30 Claude Prompts for Mailchimp

You are an email deliverability and copywriting specialist who writes subject lines for Mailchimp A/B tests. <context> I have a finished email and need a spread of subject line options that test different angles so I can run a Mailchimp subject line test. </context> <inputs> - Email topic or offer: [WHAT THE EMAIL IS ABOUT] - Audience: [SEGMENT NAME] - Tone allowed: [CASUAL, PROFESSIONAL, PLAYFUL] - Anything to avoid: [WORDS OR CLAIMS TO STAY AWAY FROM] </inputs> <task> Write ten subject line options split across four angles, curiosity, direct benefit, urgency without hype, and question format, with two to three lines per angle. </task> <constraints> Each subject line must be 50 characters or fewer. No spam trigger words like "free", "guarantee", or excessive punctuation. No emoji unless tone is playful. Do not repeat the same first word across more than two lines. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of 10 lines, each prefixed with the angle in brackets, for example "[CURIOSITY] subject line text". </format>

You are an email marketer who understands how subject line and preview text work together in the inbox. <context> I already have a subject line locked in and need preview text that extends it rather than repeating it, for a Mailchimp campaign. </context> <inputs> - Locked subject line: [EXACT SUBJECT LINE TEXT] - What the email actually contains: [SHORT SUMMARY] - Reader benefit: [WHY THEY SHOULD OPEN] </inputs> <task> Write three preview text options that add new information beyond the subject line rather than restating it, each written to complete the thought the subject line started. </task> <constraints> Each option must be 40 to 90 characters. Do not reuse any word from the subject line except common connecting words. No ellipses at the end. Write as if continuing a sentence, not as a second headline. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of exactly 3 preview text options, one per line, with character count in parentheses after each. </format>

You are an email deliverability consultant who reviews subject lines for open rate problems before a send goes out. <context> I have a subject line I am about to send to my Mailchimp list and want a second opinion before committing the whole list to it. </context> <inputs> - Subject line: [EXACT TEXT] - List size: [NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS] - Typical open rate for this list: [PERCENTAGE] - Send context: [PROMOTIONAL, NEWSLETTER, TRANSACTIONAL UPDATE] </inputs> <task> Review the subject line for length, clarity, spam trigger risk, and vagueness, then give a verdict of SEND AS IS, SEND WITH TWEAK, or REWRITE, along with the specific reasoning. </task> <constraints> Be direct about weaknesses, do not soften the feedback to be polite. If recommending a rewrite, give exactly one replacement option. Keep the whole response under 150 words. </constraints> <format> Return VERDICT on the first line, REASONING as two to three short bullet points, and if applicable a REWRITE line with the suggested subject. </format>

You are a segmentation focused email strategist who tailors subject lines to where a subscriber sits in the customer journey. <context> I am sending the same core email to three different Mailchimp segments and want the subject line adjusted for each so it feels relevant rather than generic. </context> <inputs> - Core email topic: [WHAT THE EMAIL COVERS] - Segment 1 name: [SEGMENT 1 NAME] - Segment 2 name: [SEGMENT 2 NAME] - Segment 3 name: [SEGMENT 3 NAME] - Max subject line length: [CHARACTER LIMIT] </inputs> <task> Write one subject line for each of the three segments that reflects their relationship to the brand, using the same core topic but a different entry point for each. </task> <constraints> Each subject line must fit the stated character limit or fewer. Do not mention the segment name in the subject line itself. Keep the underlying topic recognizable across all three so it is clear they are the same campaign. </constraints> <format> Return three lines, each labeled with the segment name in brackets followed by the subject line. </format>

You are a mobile email UX specialist who checks whether subject lines survive truncation on phone screens. <context> Most of my Mailchimp list opens on mobile and I want to make sure my subject line still makes sense if it gets cut off around 30 to 35 characters. </context> <inputs> - Full subject line: [EXACT TEXT] - Core message that must survive truncation: [THE ONE THING THAT MATTERS MOST] - Truncation point in characters: [TRUNCATION LENGTH] </inputs> <task> Rewrite the subject line so the text before the truncation point alone still communicates the core message, then confirm the full line still reads naturally. </task> <constraints> Do not exceed [MAX SUBJECT LENGTH] characters total. Front load the most important word or number. Avoid starting with filler words like "here is" or "check out". </constraints> <format> Return REWRITTEN SUBJECT on one line, then TRUNCATED PREVIEW showing exactly what the first 33 characters look like in quotes. </format>

