docs: add adoption dashboard workflow

[hudsonaikins]

Add the missing INT-277 growth ops docs:\n\n- weekly adoption dashboard schema and manual tracking process\n- Friday review template\n- source-of-truth guidance for trackers vs Linear vs benchmark reports\n- growth index updates for discoverability\n\nThe target pipeline and buyer-facing offer docs were already landed in parallel; this commit closes the dashboard / review / source-of-truth slice.

Greptile Summary

This PR (INT-277) adds 11 new documentation files completing the growth ops slice for ProfitCtl's design-partner program: a weekly adoption dashboard schema with manual tracking process, a Friday review template, source-of-truth guidance mapping each artifact to its canonical owner, and supporting growth docs (value proposition, offer, targeting rubric, qualification criteria, outreach sequencing, progress tracking, and target list template). All cross-document links resolve correctly and referenced files exist.

Confidence Score: 5/5

Safe to merge — documentation-only PR with no code changes and all cross-file links verified.

All findings are P2 (documentation state-label misalignment); no code, schema, or logic is affected. The inconsistencies are worth fixing but do not block the merge.

docs/growth/design-partner-outreach-sequencing.md and docs/growth/design-partner-target-list-template.md — state labels don't fully align with the canonical model in design-partner-progress-tracking.md.

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
docs/growth/adoption-dashboard.md	New file defining weekly dashboard schema, metric definitions, and manual tracking process — well-structured with no issues.
docs/growth/weekly-review-template.md	New Friday review template with sections for snapshot, friction, evaluator notes, and Linear follow-through — complete and consistent with adoption-dashboard.md.
docs/growth/source-of-truth-guidance.md	New source-of-truth guidance mapping each artifact to its canonical ownership; all cross-file links resolve correctly.
docs/growth/README.md	Updated index adding items 11–13 for adoption dashboard, weekly review, and source-of-truth; all linked files exist.
docs/growth/design-partner-outreach-sequencing.md	New file defining the 6-stage outreach sequence; Sequence Goal omits the contacted and replied states present in the canonical progress-tracking model.
docs/growth/design-partner-target-list-template.md	New template for the first-10-targets working list; Outreach Status enum skips the qualified state defined in the progress-tracking document.
docs/growth/design-partner-progress-tracking.md	New file with the canonical 9-state target model, weekly review questions, and storage guidance — no issues.
docs/growth/design-partner-qualification-criteria.md	New file defining required criteria, signals, disqualifiers, and outcome labels — complete and internally consistent.
docs/growth/design-partner-targeting-rubric.md	New file with an 8-category 0–2 scoring rubric (max 16) and tiered qualification thresholds — no issues.
docs/growth/design-partner-offer.md	New buyer-facing offer doc covering offer scope, qualification criteria, and first-conversation script — clear and consistent with the wider growth docs.
docs/growth/value-proposition.md	New positioning doc with one-line statement, audience scoping, and call-to-action path — no issues.

Flowchart

%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart TD
    A[Target Identified\ntargeting-rubric.md] --> B[targeted]
    B --> C[contacted]
    C --> D[replied]
    D --> E{Qualify?\nqualification-criteria.md}
    E -->|Pass| F[qualified]
    E -->|Fail| Z[not a fit / closed]
    F --> G[installed\noutreach-sequencing.md Stage 3]
    G --> H[activated\noutreach-sequencing.md Stage 4]
    H --> I[calibrated\noutreach-sequencing.md Stage 5]
    I --> J[design partner\noutreach-sequencing.md Stage 6]
    J --> K[closed]

    subgraph Weekly Loop
        L[adoption-dashboard.md\nFriday update] --> M[weekly-review-template.md\nFriday review]
        M --> N[Linear follow-through]
    end

    subgraph Source of Truth
        O[source-of-truth-guidance.md\nartifact ownership rules]
    end

    J -.->|feeds| L
    N -.->|drives| A

Loading

Prompt To Fix All With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: docs/growth/design-partner-outreach-sequencing.md
Line: 9

