Person Research

---
name: person-research
description: "Produces a Person Intelligence Briefing on one or more specific people. Use when preparing to meet, interview, or network with someone and you want to know who they are, what they care about, and where rapport exists."
---

# Person Research Skill

You are producing a **Person Intelligence Briefing** -- a dossier on one or more specific people the user will be meeting or speaking with. Your job is to help the user walk into that conversation knowing *who* is across the table: what they care about, how they think, what they've built, and where natural rapport exists.

---

## Step 0 -- Gather What You Need

**Check memory first.** The user's background and context are likely already saved. Use them -- don't re-ask.

You need:
1. **Person name(s)** -- at minimum one full name
2. **Organization name** -- so you can disambiguate common names and anchor the research
3. **Role/title of each person** (if known) -- helpful but not required; you'll find it
4. **Meeting purpose** (optional but useful) -- e.g., sales call, partnership discussion, networking conversation, investor meeting, media interview. This shapes how you frame the output.

If the user provides a list (e.g., pasted from a calendar invite or email), parse all names from it. If names are ambiguous or very common, ask one clarifying question before researching.

If the user provides only a first name, ask for a last name or role context before proceeding -- first-name-only searches are too noisy to be useful.

### Ask for Uploaded Materials

Before starting research, **always ask** whether the user has any of the following to share:

- **LinkedIn profile PDF(s)** -- A PDF export or saved copy of the person's LinkedIn profile is far richer than what public search returns (full career history, skills, recommendations, activity). Prompt the user: *"Do you have a LinkedIn PDF or screenshot for any of these people? It'll give me a much more complete picture than what I can find via search alone."*
- **Other notes** -- The user may have context from a prior conversation, from the meeting invite, or from their own research. Ask: *"Any other notes about these people -- anything about their role, what they'll be focused on, or what you already know about them?"*

If the user provides uploaded files, read any uploaded PDFs and integrate that information into the research. Uploaded materials take precedence over web search results for factual details (title, tenure, career history) since they're likely more current and complete. Web search then fills in the gaps -- public content, thought leadership, and anything not captured in a LinkedIn profile.

If the user says they don't have anything to upload, proceed directly to web research -- don't block on it.

---

## Step 1 -- Research Plan (Per Person)

For **each** person, run the following searches. Run searches for all people in parallel -- do not serialize by person.

**If the user provided LinkedIn PDFs or notes:** Read those first. They'll likely cover sections 1a (Identity & Role) and 1b (Career Trajectory) thoroughly, so you can skip or reduce those searches and focus web research time on 1c-1f where uploaded materials won't help (thought leadership, public content, management signals, shared connections). Always still run 1c and 1e searches -- a LinkedIn PDF won't capture blog posts, podcast appearances, or patents.

### 1a. Identity & Role
- `"[Full Name]" [Organization]`
- `"[Full Name]" [Organization] LinkedIn`
- `"[Full Name]" title role [Organization]`
- Fetch their LinkedIn profile page if a URL surfaces (the public view often has enough)

**Goal:** Confirm their current title, team/department, how long they've been at the organization, and where they sit in the org.

### 1b. Career Trajectory
- `"[Full Name]" resume background career`
- `"[Full Name]" previously worked at`
- Look at LinkedIn for prior roles, education, and career arc

**Goal:** Understand their path -- did they come up through engineering? Sales? Were they at notable companies before? How long do they stay at organizations? Any pattern (e.g., serial startup joiner, big-co lifer, founder-turned-operator)?

### 1c. Thought Leadership & Public Content
- `"[Full Name]" blog post article`
- `"[Full Name]" podcast interview`
- `"[Full Name]" conference talk speaker`
- `"[Full Name]" [Organization] blog`
- `"[Full Name]" twitter OR linkedin post`
- `"[Full Name]" webinar panel`

**Goal:** Find what they've said publicly. Blog posts, podcast appearances, conference talks, and social posts reveal what they care about, how they communicate, and what they're proud of. These are gold for rapport building.

### 1d. Management & Leadership Signals
- `"[Full Name]" leadership management philosophy`
- `"[Full Name]" team building hiring`
- `"[Full Name]" [Organization] culture`

**Goal:** If they're a senior leader, understand their leadership style and what they value in team members and partners.

### 1e. Patents, Publications & Technical Contributions
- `"[Full Name]" patent`
- `"[Full Name]" publication paper`
- `"[Full Name]" open source GitHub`

**Goal:** Surface any patents, academic publications, or open-source work. These signal deep expertise areas and are excellent conversation anchors.

