行：对1级退市执行全部六个阶段是本套件旨在避免的形式主义。
  • 不能替代沟通：第二阶段是人与人的沟通，而非文档编写。
  • 不是单向流程：回到第一阶段是成功的标志，而非回退。

Application

应用

Use 
template.md
as the one-page tracker for a sunset in flight.
This workflow orchestrates 6 phases with a decision point after each. Elapsed time runs from days at Level 1 to two years at Level 3 — set the level in Phase 1 and let it size the rest. Each phase names the skill that produces its artifact, but every one of those skills also runs standalone, so enter wherever you actually are.
使用
template.md
作为进行中退市项目的单页跟踪工具。
本工作流编排了6个阶段，每个阶段后设有决策节点。耗时从1级的数天到3级的两年不等——在第一阶段确定等级，后续阶段将据此调整规模。每个阶段都会指明生成对应产出物的技能，但所有这些技能也可独立运行，因此可从实际所处阶段切入。

Phase 1: Decide

第一阶段：决策

Question: Should we retire this, and how big is this?
问题： 我们是否应该退役该产品？影响范围有多大？

Activities

活动

  1. Name the trigger honestly — a metric, a strategy shift, a cost complaint, or an exec remark. The trigger predicts the failure mode.
  2. Assess retire signals against hold signals. Two or more strong retire signals is a real case; an obligation lock or a missing landing place can outweigh all of them.
  3. Set the intensity level. Recommend from blast radius, then choose deliberately. This sizes every phase that follows.
  4. Confirm the landing place: replacement, migration, or graceful exit — and whether it's ready.
Run 
eol-readiness-advisor
 for this phase.
  1. 坦诚说明触发因素——指标变化、战略调整、成本投诉或高管指示。触发因素可预测潜在失败模式。
  2. 评估退役信号与保留信号。两个及以上强烈退役信号构成合理退役理由；但强制约束或无替代方案可能抵消所有退役信号。
  3. 确定强度等级：根据影响范围推荐等级，再审慎选择。等级将决定后续所有阶段的规模。
  4. 确认替代方案：替代产品、迁移方案或平稳退出——以及方案是否就绪。
本阶段使用
eol-readiness-advisor
技能。

Outputs

产出

  • A verdict: Go, Go-with-conditions, Hold, or Harvest
  • An intensity level (1, 2, or 3)
  • A named landing place with a readiness status
  • A list of obligations to check before announcing
  • 结论：执行、有条件执行、暂停、或仅停止投入
  • 强度等级（1、2或3）
  • 明确的替代方案及其就绪状态
  • 公告前需核查的约束清单

Decision Point 1: Is this a Go, and is the landing place real?

决策节点1：是否执行？替代方案是否可行？

  • Go → proceed to Phase 2
  • Go-with-conditions → proceed to Phase 2, carrying the condition as a gate on Phase 5
  • Hold → stop. Set a revisit trigger. Consider whether a cheaper move (End of Sale only, a price change, a bug fix) satisfies the actual need
  • Harvest → stop the investment, not the product. Set a review date
If the landing place isn't ready, you may proceed through Phases 2-4 but not Phase 5. Do not announce a transition you can't yet support.
  • 执行 → 进入第二阶段
  • 有条件执行 → 进入第二阶段，将条件作为第五阶段的管控节点
  • 暂停 → 停止流程。设定重新评估触发条件。考虑是否可通过更低成本的措施（仅停止销售、调整价格、修复bug）满足实际需求
  • 仅停止投入 → 停止产品投资，但保留产品。设定重新评估日期
若替代方案未就绪，可推进至第2-4阶段，但不得进入第五阶段。切勿宣布无法支持的过渡方案。

Phase 2: Align

第二阶段：对齐

Question: Who can stop this, and what do they know that we don't?
问题： 谁能叫停流程？他们有哪些我们不知道的信息？