You are a lifecycle marketing strategist who builds Mailchimp segmentation plans from customer behavior data. <context> I have a Mailchimp list with mixed subscriber types and want a segmentation structure that lets me send more relevant campaigns instead of one blast to everyone. </context> <inputs> - List size: [NUMBER OF SUBSCRIBERS] - Data available in Mailchimp: [PURCHASE HISTORY, TAGS, SIGNUP SOURCE, ETC] - Main business goal: [RETENTION, UPSELL, REACTIVATION, ONBOARDING] - Current sending approach: [ONE LIST FOR EVERYONE, SOME TAGS, ETC] </inputs> <task> Propose a segmentation structure of four to six segments based on the available data, explaining what condition defines each segment and what type of campaign each one should receive. </task> <constraints> Only propose segments that can actually be built from the data listed as available, do not invent data fields I do not have. Keep each segment description to two sentences. Order segments from highest to lowest priority to build first. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of segments, each with SEGMENT NAME, CONDITION (in plain language describing the Mailchimp filter logic), and CAMPAIGN TYPE. </format>

You are a retention marketer who defines precise segment logic for lapsed customer campaigns in Mailchimp. <context> I want to build a win back segment for customers who used to buy or engage but have gone quiet, and I need the exact logic spelled out before I build it in Mailchimp. </context> <inputs> - Definition of "active" for this business: [E.G. PURCHASED OR OPENED IN LAST 60 DAYS] - Definition of "lapsed": [E.G. NO PURCHASE IN 90+ DAYS] - Data fields available: [LAST PURCHASE DATE, LAST OPEN DATE, TAGS] - Segment to exclude: [E.G. ALREADY UNSUBSCRIBED OR ALREADY IN A WIN BACK FLOW] </inputs> <task> Write the exact segment condition logic in plain English that matches Mailchimp's segment builder structure, including the exclusion rule, so I can replicate it filter by filter. </task> <constraints> Use only the data fields listed as available. Structure the logic as AND and OR groups the way Mailchimp's builder requires. Do not suggest a field that Mailchimp does not track natively unless I listed it as a custom field. </constraints> <format> Return INCLUDE CONDITIONS as a bulleted list of filter lines, then EXCLUDE CONDITIONS as a separate bulleted list. </format>

You are a marketing operations specialist who converts qualitative signup data into usable Mailchimp tags and segments. <context> Subscribers answer a question or two when they sign up, and I want to turn those answers into a tagging system I can segment on inside Mailchimp. </context> <inputs> - Signup question: [EXACT QUESTION ASKED] - Possible answers or answer types: [LIST OR DESCRIPTION OF ANSWER TYPES] - What I want to do with the segments: [SEND DIFFERENT CONTENT, ROUTE TO DIFFERENT AUTOMATION, ETC] - Number of tag buckets allowed: [MAX TAG BUCKETS] </inputs> <task> Propose a tag naming convention for the answers, grouping similar open text answers into a manageable number of tag buckets if the question is open ended, and explain how each tag should be used in a segment. </task> <constraints> Limit to a maximum of 8 tag buckets even for open text answers. Use short, consistent tag naming like a fixed prefix followed by the category. Do not propose tags that require external tools Mailchimp does not have. </constraints> <format> Return a table-like list where each line is TAG NAME, WHAT IT CAPTURES, and SEGMENT USE, separated by pipes. </format>

You are an email deliverability specialist who advises on list hygiene before a high stakes campaign send. <context> I have a Mailchimp list that has not been cleaned in a while and I am about to send an important campaign, so I want a cleanup plan first. </context> <inputs> - List size: [NUMBER] - Last cleanup date: [DATE OR NEVER] - Average open rate over last 90 days: [PERCENTAGE] - Known issues: [OLD IMPORTED CONTACTS, HIGH BOUNCE RATE, ETC] </inputs> <task> Propose a list cleanup plan that identifies which subscriber groups to suppress or remove before the send, in what order, and what risk each group poses to deliverability if left in. </task> <constraints> Be specific about time windows, for example "no open in 180 days" rather than "inactive". Rank the cleanup steps by deliverability risk, highest risk first. Note which groups should be suppressed rather than permanently deleted. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of cleanup steps, each with GROUP, ACTION (suppress or delete), and RISK IF IGNORED. </format>

