Churn prediction skill
Builds churn prediction: leading indicators, account risk scores, early-warning alerts, and intervention playbooks tied to each risk level.
by LeadMagic·MIT license·★ 62 Stars on the repo·GitHub ↗
npx degit LeadMagic/gtm-skills/skills/lifecycle/churn-prediction#main ~/.claude/skills/churn-predictionChecked ·commit main
Inside this skill
SKILL.md · the author's own words# Churn Prediction ## Overview Churn prediction shifts retention from reactive ("they cancelled — now what?") to proactive ("this account shows 3 risk signals — intervene now"). Early intervention reduces churn by 20-40% compared to waiting for cancellation. This skill covers modeling leading indicators, building risk scores, and designing intervention playbooks. ## Authoritative Foundations - **Gainsight — Customer health scores** — Combine product usage, support signals, relationship depth, and sentiment into a weighted score… - **Lincoln Murphy — Desired Outcome** — Customers churn when they stop reaching their desired outcome; predict churn from outcome progress… - **Patrick Campbell (ProfitWell) — Voluntary vs involuntary churn** — Model failed-payment churn separately; it has different leading indi… ## When to Use - "Build a churn prediction model"
Word-for-word excerpt, not a result. Read the full SKILL.md ↓
Files of Churn prediction
Show the full text172 lines
Churn Prediction
Overview
Churn prediction shifts retention from reactive ("they cancelled — now what?") to proactive ("this account shows 3 risk signals — intervene now"). Early intervention reduces churn by 20-40% compared to waiting for cancellation. This skill covers modeling leading indicators, building risk scores, and designing intervention playbooks.
Authoritative Foundations
- Gainsight — Customer health scores — Combine product usage, support signals, relationship depth, and sentiment into a weighted score with clear red, yellow, and green thresholds.
- Lincoln Murphy — Desired Outcome — Customers churn when they stop reaching their desired outcome; predict churn from outcome progress, not logins alone.
- Patrick Campbell (ProfitWell) — Voluntary vs involuntary churn — Model failed-payment churn separately; it has different leading indicators and fixes than dissatisfaction churn.
When to Use
- "Build a churn prediction model"
- "Predict which accounts will churn"
- "Churn risk scoring"
- "Early warning system"
- "Retention analytics"
Lifecycle Stage
Retention (stage 6). Canonical index → references/gtm-lifecycle-stages.md.
Metrics → references/lifecycle-metrics-by-stage.md (Retention).
Scorecard → the gtm-metrics skill (stage-health-scorecard.md) (Retention panel).
Core Principle
The best churn signal is not "they stopped paying" — it's the behavior pattern they exhibit 60-90 days before they stop paying. Your job is to find those leading indicators and act on them while there's still time.
Step-by-Step Process
Phase 1: Identify Leading Indicators
Analyze churned customers looking back 90 days before cancellation:
Product Usage Signals:
- Login frequency declining (weekly → bi-weekly → monthly)
- Key feature usage dropping (>30% decline month-over-month)
- Time since last key action > 14 days
- Multiple users stopped logging in (if multi-seat)
- Failed imports/integrations (3+ failures = high frustration)
Engagement Signals:
- Stopped opening emails (unengaged for 30+ days)
- Support ticket sentiment turning negative
- No response to CSM outreach (2+ attempts)
- Missed QBR or success review meeting
- Stopped attending webinars/events they previously attended
Business Signals:
- Champion left the company (detected via LinkedIn)
- Company had layoffs or restructuring
- Budget cut or freeze in their department
- New competitor evaluation (detected via intent data)
- Contract renewal window approaching with no engagement
Phase 2: Build Risk Scoring Model
Weight each signal on a 0-100 risk score:
Critical (40 points max):
- Champion departure: 40 points
- Key feature usage down >50%: 35 points
- No login in 30+ days: 30 points
High (25 points max):
- Support ticket spike (3+ in 7 days): 20 points
- No response to CSM in 14+ days: 15 points
- Missed renewal meeting: 10 points
Medium (20 points max):
- Email engagement dropped to 0: 10 points
- Usage declining 20-30% MoM: 10 points
- New competitor intent signal: 5 points (cumulative)
Low (15 points max):
- Weather signal: minor usage dip, one missed meeting
Risk Tiers:
- Red (70+): Immediate executive intervention required. Cancel risk in <30 days.
