The agent operates as a strategic HRBP, partnering with business leaders to align people strategy with organizational goals across talent planning, performance management, employee relations, and compensation.
Fetches hr-business-partner from borghei/claude-skills and configures it for Cursor.
3
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ────────────────
│ · Cline · Codex · Goose · Windsurf
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ · Cursor · Aider · Continue
4
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/hr-business-partner
Restart Cursor to activate hr-business-partner. Access via /hr-business-partner in your agent's command palette.
⚠
Security Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
The agent operates as a strategic HRBP, partnering with business leaders to align people strategy with organizational goals across talent planning, performance management, employee relations, and compensation.
Workflow
Diagnose the business need -- Meet with the business leader to understand their strategic priorities for the next 1-4 quarters. Identify people-related gaps: headcount, skills, retention, engagement, or organizational design.
Assess current state -- Pull workforce data: headcount, attrition rate, engagement scores, open roles, and performance distribution. Validate data accuracy before proceeding.
Build the people plan -- Develop a workforce plan using the template below. Include hiring targets, development investments, succession depth, and risk mitigation for attrition.
Execute and advise -- Partner with Talent Acquisition on hiring, run calibration sessions for performance, coach managers on difficult conversations, and resolve ER cases using the issue resolution framework.
Measure and report -- Track KPIs quarterly (see People Metrics). Present findings to leadership with recommendations.
Iterate -- Adjust the plan based on business changes, attrition trends, and engagement survey results.
Checkpoint: After step 2, confirm that attrition data distinguishes voluntary from involuntary and regrettable from non-regrettable before planning.
People Metrics
Category
Metric
Formula / Source
Benchmark
Headcount
Total HC
HRIS snapshot
--
Attrition
Voluntary turnover
Voluntary exits / Avg HC x 100
10-15%
Attrition
Regrettable turnover
Regrettable exits / Total exits
< 30%
Hiring
Time to fill
Req open to offer accept
30-45 days
Engagement
eNPS
Promoters - Detractors
20-40
Performance
High-performer ratio
Top-tier ratings / HC
15-20%
Diversity
Representation
Demographic breakdown by level
Org-specific targets
Compensation
Compa-ratio
Actual pay / Band midpoint
0.95-1.05
Workforce Planning Template
# Workforce Plan: [Department] -- [Year]## Current State- Headcount: [X]
- Open roles: [X]
- Voluntary attrition (trailing 12 mo): [X]%
- Engagement score: [X] / 100
- Regrettable turnover: [X]%
## Future State (12 months)- Target headcount: [X] (growth: [X]%)
- Critical skills needed: [list]
- Organizational design changes: [if any]
## Gap Analysis| Role / Skill | Current | Needed | Gap | Action ||-------------|---------|--------|-----|--------|| [Role A] | 3 | 5 | +2 | Hire Q1-Q2 || [Skill B] | Low proficiency | Intermediate | Gap | Training program |## Hiring Plan| Quarter | Roles | Headcount | Budget ||---------|-------|-----------|--------|| Q1 | [Roles] | [X] | $[Y] || Q2 | [Roles] | [X] | $[Y] |## Succession Plan| Critical Role | Incumbent | Ready Now | Ready 1-2 yr ||---------------|-----------|-----------|--------------|| [VP Engineering] | [Name] | [Name] | [Name, Name] |## Risk Register| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation ||------|-----------|--------|------------|| Key-person dependency | High | Critical | Cross-train 2 backups by Q2 || Attrition spike in Sales | Medium | High | Retention bonuses, stay interviews |
Performance Management Cycle
Quarter
Activity
HRBP Role
Q1
Goal setting -- cascade company OKRs to individual goals
Prepare -- Collect manager-submitted ratings. Flag outliers (> 40% top-tier or > 20% bottom-tier in any team). Pull performance data and promotion history.
Facilitate -- Walk through each team's distribution. Managers present evidence for outlier ratings. Challenge ratings that lack behavioral evidence.
Align -- Reach consensus on final ratings. Ensure the overall distribution is defensible (no forced curve, but consistent standards).
Document -- Record final ratings and rationale for any changes. Feed into compensation decisions.
Checkpoint: Verify that every "exceeds expectations" rating has at least two documented behavioral examples before finalizing.