### 1f. Personal Dimensions
- `"[Full Name]" hobbies interests`
- `"[Full Name]" family` (look for bios, interviews, or profiles that mention personal details)
- `"[Full Name]" volunteer nonprofit board`
- `"[Full Name]" marathon OR triathlon OR cycling OR fitness` (and similar -- adapt based on any hints from LinkedIn bio or social profiles)
- `"[Full Name]" twitter OR instagram OR facebook` (public profiles only)
- `"[Full Name]" interview personal` (personality profiles, "meet the team" features, podcasts where they share personal stories)
- `"[Full Name]" opinion OR stance OR believe` (for surfacing public positions on industry debates, social issues, or professional philosophies)
- Check their LinkedIn "About" section, any personal website or blog "About Me" page, and speaker bios from conferences -- these often contain curated personal details they're comfortable sharing publicly

**Goal:** Build a picture of who this person is beyond their title. Family situation (if publicly shared), hobbies, passions, side projects, causes they support, communities they belong to, and any strongly held opinions or public stances. This context creates natural rapport opportunities and helps avoid landmines. Only include what's in the public domain -- if they've shared it in a bio, blog, podcast, or social profile, it's fair game.

### 1g. Shared Connections & Overlap
Cross-reference what you find about the person against what you know about the user (from memory):
- Shared employers (even if different times)
- Shared technologies, tools, or methodologies
- Overlapping industries or verticals
- Similar career transitions (e.g., both went from IC to leadership)
- Common professional communities, conferences, or interests
- Shared educational institutions or certifications
- Shared hobbies, sports, or personal interests
- Similar family situations or life stage (if publicly known for both)
- Common causes, volunteer work, or community involvement

---

## Step 2 -- Write the Briefing

After completing research on all people, produce the briefing using this structure. Write one section per person, then close with a unified meeting strategy section.

Name the file: `Research - [Organization Name] - [Full Name] - [YYYY-MM-DD].md`

---

### 🎯 PERSON INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING
*Organization: [Organization Name] | Purpose: [Meeting/Conversation Purpose]*
*People: [Count] | Prepared for: [User's name]*

---

For **each person**, write a section with this structure:

#### 👤 [Full Name] -- [Title]

**The Basics**
- Current role and team at [Organization] (and approximate tenure)
- Reports to / manages (if discoverable)
- Location (if relevant)

**Career Arc**
- Where they came from: prior companies, roles, and industries (2-4 key stops)
- Education if available
- Career pattern narrative: what kind of professional are they? (builder, scaler, domain expert, operator, etc.)
- Total years of experience (approximate)

**The Person**
Surface everything publicly available about who they are beyond their job:
- Family: spouse, kids, etc. -- only if they've shared this publicly (LinkedIn bio, podcast interview, speaker bio, personal blog). Note the source.
- Hobbies & interests: sports, music, travel, gaming, cooking, side projects, etc.
- Causes & community: nonprofits, volunteer work, boards, advocacy
- Personality signals: how do they describe themselves? What do they joke about? What do their public posts reveal about their temperament?
- Strongly held opinions or public stances: industry debates they've weighed in on, professional philosophies they've championed, or ideas/approaches they've publicly pushed back on. Flag these clearly -- knowing what someone is *against* is as useful as knowing what they're *for*.
- If very little personal information is public, say so -- that itself tells you they keep a hard line between personal and professional, which is useful context for how to interact with them.

**What They Care About**
This is the most important part. Synthesize from their public content, career choices, and role:
- Topics they write/speak about
- Technologies, methodologies, or frameworks they champion
- Business problems they gravitate toward
- Any stated opinions on leadership, hiring, culture, or craft
- If you couldn't find public content, infer from their role and career trajectory -- but flag that it's inferred, not sourced

**Public Content & Appearances**
List any found content with links:
- Blog posts (title + link)
- Podcast episodes (show name + link)
- Conference talks (event + link)
- Notable social media posts or threads
- Publications or patents

If nothing was found, say so explicitly -- that's useful information too (they're not a public-facing person, which tells you something about their style).

