team-composition-analysis▌
wshobson/agents · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Comprehensive team structure, compensation, and equity planning for early-stage startups from pre-seed through Series A.
- ›Provides role-by-role hiring guidance, salary benchmarks (US 2024), and fully-loaded cost calculations across engineering, sales, product, customer success, and G&A functions
- ›Includes equity allocation frameworks by stage and role, option pool sizing, and founder vesting guidelines
- ›Covers organizational design patterns, reporting structures, span-of-control ra
Team Composition Analysis
Design optimal team structures, hiring plans, compensation strategies, and equity allocation for early-stage startups from pre-seed through Series A.
Overview
Build the right team at the right time with appropriate compensation and equity. Plan role-by-role hiring aligned with revenue milestones, budget constraints, and market benchmarks.
Team Structure by Stage
Pre-Seed (0-$500K ARR)
Team Size: 2-5 people
Core Roles:
- Founders (2-3): Product, engineering, business
- First engineer (if needed)
- Contract roles: Design, marketing
Focus: Build and validate product-market fit
Seed ($500K-$2M ARR)
Team Size: 5-15 people
Key Hires:
- Engineering lead + 2-3 engineers
- First sales/business development
- Product manager
- Marketing/growth lead
Focus: Scale product and prove repeatable sales
Series A ($2M-$10M ARR)
Team Size: 15-50 people
Department Build-Out:
- Engineering (40%): 6-20 people
- Sales & Marketing (30%): 5-15 people
- Customer Success (10%): 2-5 people
- G&A (10%): 2-5 people
- Product (10%): 2-5 people
Focus: Scale revenue and build repeatable processes
Role-by-Role Planning
Engineering Team
Pre-Seed:
- Founders write code
- 0-1 contract developers
Seed:
- Engineering Lead (first $150K-$180K)
- 2-3 Full-Stack Engineers ($120K-$150K)
- 1 Frontend or Backend Specialist ($130K-$160K)
Series A:
- VP Engineering ($180K-$250K + equity)
- 2-3 Senior Engineers ($150K-$180K)
- 3-5 Mid-Level Engineers ($120K-$150K)
- 1-2 Junior Engineers ($90K-$120K)
- 1 DevOps/Infrastructure ($140K-$170K)
Sales & Marketing
Pre-Seed:
- Founders do sales
- Contract marketing help
Seed:
- First Sales Hire / Head of Sales ($120K-$150K + commission)
- Marketing/Growth Lead ($100K-$140K)
- SDR or BDR (if B2B) ($50K-$70K + commission)
Series A:
- VP Sales ($150K-$200K + commission + equity)
- 3-5 Account Executives ($80K-$120K + commission)
- 2-3 SDRs/BDRs ($50K-$70K + commission)
- Marketing Manager ($90K-$130K)
- Content/Demand Gen ($70K-$100K)
Product Team
Pre-Seed:
- Founder as product lead
Seed:
- First Product Manager ($120K-$150K)
- Contract designer
Series A:
- Head of Product ($150K-$180K)
- 1-2 Product Managers ($120K-$150K)
- Product Designer ($100K-$140K)
- UX Researcher (optional) ($90K-$130K)
Customer Success
Pre-Seed:
- Founders handle support
Seed:
- First CS hire (optional) ($60K-$90K)
Series A:
- CS Manager ($100K-$130K)
- 2-4 CS Representatives ($60K-$90K)
- Support Engineer (technical) ($80K-$120K)
G&A (General & Administrative)
Pre-Seed:
- Contractors (accounting, legal)
Seed:
- Operations/Office Manager ($70K-$100K)
- Contract CFO
Series A:
- CFO or Finance Lead ($150K-$200K)
- Recruiter ($80K-$120K)
- Office Manager / EA ($60K-$90K)
Compensation Strategy
Base Salary Benchmarks (US, 2024)
Engineering:
- Junior: $90K-$120K
- Mid-Level: $120K-$150K
- Senior: $150K-$180K
- Staff/Principal: $180K-$220K
- Engineering Manager: $160K-$200K
- VP Engineering: $180K-$250K
Sales:
- SDR/BDR: $50K-$70K base + $50K-$70K commission
- Account Executive: $80K-$120K base + $80K-$120K commission
- Sales Manager: $120K-$160K base + $80K-$120K commission
- VP Sales: $150K-$200K base + $150K-$200K commission
Product:
- Product Manager: $120K-$150K
- Senior PM: $150K-$180K
- Head of Product: $150K-$180K
- VP Product: $180K-$220K
Marketing:
- Marketing Manager: $90K-$130K
- Content/Demand Gen: $70K-$100K
- Head of Marketing: $130K-$170K
- VP Marketing: $150K-$200K
Customer Success:
- CS Representative: $60K-$90K
- CS Manager: $100K-$130K
- VP Customer Success: $140K-$180K
Total Compensation Formula
Total Comp = Base Salary × 1.30 (benefits & taxes) + Equity Value
Fully-Loaded Cost:
- Base salary
- Payroll taxes (7.65% FICA)
- Benefits (health insurance, 401k): $10K-$15K per employee
- Other (workspace, equipment, software): $5K-$10K per employee
Rule of Thumb: Multiply base salary by 1.3-1.4 for fully-loaded cost
Geographic Adjustments
San Francisco / New York: +20-30% above benchmarks Seattle / Boston / Los Angeles: +10-20% Austin / Denver / Chicago: +0-10% Remote / Other US Cities: -10-20% International: Varies widely by country
Equity Allocation
Equity by Role and Stage
Founders:
- First founder: 40-60%
- Second founder: 20-40%
- Third founder: 10-20%
- Vesting: 4 years with 1-year cliff
Early Employees (Pre-Seed):
- First engineer: 0.5-2.0%
- First 5 employees: 0.25-1.0% each
Seed Stage Hires:
- VP/Head level: 0.5-1.5%
- Senior IC: 0.1-0.5%
- Mid-level: 0.05-0.25%
- Junior: 0.01-0.1%
Series A Hires:
- C-level (CTO, CFO): 1.0-3.0%
- VP level: 0.3-1.0%
- Director level: 0.1-0.5%
- Senior IC: 0.05-0.2%
- Mid-level: 0.01-0.1%
- Junior: 0.005-0.05%
Equity Pool Sizing
Option Pool by Round:
- Pre-Seed: 10-15% reserved
- Seed: 10-15% top-up
- Series A: 10-15% top-up
- Series B+: 5-10% per round
Pre-Funding Dilution: Investors often require option pool creation before investment, diluting founders.