Comment:
**Inconsistent state model across three docs**

The Sequence Goal here shows `target → qualified → installed → activated → calibrated → design partner`, omitting `contacted` and `replied`. This conflicts with `design-partner-progress-tracking.md`, which defines the canonical nine-state model (`targeted → contacted → replied → qualified → …`), and with `design-partner-target-list-template.md`, which uses `not contacted` as the initial status and skips `qualified` between `replied` and `installed`. Team members tracking targets across these files will record different state values for the same pipeline position.

```suggestion
`target` -> `contacted` -> `replied` -> `qualified` -> `installed` -> `activated` -> `calibrated` -> `design partner`
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

---

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: docs/growth/design-partner-target-list-template.md
Line: 33

Comment:
**Missing `qualified` state in Outreach Status enum**

The Outreach Status values jump from `replied` directly to `installed`, but `design-partner-progress-tracking.md` defines `qualified` as a distinct state between `replied` and `installed`, and `design-partner-qualification-criteria.md` defines five outcome labels after the qualification step. Without `qualified` here, the target list template can't reflect whether a target passed qualification.

```suggestion
- `Outreach Status`: `not contacted`, `contacted`, `replied`, `qualified`, `installed`, `activated`, `calibrated`, `design partner`
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

_{Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "docs: add adoption dashboard workflow" | Re-trigger Greptile}

Greptile also left 2 inline comments on this PR.

[greptile-apps]

Inconsistent state model across three docs

The Sequence Goal here shows target → qualified → installed → activated → calibrated → design partner, omitting contacted and replied. This conflicts with design-partner-progress-tracking.md, which defines the canonical nine-state model (targeted → contacted → replied → qualified → …), and with design-partner-target-list-template.md, which uses not contacted as the initial status and skips qualified between replied and installed. Team members tracking targets across these files will record different state values for the same pipeline position.

Suggested change

	`target` -> `qualified` -> `installed` -> `activated` -> `calibrated` -> `design partner`
	`target` -> `contacted` -> `replied` -> `qualified` -> `installed` -> `activated` -> `calibrated` -> `design partner`

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: docs/growth/design-partner-outreach-sequencing.md
Line: 9

Comment:
**Inconsistent state model across three docs**

The Sequence Goal here shows `target → qualified → installed → activated → calibrated → design partner`, omitting `contacted` and `replied`. This conflicts with `design-partner-progress-tracking.md`, which defines the canonical nine-state model (`targeted → contacted → replied → qualified → …`), and with `design-partner-target-list-template.md`, which uses `not contacted` as the initial status and skips `qualified` between `replied` and `installed`. Team members tracking targets across these files will record different state values for the same pipeline position.

```suggestion
`target` -> `contacted` -> `replied` -> `qualified` -> `installed` -> `activated` -> `calibrated` -> `design partner`
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

[greptile-apps]

Missing qualified state in Outreach Status enum

The Outreach Status values jump from replied directly to installed, but design-partner-progress-tracking.md defines qualified as a distinct state between replied and installed, and design-partner-qualification-criteria.md defines five outcome labels after the qualification step. Without qualified here, the target list template can't reflect whether a target passed qualification.

Suggested change

	- `Next Step`: the next concrete action, not a vague note
	- `Outreach Status`: `not contacted`, `contacted`, `replied`, `qualified`, `installed`, `activated`, `calibrated`, `design partner`

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: docs/growth/design-partner-target-list-template.md
Line: 33

Comment:
**Missing `qualified` state in Outreach Status enum**

The Outreach Status values jump from `replied` directly to `installed`, but `design-partner-progress-tracking.md` defines `qualified` as a distinct state between `replied` and `installed`, and `design-partner-qualification-criteria.md` defines five outcome labels after the qualification step. Without `qualified` here, the target list template can't reflect whether a target passed qualification.

```suggestion
- `Outreach Status`: `not contacted`, `contacted`, `replied`, `qualified`, `installed`, `activated`, `calibrated`, `design partner`
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.