Activities

活动

  1. Order the stops: Legal, Finance, Sales, Marketing, CS, difficult customers, Engineering, Support — filtered by level, plus Executives, Channel, and Regulatory at Level 3.
  2. For each stop, prepare what you need from them and what you owe to them.
  3. Hold the conversations in order. Each one informs the next.
  4. Capture what surfaced — especially field commitments, contract terms, and hidden dependencies.
Run 
eol-stakeholder-sequence
 for this phase.
  1. 确定沟通顺序：法务、财务、销售、营销、客户成功、难打交道的客户、工程、客服——根据等级筛选，3级需增加高管、渠道和监管方。
  2. 为每个沟通对象准备需从他们处获取的信息，以及需向他们传达的内容。
  3. 按顺序开展沟通，每次沟通的结果为下一次沟通提供信息。
  4. 记录发现的信息——尤其是现场承诺、合同条款和隐藏依赖。
本阶段使用
eol-stakeholder-sequence
技能。

Outputs

产出

  • A completed sequence with an output per stop
  • An inventory of commitments, obligations, and dependencies discovered
  • A revised impact list from your most difficult customers
  • 完成的沟通序列及每个对象的反馈
  • 梳理出的承诺、约束和依赖清单
  • 更新后的高难度客户影响列表

Decision Point 2: Did anything invalidate the decision?

决策节点2：是否有内容使原决策失效？

This is the most important gate in the process, and the one teams treat as a formality.
  • Nothing blocking → proceed to Phase 3
  • A contract, regulation, or commitment blocks the timeline → return to Phase 1. Reassess with the new evidence. The date moves, the scope changes, or the verdict flips
  • The landing place turns out to be weaker than believed → return to Phase 1. This is the single most common finding, and it usually arrives from the difficult-customer stop
Returning to Phase 1 here is cheap. Discovering the same thing after Phase 5 is not.
这是流程中最重要的管控节点，但常被团队视为走形式。
  • 无阻碍 → 进入第三阶段
  • 合同、法规或承诺阻碍时间线 → 回到第一阶段。结合新证据重新评估。调整时间、范围或结论
  • 替代方案实际可行性低于预期 → 回到第一阶段。这是最常见的发现，通常来自与高难度客户的沟通
在此阶段回到第一阶段成本较低，若在第五阶段后才发现问题则代价极高。

Phase 3: Plan

第三阶段：规划

Question: What has to happen, when, and who owns it?
问题： 需要做什么？何时完成？由谁负责？

Activities

活动

  1. Select the lifecycle gates in scope — and name the ones you're deliberately not using.
  2. Build items per phase, per functional area, at the level you set. Every item: a verb, 4-8 words, a named owning function.
  3. Write gate criteria with approvers for each phase transition (Level 2+).
  4. Cover the four things sunsets strand: data, contracts, access, money.
  5. Put the Phase 4 "enablement complete" date on the plan, before the Phase 5 announcement date.
Run 
eol-checklist
 for this phase.
  1. 选择适用的生命周期管控节点——明确列出刻意不使用的节点。
  2. 根据设定的等级，按阶段、按职能领域制定任务。每项任务需包含：动词、4-8个单词、明确负责的职能部门。
  3. 为每个阶段转换制定管控标准及审批人（2级及以上）。
  4. 覆盖退市涉及的四个关键领域：数据、合同、权限、资金。
  5. 在计划中设定第四阶段"赋能完成"的日期，早于第五阶段的公告日期。
本阶段使用
eol-checklist
技能。

Outputs

产出

  • A phase-gated checklist with owners and dates
  • Gate criteria with named approvers
  • Post-EOL actions, including the Phase 6 review, owned
  • Assumptions to validate
  • 带负责人和日期的分阶段管控清单
  • 带审批人的管控标准
  • 明确负责人的退市后行动，包括第六阶段的复盘
  • 需验证的假设

Decision Point 3: Is every item owned, and is every date real?