Example:
Pre-money: $10M
Investors want 15% option pool post-money
Calculation:
Post-money: $15M ($10M + $5M investment)
Option pool: $2.25M (15% × $15M)
Founders diluted by pool creation before new money
Organizational Design
Reporting Structure
Pre-Seed:
Founders (flat structure)
├── Contractors
└── First hires (report to founders)
Seed:
CEO
├── Engineering Lead (2-4 engineers)
├── Sales/Growth Lead (1-2 reps)
├── Product Manager
└── Operations
Series A:
CEO
├── CTO / VP Engineering (6-20 people)
│ ├── Engineering Manager(s)
│ └── Individual Contributors
├── VP Sales (5-15 people)
│ ├── Sales Manager
│ ├── Account Executives
│ └── SDRs
├── Head of Product (2-5 people)
│ ├── Product Managers
│ └── Designers
├── Head of Customer Success (2-5 people)
└── CFO / Finance Lead (2-5 people)
├── Recruiter
└── Operations
Span of Control
Manager Ratios:
- First-line managers: 4-8 direct reports
- Directors: 3-5 direct reports (managers)
- VPs: 3-5 direct reports (directors)
- CEO: 5-8 direct reports (executive team)
Full-Time vs. Contract
Use Full-Time for:
- Core product development
- Sales (revenue-generating roles)
- Mission-critical operations
- Institutional knowledge roles
Use Contractors for:
- Specialized short-term needs (legal, accounting)
- Variable workload (design, marketing campaigns)
- Skills outside core competency
- Testing role before FTE hire
- Geographic expansion before permanent presence
Cost Comparison
Full-Time:
- Lower hourly cost
- Benefits and overhead
- Long-term commitment
- Cultural fit matters
Contract:
- Higher hourly rate ($75-$200/hour vs. $40-$100/hour FTE equivalent)
- No benefits or overhead
- Flexible engagement
- Easier to scale up/down
Hiring Velocity
Realistic Timeline
Role Opening to Hire:
- Junior: 6-8 weeks
- Mid-Level: 8-12 weeks
- Senior: 12-16 weeks
- Executive: 16-24 weeks
Time to Productivity:
- Junior: 4-6 months
- Mid-Level: 2-4 months
- Senior: 1-3 months
- Executive: 3-6 months
Planning Buffer
Always add 2-3 months buffer to hiring plans.
Example: If need engineer by July 1:
- Start recruiting: April 1 (12 weeks)
- Productivity: September 1 (2 months ramp)
Budget Planning
Compensation as % of Revenue
Early Stage (Seed):
- Total comp: 120-150% of revenue (burning cash to grow)
- Engineering: 50-60%
- Sales: 30-40%
- Other: 20-30%
Growth Stage (Series A):
- Total comp: 70-100% of revenue
- Engineering: 35-45%
- Sales: 25-35%
- Other: 20-30%
Headcount Budget Formula
Total Comp Budget = Σ (Role Count × Fully-Loaded Cost × % of Year)
Example:
3 Engineers × $202K × 100% = $606K
2 AEs × $230K × 75% (mid-year start) = $345K
1 PM × $162K × 100% = $162K
Total: $1.1M
Quick Start
To plan team composition:
- Identify stage - Pre-seed, seed, or Series A
- Define roles - What functions are needed now
- Prioritize hires - Critical path for business goals
- Set compensation - Base salary + equity by level
- Plan timeline - Account for recruiting and ramp time
- Calculate budget - Fully-loaded cost × headcount
- Design org chart - Reporting structure and span of control
- Allocate equity - Fair allocation that preserves pool
How to use team-composition-analysis on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add team-composition-analysis
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches team-composition-analysis from GitHub repository wshobson/agents and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate team-composition-analysis. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /team-composition-analysis) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification 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 development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›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
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share 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
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.6★★★★★40 reviews- ★★★★★Kofi Haddad· Dec 12, 2024
I recommend team-composition-analysis for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Omar Yang· Dec 12, 2024
team-composition-analysis fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Layla Martin· Dec 12, 2024
team-composition-analysis has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Oshnikdeep· Dec 4, 2024
Keeps context tight: team-composition-analysis is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Yuki Rao· Dec 4, 2024
Useful defaults in team-composition-analysis — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Nov 23, 2024
Registry listing for team-composition-analysis matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Isabella Taylor· Nov 23, 2024
team-composition-analysis has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Layla Chen· Nov 3, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: team-composition-analysis is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Layla Yang· Nov 3, 2024
Useful defaults in team-composition-analysis — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Layla Park· Oct 22, 2024
team-composition-analysis has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
showing 1-10 of 40