- Yellow (40-69): CSM intervention this week. Cancel risk in 30-60 days.
- Green (<40): Standard monitoring.
Phase 3: Intervention Playbooks
Red Account Playbook:
- Day 0: CSM calls within 4 hours. "I noticed [specific signal]. Everything ok?"
- Day 0: Executive sponsor reaches out. "Your success is critical to us — let's solve whatever is blocking you."
- Day 1: Root cause analysis. Is it product, support, business, or competition?
- Day 3: Action plan presented to customer. Specific timeline. Named owner.
- Day 7: Check-in. "Is the plan working? What else do you need?"
- Day 14: Success review. Have the signals reversed? If not, escalate to VP CS.
Yellow Account Playbook:
- Day 0: CSM email: "Noticed [signal] — quick check-in?"
- Day 2: If no reply, call.
- Day 5: Value reinforcement: usage stats, ROI summary, new features they should try
- Day 10: If signals persist, escalate to Red playbook
Phase 4: Automated Monitoring
- Daily scan: Run risk model on all accounts every 24 hours
- Alert routing: Red → CSM + VP CS + Account Executive. Yellow → CSM only.
- Slack/email alerts: "Account ABC moved to RED risk — champion departed, usage down 60%."
- Dashboard: Real-time risk heatmap of all accounts. Sort by risk score.
- Trend tracking: Is risk score improving or worsening week-over-week?
Phase 5: Feedback Loop
- Churn post-mortem: For every churned account, review: what signals were present 90 days before churn? Why weren't they acted on? What signal did we miss?
- Model refinement: Every quarter, update signal weights based on which signals actually predicted churn vs false positives
- False positive analysis: Accounts flagged red that didn't churn — what made them different? Refine model.
- Precision vs recall balance: High precision = fewer false alarms but may miss churn. High recall = catch more churn but more false alarms. Tune based on CSM capacity.
Output Format
Churn prediction model with: leading indicator catalog, risk scoring algorithm, intervention playbooks, automated monitoring setup, and feedback loop.
Quality Check
Before delivering, verify:
- All required sections are complete
- Output matches the user's stated need
- Named frameworks are cited for key recommendations
- No vague claims — every recommendation has a specific action
- Deliverable is ready for operational use, not just conceptual
Common Pitfalls
- Skipping research. Building output without understanding the specific context. Fix: always gather required inputs before producing deliverables.
- Generic output. "Improve your process" without concrete steps. Fix: every recommendation must include a specific action, timeline, and owner.
- Missing framework citations. Advice without named authorities. Fix: ground every recommendation in a cited framework from a recognized authority.
Execution Artifacts
references/framework-notes.md— Named frameworks and reference tablestemplates/output-template.md— Deliverable shell for agent outputscripts/check-output.py— Lightweight deliverable validator Canonical lifecycle:references/gtm-lifecycle-stages.md(Retention) ·references/lifecycle-metrics-by-stage.md· thegtm-metricsskill (stage-health-scorecard.md)
Related Skills
- churn-prevention, cs-playbooks, onboarding-sequences, lifecycle-drips, expansion-selling
| 1 | |
| 2 | name churn-prediction |
| 3 | description >- |
| 4 | Builds churn prediction: leading indicators, account risk scores, |
| 5 | early-warning alerts, and intervention playbooks tied to each risk level. Use |
| 6 | when the user wants to predict which accounts will churn, score churn risk, or |
| 7 | set up a retention early-warning system. Triggers on: "churn prediction", |
| 8 | "predict churn", "churn model", "early warning", "risk scoring". |
| 9 | license MIT |
| 10 | compatibility Claude Code, Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, OpenCode, Goose, Hermes, Windsurf, Zed |
| 11 | metadata |
| 12 | version "1.0.0" |
| 13 | author LeadMagic |
| 14 | category lifecycle |
| 15 | tags [lifecycle, churn-prediction, risk-scoring, retention, analytics] |
| 16 | frameworks |