**Communication Style Signals**
Based on their content and background, give your best read on:
- Likely conversation style: structured, conversational, technical deep-dive, high-level strategic?
- Formality level: casual, professional, academic?
- What they're likely focused on given their role and the context of the meeting

**🔗 Connection Points with You**
This is where the prep becomes personal. Map overlaps between this person and the user across both professional and personal dimensions:
- Shared professional experiences (companies, industries, transitions)
- Shared technical skills or tools
- Common interests, hobbies, or personal passions
- Shared life experiences (parenting, geographic ties, etc.)
- Aligned values or causes
- Conversation hooks: specific things the user could reference naturally that would build rapport
- If there are no obvious overlaps, suggest a different angle -- e.g., genuine curiosity about their career path, asking about something they've published, or a question about a hobby or interest they've shared publicly

---

### After all individual sections, close with:

#### 🧭 Unified Meeting Strategy

**Group Dynamics**
- If multiple people are involved, characterize the likely dynamic:
  - What are each person's likely priorities in the conversation?
  - Who holds decision-making authority?
  - Who are the technical or domain experts vs. strategic stakeholders?
  - Are there any cross-functional dynamics worth noting?
- Note any power dynamics or hierarchy you can infer

**Tailored Talking Points**
Based on the combined group, suggest 3-5 things the user should be ready to discuss -- specific stories, experiences, or perspectives from their background that map well to what this group collectively cares about.

**Questions to Ask**
For each person, suggest 1-2 questions tailored to *them specifically* -- informed by their background, role, and what they've said publicly. These should feel natural, not stalker-ish. The goal is to show genuine preparation and curiosity.

Good example: "I saw you joined [Organization] from [Previous Co] about two years ago -- what's been the biggest surprise about the transition?"

Bad example: "I read your LinkedIn post from March 14th about value selling metrics."

**Rapport Traps to Avoid**
Flag anything the user should steer clear of:
- Sensitive organizational history the person lived through (layoffs, reorgs, product failures)
- Topics where the user's perspective might inadvertently signal misalignment
- Over-indexing on one person at the expense of others in the room

---

#### 🔗 Quick-Reference Links

| Person | LinkedIn | Notable Content |
|---|---|---|
| [Name] | [url or "Not found"] | [Best link or "None found"] |

---

## Step 3 -- Confidence & Gaps

Close the briefing with:
- **High confidence:** Which findings are well-sourced (LinkedIn, published content, organization pages)
- **Inferred:** Which assessments are based on role/trajectory rather than direct evidence
- **Gaps:** What you couldn't find and why it matters (e.g., "No public content found for [Name] -- they may be more private/internal-facing, so expect a less predictable conversation style")
- **Suggested follow-ups:** Any additional searches the user might want to do (e.g., "Check if [Name] has a personal blog at [likely domain]" or "Look for [Name] on Twitter/X")

---

## Tone & Format Guidelines

- **Be direct and useful.** This is a working document, not a biography. Every sentence should help the user walk in more prepared.
- **Distinguish fact from inference.** Career history is fact. "They probably care about X" is inference. Label accordingly.
- **Public is fair game, private is not.** The boundary isn't professional vs. personal -- it's public vs. private. If someone mentions their kids in a podcast, puts "trail runner" in their LinkedIn bio, or tweets about a cause they care about, include it. If it took digging through court records or private social media to find, leave it out. The test: could you mention it in conversation and they'd think "oh, you did your homework" rather than "how do you know that?" Always note where you found personal details so the user can judge for themselves.
- **Opinions and stances are high-value intel.** If someone has publicly argued against a methodology, criticized an industry trend, or championed a specific approach, surface it. The user needs to know if they're about to enthusiastically pitch something the person has publicly rejected.
- **Be opinionated.** "This person has written extensively about value-based selling and you've built a Value Consulting practice -- this is your strongest rapport vector" is more useful than "You may have some things in common."
- **Respect information scarcity.** Some people will have rich public footprints. Others will be near-invisible online. That asymmetry is fine -- adapt depth per person. A short section that says "limited public presence; here's what I could infer from their role" is better than padding.

---

## Edge Cases

- **Only one person:** That's fine -- skip the group dynamics section and focus on depth for that one person.
- **Person not found at the organization:** Flag it. They may have recently joined, or the name may be slightly different. Suggest the user confirm with their contact.
- **Very senior executive (CEO, CTO, etc.):** These people often have extensive public profiles. Prioritize recent content (last 12 months) over comprehensive career history. Focus on what they're saying *now* about company direction.
- **Same person appears in both org research and this briefing:** Don't repeat the prior research. Reference it briefly ("covered in prior research") and focus on personal and interpersonal dimensions here.