Market Viability Framework
A diagnostic framework grounded in classical rhetoric. It tells you WHERE you're stuck and WHAT to do about it.
Stasis Theory
Where is the disagreement?
From Cicero and Quintilian. Before you can win an argument, you must identify what's actually being contested. Most sales fail because seller and buyer are arguing at different levels.
- Conjecture - Does this thing exist? Is it real?
- Definition - What IS it? How should we classify it?
- Quality - Is it good or bad? Severe or mild?
- Procedure - Is this the right time/place/process?
The Three Proofs
What moves people to act?
From Aristotle. There are only three ways to persuade: through logic, through credibility, or through emotion. Each gate in this framework has a dominant proof.
- Logos - Logical argument. Facts, data, reasoning.
- Ethos - Credibility. Trust, expertise, goodwill.
- Pathos - Emotion. Fear, desire, urgency.
The Problem
"Revenue is unpredictable."
The problem exists and carries real cost. Like pathology, it's there whether anyone has diagnosed it yet. This is objective ground truth about your market. Either your ICP has this problem or they don't.
"Board meetings spent explaining variance instead of strategy."
Anatomy of Pain
Frequency - How often does it hurt?
Severity - How bad when it does?
Scope - Who feels it?
Quantifiability - Can you measure it?
Stasis
Conjecture - "Does this problem exist?" This is a question of fact. Either the disease is present in this population or it isn't.
Dominant Proof
Logos - Logic and evidence. You prove pain exists through data, metrics, and observable patterns. This is not about feelings yet.
Wrong Room
The disease doesn't exist for this ICP. No rhetorical move fixes this. You're not losing the argument - you're in the wrong argument entirely. The stasis at Conjecture has failed at the objective level.
Action: Pivot your ICP or your problem hypothesis. You're talking to the wrong people about the wrong thing.
After this gate: We know the problem is real for this market.
They recognize the problem and can name it. They know something is wrong. We understand how they frame it, the language they use, what they attribute it to. Our frame and their frame are aligned.
"We don't have a revenue problem, we have a predictability problem."
Schwartz's 5 Stages of Awareness
Unaware
Don't know they have a problem
Problem
Know the problem, not solutions
Solution
Know solutions exist, not yours
Product
Know your product, not convinced
Most Aware
Convinced, just need the offer
Stasis
Definition - "What IS this thing? How do they see it?" This is about frame alignment. You call it "revenue operations inefficiency." They call it "my sales team sucks." Until frames align, you're talking past each other.
Dominant Proof
Logos + Ethos - Logic to prove your reframe is correct, but also credibility. Reframing someone's understanding of their own problem requires trust. They need to believe you see something they don't.
Hidden Pain
They have the disease but don't see it or misname it. From their perspective, the stasis is still at Conjecture ("Do I even have this problem?") or Definition ("This isn't what you're calling it"). They're not denying the solution - they're denying the diagnosis.
Action: Education with persuasive intent. Prove the disease exists using their language. Reframe how they see it. Move them from Unaware to Problem Aware on Schwartz's spectrum.
After this gate: The problem is real and we understand how they see it.
There's pressure to act now, not eventually. The condition is acute, not chronic. A trigger exists, a deadline is real, consequences follow if they wait. They're not passively researching - they're actively seeking treatment.
"Annual planning cycle kicks off in 60 days."
Anatomy of Urgency
Trigger - What created the pressure?
Deadline - When must they act?
Consequence - What happens if they don't?
Urgency answers "Is there pressure?" Kairos asks "Is the window open NOW?"
Readiness
Is the audience in a state to receive this? Emotionally, cognitively, politically?
Ripeness
Have conditions matured? Budget, mandate, pain severity, political capital?
Decay
Is the moment passing? Attention shifting, alternatives emerging, urgency fading?
Stasis
Quality + Procedure - "Is it severe enough to act?" (Quality) and "Is NOW the right time?" (Procedure). They agree the problem exists and what it is. They're stuck on whether it warrants action and whether this is the moment.
Dominant Proof
Pathos - Emotion. This is where logic takes a back seat. Fear of loss is more powerful than hope for gain. Consequences of inaction, competitive threats, missed windows. You're not convincing their mind - you're moving their gut.
No Forcing Function
They know the problem and what to call it, but aren't compelled to act NOW. The disease is chronic, not acute. There's no deadline, no trigger, no consequence for waiting. The stasis is stuck at Quality ("not severe enough to prioritize") or Procedure ("not the right time for this initiative").
Action: Amplify severity. Surface consequences of inaction. Create or reveal forcing functions. Fear of loss beats aspiration. Make the status quo untenable.
After this gate: Real, aligned, and compelled to act now.
All three gates passed. All stases resolved. The problem is real (Conjecture). They see it clearly (Definition). They're compelled to act now (Quality + Procedure). You have the full rhetorical stack available: Logos to prove, Ethos to trust, Pathos to move. Execute.