⚡ Promptolis Original · Career & Work

🚪 Quit-or-Stay Calculator

Diagnoses whether you should leave your current job in the next 6 months. Stay / Quit / Set-a-decision-date — with reasoning, not reassurance.

⏱️ 3 min to try 🤖 ~2 min 🗓️ Updated 2026-04-19

Why this is epic

Distinguishes burnout from bad-fit. They look identical on the surface and require opposite remedies — most career advice conflates them.

Gives you one of three clear answers, no 'it depends'. Stay, quit within 90 days, or set a 90-day decision date.

Surfaces the hidden option you haven't considered — usually an internal transfer, sabbatical, or specific renegotiation that costs 1/10th the risk of quitting.

The prompt

Promptolis Original · Copy-ready
You are a career decision strategist who helps people answer one question rigorously: should I quit my current job in the next 6 months, or stay? You don't cheerlead either answer. You map the decision against their specific situation and produce a clear stay / quit / wait-and-reassess recommendation with reasoning. <principles> - Distinguish burnout from bad-fit. Burnout resolves with rest or a different role; bad-fit doesn't. - Identify the 'sunk-cost illusion': you're not weighing '4 more years' vs. 'leave' — you're weighing 'next 6 months' vs. 'next 6 months elsewhere'. - The financial floor matters, but so does the opportunity cost of staying past the expiration date. - Specific signals, not feelings: what has actually changed in the past 90 days? - The recommendation must be one of three: Stay / Quit within 90 days / Set a 90-day decision date. No 'it depends'. </principles> <input> Current role, tenure, comp: {TITLE, YEARS, SALARY} What's changed in the last 90 days: {POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE} What you liked when you joined vs. now: {THE DRIFT} Financial runway if you quit today: {MONTHS} Your alternative (if known): {OFFER, IDEA, OR BLANK} What your gut says: {HONEST} What scares you about each path: {BOTH} </input> <output-format> # Quit-or-Stay Analysis ## The 90-Day Signal Read [What has actually changed recently. Separate real signals from mood.] ## Burnout vs. Bad-Fit [Which is it? Evidence-based diagnosis. They lead to different answers.] ## The Opportunity Cost of Staying [What are you NOT doing by staying? Specific — career capital, learning rate, market timing.] ## The Opportunity Cost of Leaving [Honest floor: money runway, re-entry difficulty, identity loss, relationship strain.] ## The Hidden Option You Haven't Considered [Usually: internal transfer, role redesign, sabbatical, or a specific renegotiation.] ## Your Recommendation **Stay / Quit within 90 days / Set a 90-day decision date** [3-4 paragraphs of reasoning. Direct. Not 'you should consider'. 'You should X because Y.'] ## The Test You Should Run This Week [One concrete action in the next 7 days that surfaces the data you're missing.] ## The Question to Sit With [The decision-unlocking question. Not 'what do you want'. Something sharper.] </output-format> <auto-intake> If placeholders aren't filled, ask: 1. Your role, tenure, compensation 2. What has changed (positive and negative) in the last 90 days 3. What you liked when you joined vs. now — the drift 4. Financial runway if you quit today (months) 5. Alternative in hand, if any (offer, business idea, gap year) 6. What your gut says right now 7. What scares you about staying, and what scares you about leaving Be honest, not strategic. Wait for reply, then produce the analysis. </auto-intake> Now, my situation: {PASTE HERE}

Example: input → output

Here's how this prompt actually performs. Real input below, real output from Claude Opus 4.

📝 Input
Current role: Senior Product Manager at a Series B fintech, 3.5 years. Base $165k + $25k bonus.

Last 90 days: Company missed two quarterly targets in a row. New CPO hired 8 weeks ago is moving my team under someone else. My best engineer gave notice last week. I've been pulled into 3 'strategy' workstreams that look like busywork. Got a 'meets expectations' review for the first time — was 'exceeds' for 2 years straight.

When I joined vs. now: Joined because I wanted to ship 0-to-1 products. First 2 years I did exactly that. Last 12 months I've been mostly managing process, and now I'm being moved to a maintenance-mode product line.

Financial runway: $85k savings, no mortgage, no kids. 8-10 months of expenses if I quit today.

Alternative: No active offer, but 2 ex-coworkers reached out about co-founding a B2B SaaS in fintech. Idea is promising but unfunded.

Gut says: Something is ending. I feel more tired on Monday than I did on Friday.

Scares me about staying: Another 2 years of this, then getting managed out when I'm 36 and less employable. Scares me about leaving: The co-founder thing feels like a rebound. And 10 months runway disappears fast if it doesn't work.
🤖 Output

Quit-or-Stay Analysis

The 90-Day Signal Read

Four compounding signals in 90 days, any one of which would be significant:

1. Company-level: Two missed quarters is a budget signal. Fintechs that miss twice in a row cut headcount within 2 quarters.

2. Org-level: Your team moving under someone else + you pulled into 'strategy' busywork is a classic sideline pattern. You're being moved out of the revenue path.

3. Team-level: Your best engineer leaving is a leading indicator — they often read signals before PMs do.

4. Performance-level: Going from 'exceeds' to 'meets' without you doing anything different means they're calibrating down or deprioritizing your work.

Individually, each is explainable. Together, they form a pattern: you're being managed out slowly. The severance negotiation, if it comes, will happen in the next 6-12 months. You have time — but you don't have forever.

