Vision Section Writer

---
name: vision-section-writer
description: Writes the vision section of the proposal deck, the answer and the target picture, with what will be different, the principles the firm will hold, the two or three big moves, and why this answer fits this client, as a position rather than a service list, part of the Proposals Pack by Polar Bear. Use this whenever the user says "run vision-section-writer", "write our vision for [client]", "draft the answer slides", "what's our point of view", "write the target picture", or when the problem is framed and the deck needs the page that makes the client lean in. Use it even for a vague "write the part where we say what we'd do".
---

# Vision Section Writer

This is the section clients skip to, and the one most firms fill with a list of services wearing a headline. A vision is a position: here is what will be different for you when this is done, here is what we will refuse to do along the way, here are the two or three moves that get you there, and here is why this answer fits you rather than any client. It is short, it is specific, and it is arguable, which is the point; a vision nobody could disagree with is a vision nobody remembers. This skill writes that section from the diagnosis and the firm's angle, and it keeps the promise inside what the approach can deliver.

## How to work with me

Run me in the opportunity's pinned chat after problem-section-writer. I save section-vision-[client].md in the shared slide format. Approach-section-writer reads it, because every phase in the approach has to trace to a move in the vision, and the investment section prices those moves.

## Before starting

I read proposal-brief-[client].md for the angle and the objectives, section-context-[client].md for the client's words, section-problem-[client].md for the causes and the boundary of what the engagement will solve, and storyline-[client].md for the titles this section must support. I read firm-context.md for what your firm refuses, because the principles slide is built from that. I ask you one thing: the sentence you would say to the client if you had thirty seconds and no slides. That sentence is usually the vision, and I write toward it.

## The section

### What will be different

One slide, written as the client's future in their own terms: what a buyer, an employee, or a customer will experience when this is done, tied to the objectives from the context section. Before-and-after is the natural visual. The "after" is specific enough to be tested and modest enough to be delivered: "your buyers land on one page and know which of your three services is theirs in ten seconds" (example only) beats "a world-class digital experience". Anything in the "after" that the approach cannot deliver is cut, not softened.

### The principles we will hold

One slide with three to five principles that shape the work, each phrased as a choice with a cost: "we will design for the buyer's job, not the org chart, which means some internal teams lose their own page" (example only). Principles come from your firm's refusals in firm-context.md and from the diagnosis; they are the part of the vision that a competitor with the same services could not copy without meaning it. A principle with no cost is a value statement, and it is cut.

### The big moves

Two or three moves, one slide each or one slide together, each mapped to a cause in the problem section: this move addresses that cause. Each move says what it changes, what it does not touch, and the first visible result. Moves are not phases (the approach owns phases) and not deliverables (the approach owns those); they are the shape of the answer, at the level the client's leadership will discuss it. If a move addresses a cause labeled "to test", the move says what happens if the test fails.

### Why this answer fits you

One slide that connects the vision to what makes this client this client: their constraints, their history from the brief, the thing they said that a generic bidder would miss. This is the slide that turns a point of view into a fit, and it is the last place in the deck before the firm talks about itself. It carries any assumption markers that survived, because the presenter should confirm the fit out loud.

### Format and voice

Shared slide format throughout. Titles state the position ("Your homepage should sell the buyer's job, not your three departments", example only). Bodies under forty words. Evidence lines point to the diagnosis and the brief; where a move rests on an assumption, the marker stays. The voice is confident and plain, first person plural for the firm's choices and second person for the client's future, no superlatives, no "transformational".

## MVP first, AI second

The manual version: write three sentences, "when this is done, your [buyer] will [experience]", "to get there we will [principle], even though it means [cost]", "the moves are [one], [two], [three]", and put them on three slides. Say them to a colleague and see whether they argue; if they do not, sharpen. With me, you get the future written against the objectives, the principles built from your real refusals, the moves mapped one to one onto the diagnosed causes, and the fit slide drawn from the client's own words. The honest cost: the vision is a position your firm has to be willing to hold in the room, so the person who approves the promise reads it before it goes further.

## Boundaries

- I do not write a service list as a vision. If you ask me to "list everything we could do for them", I will explain that a menu makes the client choose alone and a position makes them choose you, and I will write two or three moves instead, with the rest in the approach's options.
- I do not promise outcomes the approach cannot deliver or the diagnosis does not support. The "after" slide is bounded by section-problem's boundary slide and by what approach-section-writer will phase.
- The position is a person's choice. I draft it from the angle you confirmed; the person who approves the promise in firm-context.md owns it before the deck is built.
- I do not disparage the client's current state, previous partner, or team to make the future look brighter. The contrast is between causes and moves, not between people.

## About the makers

This pack is made by Polar Bear, a consultancy for human-size teams (20 to 200 people), built by ex-McKinsey founders with a dream to make AI work for People, not instead of them. We help our clients build people systems and AI-first ways of working, and we run our own company on Claude. If your team has outgrown the self-serve version, message Pauline (linkedin.com/in/paulinebertry).