Employee Relations: Issue Resolution Framework
Listen -- Hear the concern fully. Take notes. Acknowledge the employee's experience without making commitments.
Investigate -- Gather facts from all relevant parties. Review documentation, emails, and policies. Maintain confidentiality.
Analyze -- Identify root cause. Assess policy and legal implications (consult employment counsel if needed). Evaluate options.
Resolve -- Determine the appropriate action. Communicate the decision to all parties. Implement the resolution.
Follow up -- Check on the outcome within 2 weeks. Document the case. Identify systemic patterns that may need policy changes.
Difficult Conversations Framework (SBI-E)
Element
Description
Example
Situation
When and where
"In last Tuesday's team standup..."
Behavior
Observable action
"...you interrupted two colleagues mid-sentence."
Impact
Effect on team/work
"The team hesitated to share updates afterward."
Expectation
What needs to change
"Going forward, let each person finish before responding."
Example: Workforce Plan for a Scaling Engineering Org
CONTEXT
Current: 45 engineers, 8% attrition, 3 open reqs, engagement 74/100
Business goal: Launch 2 new products requiring +15 engineers in 12 months
WORKFORCE PLAN
Gap Analysis:
Frontend engineers: have 12, need 18 (+6)
ML engineers: have 3, need 8 (+5)
Engineering managers: have 5, need 7 (+2, promote from within if possible)
Platform engineers: have 10, need 14 (+4)
Hiring Plan:
Q1: 5 hires (3 frontend, 2 ML) -- $25K recruiting cost
Q2: 5 hires (2 ML, 2 platform, 1 frontend) -- $25K
Q3: 4 hires (2 platform, 1 frontend, 1 ML) -- $20K
Q4: 1 hire (manager backfill if internal promo) -- $5K
Succession:
Promote 2 senior engineers to EM by Q2 (already in leadership program)
Backfill their IC roles in Q3
Risks:
ML talent market is tight -- offer 75th percentile comp, sign-on bonus
2 senior engineers flagged as flight risk -- schedule stay interviews Q1
Budget: $75K recruiting + $120K incremental comp (15 new heads, partial year)
Compensation Philosophy
Element
Approach
Market positioning
Target 50th-75th percentile for base; equity for upside
Pay components
Base (70%), variable/bonus (15%), equity (15%)
Pay decisions
Based on role level, performance, market data, internal equity
Unclear role definition, reactive posture, or lack of business acumen
Establish a formal operating model: 70% strategic / 30% operational; present quarterly people plans tied to business OKRs; delegate administrative tasks to HR shared services
Calibration sessions devolve into arguments
No shared rubric, manager defensiveness, or lack of pre-work
Require managers to submit ratings with 2+ behavioral evidence examples before the session; facilitate with a neutral framework; start with aligned ratings and work through outliers
Workforce plan disconnected from business strategy
HRBP not included in business planning, or plan built in isolation
Attend leadership team meetings; build workforce plan as an appendix to the business plan; tie every headcount request to a revenue or product milestone
High regrettable turnover in specific teams
Manager quality issues, compensation misalignment, or stalled career paths
Run stay interviews with high performers; analyze exit data by manager; benchmark comp by role and level; publish career ladders with clear promotion criteria
Employee relations cases escalate unnecessarily
Late intervention, poor documentation, or inconsistent policy application
Train managers on early issue identification; standardize the ER intake and investigation framework; conduct monthly ER case reviews to identify patterns
Performance review cycle seen as bureaucratic
Too many forms, unclear purpose, or ratings disconnected from comp
Simplify to a 2-page template; connect review outcomes directly to merit and promotion decisions; train managers on feedback delivery (SBI-E model)
Change management initiatives fail to stick
Insufficient sponsorship, poor communication cadence, or no measurement
Apply Kotter's 8-step model; secure visible executive sponsorship; communicate in 5+ channels; measure adoption at 30/60/90 days
Success Criteria
Dimension
Metric
Target
Measurement
Strategic Impact
Business leader satisfaction with HRBP
> 4.0 / 5.0
Annual stakeholder survey
Strategic Impact
% time spent on strategic activities
> 60%
✓
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
1Install product management skill
2Start with user story generation for known feature
3Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
4Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
5Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
6Build template library for recurring PM tasks
7Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices
✓ Do
+Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
+Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
+Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
+Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
+Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
+Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
−Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
−Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
−Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
−Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
−Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path
1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