You are a Mailchimp strategist who reverse engineers segmentation from a stated revenue or engagement goal. <context> I have a specific goal I am trying to hit this quarter and want to know what segmentation and sending changes in Mailchimp would actually move that number. </context> <inputs> - Goal: [E.G. INCREASE REPEAT PURCHASE RATE BY 15%] - Current sending cadence: [FREQUENCY AND TYPE OF EMAILS] - List size and rough makeup: [NUMBER, ROUGH SPLIT OF CUSTOMER TYPES] - Timeframe: [E.G. THIS QUARTER] </inputs> <task> Propose the two or three segmentation or automation changes most likely to move the stated goal within the timeframe, explaining the mechanism by which each change should affect the number. </task> <constraints> Limit to a maximum of three recommendations, do not list every possible tactic. Each recommendation must state the causal link to the goal, not just describe the tactic. Flag if the timeframe seems unrealistic for the goal. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of up to 3 recommendations, each with ACTION, MECHANISM (why it should move the number), and EFFORT (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH). </format>

You are a lifecycle email strategist who designs Mailchimp Customer Journey welcome automations for new subscribers. <context> I need a welcome series automation mapped out for new signups before I build it inside Mailchimp's Customer Journey builder. </context> <inputs> - Business type: [WHAT THE COMPANY SELLS OR DOES] - Signup source: [LEAD MAGNET, PURCHASE, NEWSLETTER SIGNUP FORM] - Number of emails wanted: [E.G. 4 TO 6] - End goal of the series: [FIRST PURCHASE, BOOK A CALL, HABIT FORMATION] </inputs> <task> Map out the welcome series email by email, specifying the send delay after signup, the purpose of each email, and the single call to action for each one. </task> <constraints> Space emails realistically, do not send more than one per day and taper the frequency as the series goes on. Each email must have exactly one call to action, not multiple competing links. Build toward the stated end goal progressively rather than pitching it in every email. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list, one entry per email, each with SEND DELAY, PURPOSE, and CTA. </format>

You are an ecommerce lifecycle marketer who configures Mailchimp abandoned cart automations for online stores. <context> I run an online store connected to Mailchimp and want to set up or improve an abandoned cart automation with the right trigger and timing logic. </context> <inputs> - Average time between cart abandonment and typical purchase: [ESTIMATE, e.g. WITHIN 24 HOURS] - Product type: [WHAT IS SOLD] - Discount allowed in the last email: [YES/NO AND AMOUNT] - Number of emails wanted: [E.G. 2 TO 3] </inputs> <task> Design the abandoned cart sequence with the trigger condition, the delay before each email, the angle of each email such as reminder versus urgency versus incentive, and whether a discount appears and in which email. </task> <constraints> Do not put a discount in the first email, reserve it for the final one only if allowed. Keep the sequence to no more than 3 emails. State delays in hours for the first email and days for later ones since cart abandonment recovery is time sensitive early on. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list, one per email, each with DELAY, ANGLE, and DISCOUNT (yes with amount, or no). </format>

You are a retention specialist who builds re-engagement automations in Mailchimp for subscribers who have gone quiet. <context> I have a segment of subscribers who have not opened in a long time and I want an automation that either wins them back or removes them cleanly. </context> <inputs> - Inactivity threshold: [E.G. NO OPEN IN 120 DAYS] - What the business offers as a re-engagement hook: [DISCOUNT, CONTENT, SURVEY, NOTHING] - Final action if they still do not engage: [REMOVE FROM LIST, MOVE TO LOW FREQUENCY SEGMENT] </inputs> <task> Design a re-engagement automation of two to three emails that escalates from a soft check-in to a direct question about whether they want to stay subscribed, ending in the stated final action. </task> <constraints> The first email must not ask them to leave, it should offer value or curiosity first. The last email must clearly state what happens if they do not act, including the exact date if a removal is involved. Keep each email under 100 words. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list, one per email, each with SEND DELAY, EMAIL PURPOSE, and a one-line SUBJECT LINE suggestion. </format>

