Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add ace3000chao/book2startup --skill pace-process-chartgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ace3000chao/book2startupWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/pace-process-chart)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/pace-process-chart"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/pace-process-chart/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/pace-process-chart"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/pace-process-chart.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00172 | $0.02719 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00069 | $0.01088 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00544 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00272 |
Grade A, and why
pace-process-chart scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 206 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PACe Process Chart（横向流程问责表）
R — 原文 (Reading)
"The Process Accountability Chart (PACe) lists who is accountable for each of the four to nine processes that drive the business and how each process will be measured."
— Vern Harnish, Scaling Up, 第3章 The Leaders
I — 方法论骨架 (Interpretation)
PACe（流程问责表）是Scaling Up的组织设计核心工具之一。 它的本质是回答一个问题："如果这个流程出了问题，谁负责？"
两个前置概念：
FACe（功能问责表）——纵向：按职能分（销售/市场/技术/财务等）， 每个职能指定一个人和KPIs，保证"对的屁股坐在对的位置上"。
PACe（流程问责表）——横向：按流程分，从客户旅程或价值交付链的角度， 识别4-9个核心业务流程，为每个流程指定一个Owner和度量方式。
为什么需要横向？ 功能分工解决"谁做什么"，流程问责解决"谁保证这个事真的发生"。 很多企业有清晰的职能划分（FACe OK），但流程经常"在夹缝中"—— 每个部门都沾一点，但没有一个人对整体流程负责。
PACe的核心要素：
- 流程名称：用动词+名词（"获取客户"而非"客户获取部门"）
- Owner：对这个流程的输出和持续改进负最终责任的人
- 度量指标：用数字衡量这个流程的健康度
- 流程数量：4-9个（太少=遗漏关键流程；太多=等于没有重点）
4-9个核心流程的典型划分（以服务业为例）：
- 获取客户 / 需求理解 / 方案交付 / 客户满意度 / 收款
A1 — 书中的应用 (Past Application)
案例 1: 客户投诉"没人管"的问题
- 问题: 客户投诉经过多个部门（销售→技术→客服→管理层）， 每个部门都觉得是其他部门的责任，客户等了3周没得到有效回应
- 方法论的使用: 引入PACe——识别"客户服务"作为一个独立流程， 指定Owner和SLA指标（如48小时内首次响应）。Owner有权调动跨部门资源
- 结论: 问题不在于没能力，而在于没"责任人"——流程Owner补上了这个缺口
- 结果: 客户响应时间从3周缩短到48小时
案例 2: 产品交付质量下降但找不到原因
- 问题: 产品质量问题频发，销售怪技术，技术怪采购， 采购怪供应商——循环甩锅，没有尽头
- 方法论的使用: 用PACe识别"供应链质量"和"产品交付"两个流程， 指定两个不同的Owner，用PPM（百万零件缺陷率）和准时交付率来量化
- 结论: 量化指标让问题的根源浮出水面—— 原来是采购换了供应商，但质量验收流程没有同步更新
- 结果: 问题在两周内定位并解决
案例 3: 流程过多导致的"形式主义"
- 问题: 某企业有25个流程，每个流程都有Owner和KPI， 但每个Owner只关注自己的指标，跨流程的衔接问题没人管
- 方法论的使用: 作者指出PACe的原则是"4-9个"核心流程—— 25个流程等于没有优先级。将25个合并为7个核心流程
- 结论: PACe的目的是"聚焦"而非"全覆盖"； 不是给每个工作都找个爹，而是给最重要的价值链环节找个负责人
- 结果: 执行效率和清晰度大幅提升
A2 — 触发场景 (Future Trigger) ★
用户会在什么情境下需要这个 skill?
- 出现跨部门问题时"找不到负责人"——每个部门都说 "这不是我的事"，客户或员工的问题在部门之间漂流没人接
- 某个关键指标持续恶化但原因不明——比如客户满意度 下降，不知道是销售的问题还是产品的问题还是客服的问题
- 企业从"人际协调"向"流程协调"转型——规模大了， 不能靠创始人"叫谁谁动"来推动事情，需要建立流程Owner制度
- 在做组织架构调整时——从职能型向流程型组织演进， 或者要引入新的业务线，需要设计新的流程Owner
- FACe已经建立但执行仍然打折扣——功能分工清晰了， 但"部门之间的事"（handover/衔接）还是没人管
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 206 lines · 172 tokens per session scan A 63b8f4846daa
pace-process-chart is a skill published in the GitHub repository ace3000chao/book2startup (90 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 172 tokens to every session and 2,719 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
project-os
AI project OS for autonomous loop, automated orchestration, and rule-driven execution.
delegation-and-empowerment
Develops the daily practice of effective delegation, accountability diagnosis, and team empowerment. Covers assessing which tasks require personal attention, clarifying scope and context for delegated work, allowing productive struggle, recognising and correcting micromanagement, and leading through influence rather…
team-culture-and-dynamics
Provides daily practices for reading team energy, shaping culture deliberately, writing unwritten rules, diagnosing accountability gaps, balancing personality types, and building high-performing teams through social connection. Use when a team feels stuck or stale, when collaboration derails despite good intentions…
apply-extreme-ownership
Use when leading a team and outcomes are falling short — to apply the principle that the leader owns every result, including failures caused by team members, as the non-negotiable foundation for improving performance and building trust.
design-team-norms
Use when a team is forming, after a significant membership change, or when a recurring dysfunction suggests the team lacks shared agreements on how to work together — to co-create explicit norms covering communication, decision-making, conflict, and accountability.
manage-teams
A system for creating and managing lasting teams of coding agents, including their members, supervisors, shared folders, and team repositories.