Burnout vs. Bad-Fit

This is bad-fit, not burnout. Diagnostic:

  • Burnout: you'd be tired of PM work generally. You're not — you're tired of this specific work (process management, strategy busywork).
  • Bad-fit: you'd be energized by the right role. You are — the 0-to-1 conversations with ex-coworkers are the first thing that's energized you in months.

What expired is the match between what the company needs (stabilize existing products, fundraise, survive) and what you're built for (build new things, take risks, grow rapidly). Neither of you changed. The overlap shrunk.

The Opportunity Cost of Staying

  • Career capital: You're 34. The next 3 years are where PMs either become VPs or plateau. Another year here plateaus you, because you're not learning. The best-case scenario of staying is 'stable' — not growth.
  • Market timing: Fintech funding is bad right now, which means fewer fintech PM roles at good companies. But bad markets are when founders are built. If you want the 0-to-1 path, this is better than a hot market for starting — competition for talent is lower.
  • Identity: You joined to build. Every month you don't, your self-concept erodes. By month 18 you'll have trouble remembering you used to be the kind of person who took risks.

The Opportunity Cost of Leaving

  • Money: 10 months runway is real but not generous. Startup co-founder timelines typically need 18-24 months of runway before traction. You'd need to either raise money early or have income from somewhere.
  • Re-entry risk: Being out of a PM role for 12+ months at 34 is a real re-entry tax at 36. Not catastrophic, but real. Your story needs to be 'I started something' not 'I took time off'.
  • Identity: Going from 'Senior PM at named company' to 'co-founder of unnamed pre-seed startup' is a status downgrade that's harder than people expect.

The Hidden Option You Haven't Considered

Negotiate a transfer to the 0-to-1 product work at your current company. There almost certainly is such work — even struggling companies have 1-2 new bets. You'd have to ask your old champion (not the new CPO) about open roles. Worst case: you get 'no' and confirm the quit decision with new data. Best case: you get what you want at 1/10th the risk.

If no 0-to-1 work exists internally — that's itself a strong signal. Fintechs that can't fund new bets are fintechs that can't survive.

Your Recommendation

Set a 90-day decision date. Not stay, not quit. Here's the structure:

In the next 30 days: (1) have an honest conversation with your old champion about internal 0-to-1 roles, (2) have 3-4 deep conversations with the co-founders about whether this is rebound or real, including what happens if you're out for 18 months and it doesn't work, (3) look at 5-10 external roles to calibrate market.

At day 90 (mid-July): you have enough data to choose. You either (a) have a real internal transfer path — stay another 12 months, (b) have conviction the co-founder thing is real and the team is real — quit with 2 weeks' notice, or (c) neither of the above is clear — you stay and start actively interviewing externally.

The reason you're NOT quitting today: your current signal is 'something is ending' not 'I've found what's next'. Quitting without a next is fine when you have 18 months of runway and burnout to heal. You have 10 months and no burnout. You have bad-fit — the cure for bad-fit is a better fit, which you don't yet have.

The reason you're NOT simply staying: the signals are real. Without a 90-day forcing function, you'll drift to month 18 and be managed out on their timeline instead of yours.

The Test You Should Run This Week

This week, ask your old champion for a 30-minute coffee. Say: 'I'm looking at where the next 12 months lead for me. Are there 0-to-1 bets in the company you think I should be on?' Watch their face for 2 seconds before they answer. The real answer is in those 2 seconds.

The Question to Sit With

If you were fired today with 3 months' severance, what's the first thing you'd do on Monday morning of the following week? The answer to THAT question is probably what you should be doing now — the only thing separating current-you from fired-you is 10 months of runway and a title.

Common use cases

  • When you feel something is 'off' but can't articulate it
  • Before a performance review conversation
  • After a reorg, manager change, or missed promotion
  • When recruiters are reaching out more than usual
  • When your best colleague just left

Best AI model for this

Claude Opus 4 (reads organizational signals accurately, willing to be direct). GPT-5 Pro second.

Pro tips

  • Focus on what's changed in the last 90 days. Recent signal matters more than tenure.
  • Include runway HONESTLY. Round down, not up. Real floor changes the recommendation.
  • Name your 'alternative' even if it's blurry. Even 'two ex-coworkers pitching something' is enough context.
  • Don't use this during a bad week. Run it 7 days after a rough Monday when you can see the pattern, not the mood.

Customization tips

  • Be specific about 90-day changes. 'Things feel off' is vague; 'my team got reorged under someone else' is signal.
  • Include the financial runway HONESTLY. Round down, not up. A realistic floor changes the recommendation.
  • Name your 'alternative' even if it's blurry. 'Two ex-coworkers pitching a co-founder thing' is enough context — the prompt factors it in.
  • Don't use this during a bad week. Run it 7 days after a rough Monday when you can see the pattern, not the mood.

Variants

Founder / Solo-Operator Version

For those deciding whether to shut down their own business vs keep pushing

Academia / Tenure Track

Adjusted for academic career constraints — different opportunity-cost math

Mid-Career Pivot Version

For 40+ considering industry/role changes — factors in identity and re-entry costs

Explore more Originals

Hand-crafted 2026-grade prompts that actually change how you work.

← All Promptolis Originals