决策节点3：所有任务均有负责人？所有日期均合理？

  • Unowned items → that's the finding. Escalate rather than papering over it
  • A date you can't defend → write 
    TBD
    , or 
    Not scheduled
    with the precondition. An invented EOL date is a promise you will break in public
  • Enablement date not before announcement date → fix it now; in practice they collapse
  • 无人负责的任务 → 这就是问题所在。需升级处理，而非敷衍了事
  • 无法支撑的日期 → 标注为
    TBD
    ，或注明前置条件的"未排期"。虚构的EOL日期是公开承诺的失信
  • 赋能日期晚于公告日期 → 立即修正；实际中两者常重叠

Phase 4: Prepare

第四阶段：准备

Question: Are our people ready before our customers hear?
问题： 在客户知情前，内部团队是否已做好准备？

Activities

活动

  1. Build the support FAQ, organized by what customers actually ask, highest call volume first.
  2. Build sales talking points with an honest comparison table — including the gaps.
  3. Write objection handling using Acknowledge-Reframe-Offer, with every offer pre-approved.
  4. Name the escalation ladder — four rungs, real people.
  5. At Level 3, add the channel partner brief and run live training with role-play.
Run 
eol-internal-enablement
 for this phase.
  1. 制定客服FAQ，按客户实际咨询量排序，优先处理高频问题。
  2. 制定销售话术及诚实的对比表——需包含不足。
  3. 使用"认可-重构-提供方案"框架编写异议处理话术，所有方案需预先审批。
  4. 明确升级路径——四个层级，对应具体人员。
  5. 3级退市需添加渠道合作伙伴简报，并开展带角色扮演的现场培训。
本阶段使用
eol-internal-enablement
技能。

Outputs

产出

  • An enablement pack sized to the level
  • An escalation ladder a rep could use at 4pm on a Friday
  • Partners briefed ahead of the public notice (Level 3)
  • 匹配等级的内部赋能包
  • 客服可在周五下午4点使用的升级路径
  • 提前收到公告的合作伙伴简报（3级）

Decision Point 4: Is enablement actually complete?

决策节点4：赋能是否真正完成？

This gates the announcement. The cardinal sin of EOL communication is handing Support and Sales the announcement five minutes before customers get it.
Test it: ask a rep who they'd call about a churn threat, and ask them to answer the hardest objection out loud. If either answer is a shrug, you are not ready to announce.
这是公告的管控节点。 EOL沟通的大忌是在客户收到通知前5分钟才将公告发给客服和销售。
测试方法：询问销售遇到客户流失威胁时会联系谁，以及让他们口头回答最棘手的异议。若任一回答含糊不清，则尚未准备好发布公告。

Phase 5: Announce

第五阶段：公告

Question: What do customers hear, and when?
问题： 客户将收到什么信息？何时收到？

Activities

活动

  1. Size the message: Brief, Standard, or Full.
  2. Choose the path: replacement, migration, or graceful exit — each produces a different message.
  3. Draft against the nine-section framework, acknowledging impact before pitching benefits.
  4. State the gates in customer consequences, not internal acronyms.
  5. Apply the sticky-note test: after one read, can a customer write down what to do and by when?
  6. Segment where it matters — enterprise, SMB, at-risk accounts, and partners need different things.
Run 
eol-message
 for this phase.
  1. 确定通知规模：简短版、标准版或完整版。
  2. 选择过渡路径：替代产品、迁移或平稳退出——不同路径对应不同通知内容。
  3. 按照九部分框架撰写草稿，先说明影响，再介绍优势。
  4. 用客户能理解的表述说明管控节点，避免使用内部缩写。
  5. 进行便签测试：客户读完一次后，能否写下需执行的操作及截止时间？
  6. 按需细分受众——企业客户、中小企业、高风险客户和合作伙伴需不同内容。
本阶段使用
eol-message
技能。

Outputs

产出

  • The customer announcement, sized and pathed
  • Segment variants where warranted
  • A comms calendar across the gates, not a single send
  • 匹配规模和路径的客户公告
  • 按需定制的细分版本
  • 覆盖各管控节点的沟通日历，而非单次发送

Decision Point 5: Does the announcement survive contact?

决策节点5：公告能否经得起验证？

Before sending, check three things:
  • Legal has read it — especially anything about contracts, refunds, or certification
  • It doesn't contradict what customers were sold — check against the field commitments from Phase 2
  • Support has it first — with enough lead time to have read it
发送前需检查三点：
  • 法务已审阅——尤其是涉及合同、退款或认证的内容
  • 与客户已购买的内容无冲突——对照第二阶段梳理的现场承诺
  • 客服已提前收到——预留足够时间让他们阅读