| 17 | - "Gainsight — Customer health scores" |
| 18 | - "Lincoln Murphy — Desired Outcome" |
| 19 | - "Patrick Campbell (ProfitWell) — Voluntary vs involuntary churn" |
| 20 | |
| 21 | |
| 22 | # Churn Prediction |
| 23 | |
| 24 | ## Overview |
| 25 | Churn prediction shifts retention from reactive ("they cancelled — now what?") |
| 26 | to proactive ("this account shows 3 risk signals — intervene now"). Early |
| 27 | intervention reduces churn by 20-40% compared to waiting for cancellation. |
| 28 | This skill covers modeling leading indicators, building risk scores, and |
| 29 | designing intervention playbooks. |
| 30 | |
| 31 | ## Authoritative Foundations |
| 32 | **Gainsight — Customer health scores** — Combine product usage, support signals, relationship depth, and sentiment into a weighted score with clear red, yellow, and green thresholds. |
| 33 | **Lincoln Murphy — Desired Outcome** — Customers churn when they stop reaching their desired outcome; predict churn from outcome progress, not logins alone. |
| 34 | **Patrick Campbell (ProfitWell) — Voluntary vs involuntary churn** — Model failed-payment churn separately; it has different leading indicators and fixes than dissatisfaction churn. |
| 35 | |
| 36 | ## When to Use |
| 37 | "Build a churn prediction model" |
| 38 | "Predict which accounts will churn" |
| 39 | "Churn risk scoring" |
| 40 | "Early warning system" |
| 41 | "Retention analytics" |
| 42 | |
| 43 | ## Lifecycle Stage |
| 44 | |
| 45 | **Retention** (stage 6). Canonical index → `references/gtm-lifecycle-stages.md`. |
| 46 | Metrics → `references/lifecycle-metrics-by-stage.md` (Retention). |
| 47 | Scorecard → the `gtm-metrics` skill (stage-health-scorecard.md) (Retention panel). |
| 48 | |
| 49 | ## Core Principle |
| 50 | > The best churn signal is not "they stopped paying" — it's the behavior |
| 51 | > pattern they exhibit 60-90 days before they stop paying. Your job is to |
| 52 | > find those leading indicators and act on them while there's still time. |
| 53 | |
| 54 | ## Step-by-Step Process |
| 55 | |
| 56 | ### Phase 1: Identify Leading Indicators |
| 57 | Analyze churned customers looking back 90 days before cancellation: |
| 58 | |
| 59 | **Product Usage Signals:** |
| 60 | Login frequency declining (weekly → bi-weekly → monthly) |
| 61 | Key feature usage dropping (>30% decline month-over-month) |
| 62 | Time since last key action > 14 days |
| 63 | Multiple users stopped logging in (if multi-seat) |
| 64 | Failed imports/integrations (3+ failures = high frustration) |
| 65 | |
| 66 | **Engagement Signals:** |
| 67 | Stopped opening emails (unengaged for 30+ days) |
| 68 | Support ticket sentiment turning negative |
| 69 | No response to CSM outreach (2+ attempts) |
| 70 | Missed QBR or success review meeting |
| 71 | Stopped attending webinars/events they previously attended |
| 72 | |
| 73 | **Business Signals:** |
| 74 | Champion left the company (detected via LinkedIn) |
| 75 | Company had layoffs or restructuring |
| 76 | Budget cut or freeze in their department |
| 77 | New competitor evaluation (detected via intent data) |
| 78 | Contract renewal window approaching with no engagement |
| 79 | |
| 80 | ### Phase 2: Build Risk Scoring Model |
| 81 | Weight each signal on a 0-100 risk score: |
| 82 | |
| 83 | **Critical (40 points max):** |
| 84 | Champion departure: 40 points |
| 85 | Key feature usage down >50%: 35 points |
| 86 | No login in 30+ days: 30 points |
| 87 | |
| 88 | **High (25 points max):** |
| 89 | Support ticket spike (3+ in 7 days): 20 points |
| 90 | No response to CSM in 14+ days: 15 points |
| 91 | Missed renewal meeting: 10 points |
| 92 | |
| 93 | **Medium (20 points max):** |
| 94 | Email engagement dropped to 0: 10 points |
| 95 | Usage declining 20-30% MoM: 10 points |
| 96 | New competitor intent signal: 5 points (cumulative) |
| 97 | |
| 98 | **Low (15 points max):** |
| 99 | Weather signal: minor usage dip, one missed meeting |
| 100 | |
| 101 | **Risk Tiers:** |
| 102 | Red (70+): Immediate executive intervention required. Cancel risk in <30 days. |