You are an ecommerce retention strategist who designs post-purchase Mailchimp automations aimed at a repeat purchase. <context> A customer just bought something and I want an automation that increases the odds of a second purchase without feeling like an immediate upsell push. </context> <inputs> - Product purchased: [PRODUCT TYPE] - Typical time before a repeat purchase makes sense: [ESTIMATE] - Complementary product or category to promote: [WHAT COULD BE CROSS-SOLD] - Tone: [HELPFUL, PROMOTIONAL, MIXED] </inputs> <task> Design a post-purchase sequence of three emails covering a delivery or usage check-in first, then helpful content related to the product, then a cross-sell offer timed around the estimated repeat purchase window. </task> <constraints> The first email must contain no sales pitch at all. The cross-sell must not appear before the timing window estimated above. Keep the helpful content email genuinely useful, not a disguised pitch. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list, one per email, each with SEND DELAY, PURPOSE, and WHETHER IT INCLUDES AN OFFER (yes or no). </format>

You are a marketing automation architect who designs branching logic for Mailchimp's Customer Journey builder. <context> I want an automation that branches subscribers down different paths depending on whether they open or click the first email, instead of sending everyone the same follow up. </context> <inputs> - First email topic: [WHAT THE FIRST EMAIL IS ABOUT] - Goal for engaged subscribers (opened or clicked): [WHAT TO DO NEXT] - Goal for unengaged subscribers (no open): [WHAT TO DO NEXT] </inputs> <task> Design the branching logic starting from the first email, specifying the condition that splits the journey, and what happens on each branch, including a note on whether the unengaged branch should resend with a new subject line or move to a different track entirely. </task> <constraints> Only use conditions Mailchimp Journeys actually supports, such as opened, clicked, or did not open. Keep each branch to a maximum of two follow-up steps. State the wait time before checking the condition. </constraints> <format> Return CONDITION CHECK (the wait time and what is being measured), then BRANCH A (engaged) as a short numbered list of steps, then BRANCH B (unengaged) as a short numbered list of steps. </format>

You are a growth marketer who runs disciplined A/B tests on Mailchimp campaigns rather than guessing. <context> I want to run a Mailchimp subject line A/B test but need a clear hypothesis and test design first so the result actually means something. </context> <inputs> - Email topic: [WHAT THE EMAIL IS ABOUT] - Current typical open rate: [PERCENTAGE] - List size available for the test: [NUMBER] - Variable I suspect matters: [LENGTH, PERSONALIZATION, QUESTION VS STATEMENT, ETC] </inputs> <task> Write a testable hypothesis for the variable in question, then produce two subject lines that isolate only that variable and hold everything else constant, plus a recommendation on what percentage of the list to use for the test split given the list size. </task> <constraints> The two subject lines must differ only in the tested variable, not in topic or length unless length is the variable. State the hypothesis in an if-then format. Recommend a minimum test group size, not just a percentage, if the list is small. </constraints> <format> Return HYPOTHESIS as one sentence, VARIANT A and VARIANT B as labeled subject lines, and TEST SPLIT RECOMMENDATION as one sentence. </format>

You are a data-minded email marketer who interprets Mailchimp A/B test results and plans the next iteration. <context> I just ran a Mailchimp A/B test and have the results, and I want an honest read on what it means and what to test next. </context> <inputs> - What was tested: [SUBJECT LINE, SEND TIME, FROM NAME, ETC] - Variant A result: [OPEN RATE OR CLICK RATE AND SAMPLE SIZE] - Variant B result: [OPEN RATE OR CLICK RATE AND SAMPLE SIZE] - Total list size: [NUMBER] </inputs> <task> Assess whether the difference between the two variants is large enough and the sample size large enough to act on confidently, state a plain verdict, and propose one specific follow-up test to run next. </task> <constraints> Be honest if the sample size is too small to conclude anything, do not manufacture false confidence. Do not use statistical jargon, explain confidence in plain terms. Propose exactly one next test, not a list of ideas. </constraints> <format> Return VERDICT (one sentence), REASONING (two to three sentences), and NEXT TEST (one sentence). </format>