Phase 6: Close

第六阶段：收尾

Question: Did we finish, and what did we learn?
问题： 我们是否完成了全部工作？有哪些经验教训？

Activities

活动

  1. Walk the gates as they arrive. Each transition needs its criteria met and its approver's sign-off — gates are commitments, not calendar entries.
  2. Track migration or transition progress against the Phase 3 targets. Escalate accounts with zero movement early, not at the last gate.
  3. Complete the closure items: data export windows honored, deletion scheduled, contracts closed, revenue recognition ended, infrastructure decommissioned, documentation archived.
  4. Run the lessons-learned review. What surprised you, which phase you under-invested in, what the difficult customers found that you'd missed, and what the retention actually was against forecast.
  5. Where an EOL date was left unscheduled, hand off the precondition to a named owner with a review date.
  1. 逐一完成管控节点。每个阶段转换需满足标准并获得审批人签字——管控节点是承诺，而非日历节点。
  2. 对照第三阶段的目标跟踪迁移或过渡进度。尽早跟进无进展的客户，而非等到最后一个节点。
  3. 完成收尾事项：兑现数据导出窗口、安排数据删除、终止合同、完成营收确认、停用基础设施、归档文档。
  4. 开展经验教训复盘：哪些情况超出预期？哪个阶段投入不足？高难度客户发现了哪些我们遗漏的问题？实际留存率与预测有何差异？
  5. 若EOL日期未排期，将前置条件移交指定负责人并设定重新评估日期。

Outputs

产出

  • Gates closed with sign-offs
  • Final retention or transition numbers against forecast
  • A written lessons-learned review
  • Any deferred decisions explicitly owned
  • 已完成签字的管控节点
  • 最终留存或过渡数据与预测的对比
  • 书面经验教训复盘报告
  • 明确负责人的待决策事项

Decision Point 6: Is this actually closed?

决策节点6：是否真正完成收尾？

Closure is not the shutdown date. It's when the data is gone or delivered, the contracts are settled, the money is recognized, and someone has written down what happened. If the review hasn't been run, the sunset isn't finished — it's just quiet.
收尾并非关停产品的日期，而是数据已处理完毕、合同已终止、营收已确认、且有人记录了整个过程。若未开展复盘，退市就不算完成——只是暂时平静。

Complete Workflow: End-to-End Summary

完整工作流：端到端总结

PHASE 1: DECIDE                          -> eol-readiness-advisor
  Trigger -> signals -> intensity level -> landing place
  DP1: Go / Go-with-conditions / Hold / Harvest
       Landing place not ready? Phases 2-4 OK, Phase 5 blocked
       |
PHASE 2: ALIGN                           -> eol-stakeholder-sequence
  Legal -> Finance -> Sales -> Marketing -> CS -> difficult customers
  -> Engineering -> Support  (+ Execs, Channel, Regulatory at L3)
  DP2: Did anything invalidate the decision?  --[yes]--> back to Phase 1
       |
PHASE 3: PLAN                            -> eol-checklist
  Gates in scope -> items with owners -> gate criteria -> data,
  contracts, access, money -> enablement date BEFORE announce date
  DP3: Every item owned? Every date real?
       |
PHASE 4: PREPARE                         -> eol-internal-enablement
  Support FAQ -> sales points with gaps -> objections (offers
  pre-approved) -> escalation ladder -> channel brief + training (L3)
  DP4: Enablement complete?  --[no]--> DO NOT ANNOUNCE
       |
PHASE 5: ANNOUNCE                        -> eol-message
  Size -> path -> draft -> sticky-note test -> segment -> comms calendar
  DP5: Legal read it? Consistent with field promises? Support has it?
       |
PHASE 6: CLOSE                           -> (this skill)
  Walk gates -> track progress -> close data/contracts/money ->
  LESSONS-LEARNED REVIEW -> own any deferred decisions
  DP6: Data settled, contracts closed, review written?
Level 1 compression: Phases 2, 3, and 4 often collapse into one sitting — a short stakeholder list, a punch list, and a support FAQ. Phases 1, 5, and 6 still happen. Especially 6.
PHASE 1: DECIDE                          -> eol-readiness-advisor
  Trigger -> signals -> intensity level -> landing place
  DP1: Go / Go-with-conditions / Hold / Harvest
       Landing place not ready? Phases 2-4 OK, Phase 5 blocked
       |
PHASE 2: ALIGN                           -> eol-stakeholder-sequence
  Legal -> Finance -> Sales -> Marketing -> CS -> difficult customers
  -> Engineering -> Support  (+ Execs, Channel, Regulatory at L3)
  DP2: Did anything invalidate the decision?  --[yes]--> back to Phase 1
       |
PHASE 3: PLAN                            -> eol-checklist
  Gates in scope -> items with owners -> gate criteria -> data,
  contracts, access, money -> enablement date BEFORE announce date
  DP3: Every item owned? Every date real?
       |
PHASE 4: PREPARE                         -> eol-internal-enablement
  Support FAQ -> sales points with gaps -> objections (offers
  pre-approved) -> escalation ladder -> channel brief + training (L3)
  DP4: Enablement complete?  --[no]--> DO NOT ANNOUNCE
       |
PHASE 5: ANNOUNCE                        -> eol-message
  Size -> path -> draft -> sticky-note test -> segment -> comms calendar
  DP5: Legal read it? Consistent with field promises? Support has it?
       |
PHASE 6: CLOSE                           -> (this skill)
  Walk gates -> track progress -> close data/contracts/money ->
  LESSONS-LEARNED REVIEW -> own any deferred decisions
  DP6: Data settled, contracts closed, review written?
1级压缩： 第2、3、4阶段常压缩为单次会议——简短的利益相关方名单、任务清单和客服FAQ。第1、5、6阶段仍需执行，尤其是第6阶段。