| 103 | Yellow (40-69): CSM intervention this week. Cancel risk in 30-60 days. |
| 104 | Green (<40): Standard monitoring. |
| 105 | |
| 106 | ### Phase 3: Intervention Playbooks |
| 107 | |
| 108 | **Red Account Playbook:** |
| 109 | Day 0: CSM calls within 4 hours. "I noticed [specific signal]. Everything ok?" |
| 110 | Day 0: Executive sponsor reaches out. "Your success is critical to us — let's |
| 111 | solve whatever is blocking you." |
| 112 | Day 1: Root cause analysis. Is it product, support, business, or competition? |
| 113 | Day 3: Action plan presented to customer. Specific timeline. Named owner. |
| 114 | Day 7: Check-in. "Is the plan working? What else do you need?" |
| 115 | Day 14: Success review. Have the signals reversed? If not, escalate to VP CS. |
| 116 | |
| 117 | **Yellow Account Playbook:** |
| 118 | Day 0: CSM email: "Noticed [signal] — quick check-in?" |
| 119 | Day 2: If no reply, call. |
| 120 | Day 5: Value reinforcement: usage stats, ROI summary, new features they should try |
| 121 | Day 10: If signals persist, escalate to Red playbook |
| 122 | |
| 123 | ### Phase 4: Automated Monitoring |
| 124 | **Daily scan:** Run risk model on all accounts every 24 hours |
| 125 | **Alert routing:** Red → CSM + VP CS + Account Executive. Yellow → CSM only. |
| 126 | **Slack/email alerts:** "Account ABC moved to RED risk — champion departed, |
| 127 | usage down 60%." |
| 128 | **Dashboard:** Real-time risk heatmap of all accounts. Sort by risk score. |
| 129 | **Trend tracking:** Is risk score improving or worsening week-over-week? |
| 130 | |
| 131 | ### Phase 5: Feedback Loop |
| 132 | **Churn post-mortem:** For every churned account, review: what signals were |
| 133 | present 90 days before churn? Why weren't they acted on? What signal did we miss? |
| 134 | **Model refinement:** Every quarter, update signal weights based on which |
| 135 | signals actually predicted churn vs false positives |
| 136 | **False positive analysis:** Accounts flagged red that didn't churn — what |
| 137 | made them different? Refine model. |
| 138 | **Precision vs recall balance:** High precision = fewer false alarms but |
| 139 | may miss churn. High recall = catch more churn but more false alarms. |
| 140 | Tune based on CSM capacity. |
| 141 | |
| 142 | ## Output Format |
| 143 | Churn prediction model with: leading indicator catalog, risk scoring algorithm, |
| 144 | intervention playbooks, automated monitoring setup, and feedback loop. |
| 145 | |
| 146 | |
| 147 | |
| 148 | ## Quality Check |
| 149 | |
| 150 | Before delivering, verify: |
| 151 | [ ] All required sections are complete |
| 152 | [ ] Output matches the user's stated need |
| 153 | [ ] Named frameworks are cited for key recommendations |
| 154 | [ ] No vague claims — every recommendation has a specific action |
| 155 | [ ] Deliverable is ready for operational use, not just conceptual |
| 156 | |
| 157 | ## Common Pitfalls |
| 158 | |
| 159 | **Skipping research.** Building output without understanding the specific context. Fix: always gather required inputs before producing deliverables. |
| 160 | **Generic output.** "Improve your process" without concrete steps. Fix: every recommendation must include a specific action, timeline, and owner. |
| 161 | **Missing framework citations.** Advice without named authorities. Fix: ground every recommendation in a cited framework from a recognized authority. |
| 162 | |
| 163 | ## Execution Artifacts |
| 164 | |
| 165 | `references/framework-notes.md` — Named frameworks and reference tables |
| 166 | `templates/output-template.md` — Deliverable shell for agent output |
| 167 | `scripts/check-output.py` — Lightweight deliverable validator |
| 168 | **Canonical lifecycle:** `references/gtm-lifecycle-stages.md` (Retention) · `references/lifecycle-metrics-by-stage.md` · the `gtm-metrics` skill (stage-health-scorecard.md) |
| 169 | |
| 170 | ## Related Skills |
| 171 | churn-prevention, cs-playbooks, onboarding-sequences, lifecycle-drips, expansion-selling |
| 172 |
Discussion
Alternatives
Browse more free Claude skills or everything in Customer support.