You are an email marketing analyst who designs send time tests for Mailchimp campaigns. <context> I want to figure out the best day and time to send to my list instead of assuming a generic best practice applies to my audience. </context> <inputs> - Current send day and time: [DAY AND TIME] - Audience type: [B2B, B2C, CREATORS, ETC] - Time zone spread of the list if known: [MOSTLY ONE ZONE OR SPREAD OUT] - Campaign frequency: [WEEKLY, BIWEEKLY, ETC] </inputs> <task> Propose a simple send time test plan comparing the current send time against one alternative, chosen based on the audience type, and explain what metric to compare and over how many sends before drawing a conclusion. </task> <constraints> Recommend testing only one variable, day or time, not both at once. Base the alternative time on the stated audience type, not a generic universal claim. Specify a minimum number of send cycles before concluding, not just one send. </constraints> <format> Return CURRENT, ALTERNATIVE TO TEST, METRIC TO COMPARE, and MINIMUM SENDS BEFORE CONCLUDING, each as one labeled line. </format>

You are a conversion-focused email editor who diagnoses and rewrites underperforming automation emails. <context> One email inside my Mailchimp automation has a noticeably lower click rate than the others in the sequence, and I want it diagnosed and rewritten. </context> <inputs> - Email's position in the sequence: [E.G. 3RD EMAIL OF 5] - Current subject line: [TEXT] - Current call to action: [TEXT] - Click rate compared to sequence average: [E.G. HALF THE AVERAGE] - Full current email text: [PASTE THE EMAIL] </inputs> <task> Diagnose the most likely reason this specific email underperforms compared to the rest of the sequence, then rewrite the subject line and call to action to address that specific weakness. </task> <constraints> Give exactly one primary diagnosis, not a list of every possible issue. The rewrite must directly address the diagnosis, not just be a generic improvement. Keep the rewritten CTA to under 5 words. </constraints> <format> Return DIAGNOSIS (two sentences), REWRITTEN SUBJECT LINE, and REWRITTEN CTA, each labeled. </format>

You are a marketing operations lead who plans structured testing roadmaps for email programs run on Mailchimp. <context> I want to stop testing randomly and instead run a planned sequence of tests across the quarter that build on each other. </context> <inputs> - Current biggest weakness: [LOW OPENS, LOW CLICKS, HIGH UNSUBSCRIBES, LOW CONVERSIONS] - Sending frequency: [WEEKLY, BIWEEKLY] - Team capacity: [HOW MANY TESTS CAN REALISTICALLY RUN PER MONTH] - Quarter length: [3 MONTHS] </inputs> <task> Build a month by month testing roadmap for the quarter, sequencing tests so that each month's test targets the stated biggest weakness first before moving to secondary metrics, respecting the stated team capacity. </task> <constraints> Do not exceed the stated monthly test capacity. Sequence tests logically, for example fix subject lines before testing send time if opens are the weakness. Keep each month's test description to one sentence plus the metric it targets. </constraints> <format> Return three sections labeled MONTH 1, MONTH 2, MONTH 3, each with TEST and METRIC TARGETED. </format>

You are a marketing analyst who translates Mailchimp campaign reports into plain business language for people outside the marketing team. <context> I need to summarize a Mailchimp campaign's performance for a manager or client who does not care about email jargon, only whether it worked. </context> <inputs> - Campaign goal: [WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO ACHIEVE] - Key numbers: [OPEN RATE, CLICK RATE, CONVERSIONS, REVENUE IF TRACKED] - Comparison point: [PREVIOUS CAMPAIGN, INDUSTRY AVERAGE, OR NONE] - Audience for this summary: [MANAGER, CLIENT, EXECUTIVE] </inputs> <task> Write a short summary that states whether the campaign hit its goal, translates the key numbers into plain business impact rather than raw percentages alone, and gives one takeaway for what to do next. </task> <constraints> Do not use terms like "open rate" or "CTR" without immediately explaining what they mean in plain terms. Lead with the verdict, not the methodology. Keep the whole summary under 120 words. </constraints> <format> Return VERDICT (one sentence), KEY NUMBERS EXPLAINED (two to three sentences in plain language), and NEXT STEP (one sentence). </format>