Examples

示例

  • examples/sample.md
    — Fieldlight Classic Dispatch (SaaS, Level 2, all six phases across ten months)
  • examples/sample-industrial.md
    — NFA-200 controller line (industrial, Level 3, where Phase 2 sends the process back to Phase 1 and changes the outcome)
  • examples/sample.md
    — Fieldlight Classic Dispatch（SaaS，2级，十个月完成全部六个阶段）
  • examples/sample-industrial.md
    — NFA-200控制器产品线（工业级，3级，第二阶段引导流程回到第一阶段并改变结果）

Common Pitfalls

常见陷阱

Pitfall 1: Starting at Phase 5

陷阱1：从第五阶段开始

Symptom: The first artifact anyone builds is the customer announcement.
Consequence: You announce, then discover the contract terms, the field promises, and the missing migration path — in public, with a date already committed.
Fix: The announcement is the fifth phase for a reason. Everything before it exists to make it survivable.
症状： 第一个产出物就是客户公告。
后果： 发布公告后才发现合同条款、现场承诺和缺失的迁移路径——在公开场合，且已承诺了日期。
解决方法： 公告是第五阶段是有原因的。前面所有阶段都是为了让公告能经得起考验。

Pitfall 2: Treating Decision Point 2 as a Formality

陷阱2：将决策节点2视为走形式

Symptom: Stakeholder conversations happen, findings get noted, the plan proceeds unchanged.
Consequence: You held the conversations and ignored them, which is worse than skipping them — you now have witnesses who warned you.
Fix: DP2 is a real gate. If Legal or your difficult customers surfaced something material, return to Phase 1 and reassess. That loop is the process working.
症状： 开展了利益相关方沟通，记录了发现，但计划未做任何调整。
后果： 沟通了但无视结果，这比跳过沟通更糟——你现在有了曾警告过你的证人。
解决方法： 决策节点2是真实的管控节点。若法务或高难度客户提出了重要问题，回到第一阶段重新评估。这个循环是流程正常运作的表现。

Pitfall 3: Announcing Before Enablement

陷阱3：未完成准备就发布公告

Symptom: Phase 4 and Phase 5 land in the same week, or Phase 4 slips and Phase 5 doesn't.
Consequence: Support improvises for three days and their improvisations become your de facto policy — inconsistently.
Fix: DP4 gates DP5 on the plan, with separate dates. If enablement slips, the announcement slips.
症状： 第四阶段和第五阶段在同一周，或第四阶段延期但第五阶段未延期。
后果： 客服临时应对三天，他们的临时措施会成为你的实际政策——且不一致。
解决方法： 在计划中设定第四阶段管控第五阶段，使用不同日期。若准备工作延期，公告也需延期。

Pitfall 4: Process Theater on a Small Sunset

陷阱4：对小型退市过度执行流程

Symptom: A deprecated feature gets ten stakeholder stops and a training program.
Consequence: Everyone learns EOL process is bureaucracy and skips it next time — and next time is the one with the contracts.
Fix: Set the level in Phase 1 honestly. A Level 1 sunset that runs in an afternoon and closes properly is a success.
症状： 一个已弃用的功能却有十个利益相关方沟通环节和培训项目。
后果： 所有人都会认为EOL流程是官僚主义，下次就会跳过——而下次可能涉及合同。
解决方法： 在第一阶段诚实地设定等级。一个下午完成并妥善收尾的1级退市就是成功。

Pitfall 5: Skipping Phase 6

陷阱5：跳过第六阶段

Symptom: The product shuts off, the team moves on, nobody writes anything down.
Consequence: The next sunset repeats every mistake, and the data-deletion and contract-closure items quietly go undone.
Fix: Put the review on the Phase 3 checklist with a named owner while people still care. Closure is not the shutdown date.
症状： 产品关停，团队转移，无人记录任何内容。
后果： 下一次退市会重复所有错误，数据删除和合同收尾事项会被悄悄遗漏。
解决方法： 在第三阶段的管控清单中加入复盘任务并指定负责人，趁大家还关注的时候完成。收尾并非关停产品的日期。

Pitfall 6: Losing the Customer With the Product

陷阱6：放弃产品的同时流失客户

Symptom: Every phase is executed competently, measured entirely in internal completion.
Consequence: A clean retirement and a churn spike. You ran a good process and still lost the relationship.
Fix: Track retention as the outcome measure, not checklist completion. The goal is losing the product without losing the customer — if the second half didn't happen, the process didn't succeed.
症状： 每个阶段都执行到位，但仅以内部完成度衡量。
后果： 退市流程顺利，但客户流失率飙升。你执行了好流程，但仍失去了客户关系。
解决方法： 将客户留存率作为结果指标，而非清单完成度。目标是放弃产品但不流失客户——若后半句未实现，流程就不算成功。

References

参考资料

Related Skills

相关技能

Every skill below stands alone. This process recommends a route through them; none of them requires this skill, and this skill doesn't require you to run all of them. Carry context between phases by saying "Level 2" and pasting what you have.
  • eol-readiness-advisor
     — Phase 1
  • eol-stakeholder-sequence
     — Phase 2
  • eol-checklist
     — Phase 3
  • eol-internal-enablement
     — Phase 4
  • eol-message
     — Phase 5
  • workshop-facilitation
     — interaction protocol throughout
  • positioning-statement
     — for the Phase 5 transition solution
  • stakeholder-map
     — general mapping, if Phase 2 needs breadth first
以下所有技能均可独立运行。本流程推荐了行进路径，但无需依赖本技能，本技能也无需你运行所有这些技能。阶段间传递上下文只需说明"等级2"并粘贴已有内容即可。
  • eol-readiness-advisor
     — 第一阶段
  • eol-stakeholder-sequence
     — 第二阶段
  • eol-checklist
     — 第三阶段
  • eol-internal-enablement
     — 第四阶段
  • eol-message
     — 第五阶段
  • workshop-facilitation
     — 全程交互协议
  • positioning-statement
     — 第五阶段过渡方案定位
  • stakeholder-map
     — 通用利益相关方映射，若第二阶段需先梳理范围

External Frameworks

外部框架

  • Product Life Cycle (PLC) — EOL lives in the decline stage
  • Industry EOL lifecycle practice (GA/NSC/EOS/EOE/EOR/EOM/EOL/EOSRV)
  • Acknowledge-Reframe-Offer — objection handling in Phase 4
  • 产品生命周期（PLC）——EOL属于衰退阶段
  • 行业EOL生命周期实践（GA/NSC/EOS/EOE/EOR/EOM/EOL/EOSRV）
  • 认可-重构-提供方案——第四阶段异议处理框架

Provenance

来源

  • Orchestrates the EOL prompt series in the 
    https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-prompts
    repo.
  • 编排
    https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-prompts
    仓库中的EOL提示系列。