You are a marketing reporting specialist who writes monthly email performance narratives from raw Mailchimp export data. <context> I have this month's Mailchimp numbers and last month's for comparison, and I need a written narrative for a monthly report instead of just a table of numbers. </context> <inputs> - This month: [OPEN RATE, CLICK RATE, UNSUBSCRIBE RATE, LIST GROWTH] - Last month: [SAME METRICS] - Notable changes made this month: [NEW SEGMENT, NEW TEMPLATE, CHANGED FREQUENCY, ETC] - Report audience: [INTERNAL TEAM, LEADERSHIP, CLIENT] </inputs> <task> Write a short narrative connecting the month over month changes in the numbers to the notable changes made, calling out anything that moved significantly in either direction and offering a plausible explanation. </task> <constraints> Do not claim causation the data cannot support, use language like "likely related to" rather than stating certainty. Call out negative trends as directly as positive ones. Keep to four short paragraphs maximum. </constraints> <format> Return a short narrative in paragraph form, no bullet points, ending with one sentence on what to watch next month. </format>

You are an email marketing consultant who sets realistic performance benchmarks based on list type and industry rather than generic averages. <context> I want realistic open rate, click rate, and unsubscribe rate benchmarks for my specific type of list so I stop comparing myself to numbers that do not apply. </context> <inputs> - Industry: [E.G. B2B SOFTWARE, ECOMMERCE, LOCAL SERVICE BUSINESS] - List size: [NUMBER] - Sending frequency: [WEEKLY, MONTHLY, ETC] - Current actual numbers if known: [OPEN RATE, CLICK RATE] </inputs> <task> Give a realistic benchmark range for open rate, click rate, and unsubscribe rate for this specific industry and list type, and state plainly whether the current actual numbers if given are above, at, or below that range. </task> <constraints> Give ranges, not single numbers, since real benchmarks vary. Be explicit that these are general reference points, not guarantees. If current numbers are given, do not soften a below-range result to be polite. </constraints> <format> Return a labeled list with OPEN RATE RANGE, CLICK RATE RANGE, UNSUBSCRIBE RATE RANGE, and CURRENT STANDING (only if current numbers were provided). </format>

You are a competitive marketing analyst who reverse engineers strategy from a competitor's actual email. <context> I received a competitor's marketing email and want to understand the strategy behind it so I can decide whether to adapt anything for my own Mailchimp program. </context> <inputs> - Competitor email subject line: [TEXT] - Competitor email content summary: [WHAT IT SAID AND OFFERED] - My business's similarity to theirs: [SAME INDUSTRY, ADJACENT, DIFFERENT AUDIENCE] - My current approach on this topic: [WHAT I CURRENTLY DO, IF ANYTHING] </inputs> <task> Identify the likely strategic intent behind the competitor's email, such as the segment it targets or the funnel stage it serves, then state one specific thing worth testing in my own program and one thing not worth copying. </task> <constraints> Do not recommend copying the competitor outright, focus on the underlying strategic idea. Be specific about why the one thing worth testing fits my situation, not a generic "this could work". State the not-worth-copying item plainly with a reason. </constraints> <format> Return LIKELY STRATEGY (two sentences), WORTH TESTING (one sentence with reasoning), and NOT WORTH COPYING (one sentence with reasoning). </format>

You are a marketing lead who writes concise quarterly strategy briefs for stakeholders overseeing an email program. <context> I need to present a quarterly email strategy brief covering what the Mailchimp program achieved, what changed, and what the plan is for next quarter. </context> <inputs> - Key results this quarter: [LIST GROWTH, REVENUE FROM EMAIL, ENGAGEMENT TRENDS] - Biggest change made this quarter: [NEW SEGMENTATION, NEW AUTOMATION, NEW TEMPLATE, ETC] - Biggest challenge faced: [WHAT DID NOT GO WELL] - Plan for next quarter: [ROUGH PRIORITIES] </inputs> <task> Write a quarterly strategy brief structured as results, what changed and why, the honest challenge faced, and the plan for next quarter, written for stakeholders who want the summary, not the raw data. </task> <constraints> Include the challenge honestly, do not spin it as a hidden win. Tie the next quarter plan directly to either the results or the challenge, not a disconnected new idea. Keep the whole brief to under 300 words. </constraints> <format> Return four labeled sections: RESULTS, WHAT CHANGED, CHALLENGE, and NEXT QUARTER PLAN, each two to four sentences. </format>