Decisions we review
The decision is yours: the business context, the alternatives, the responsibility. The problem is the uncertainty around it — incomplete evidence, unchallenged assumptions, hidden trade-offs, and experience that is not available internally in the time available.
Three initial families cover most of what arrives — Product & AI, Monetization & Market, and Scale & Execution. All are cross-functional, which is precisely why a single discipline can produce a confident answer that is still incomplete.
The initial focus is European B2B software and AI companies of roughly 40 to 150 employees. That is a recommendation, not a restriction: companies outside the profile and independent advisers are welcome, fit depends on the decision, and a question outside the initial focus may require longer expert sourcing.
Capability gap
The specific experience the decision needs does not exist inside the company — and hiring for one question is the wrong instrument.
Bandwidth gap
The experience exists, but the people who hold it are committed to work you would not want to pause.
Independence gap
Everyone close to the question shares the same context, incentives, and assumptions. Information from outside the decision system is worth more here.
Open a family to see the decisions we review, a synthetic mini-example, and why the answer usually sits across more than one discipline.
Decisions we review
- Should we build, buy, partner, or stop this AI capability?
- Which roadmap investment deserves priority?
- Is this AI feature commercially valuable or merely technically impressive?
- Which vendor, model, or platform path creates unacceptable lock-in?
- The decision (yours)
- Continue building an in-house AI assistant, license a vendor, partner, or stop — decision due in one quarter.
- Uncertainty around it
- Three assumptions carry the answer and none has been tested: that in-house control is cheaper long term, that adoption will be weekly, and that inference cost will fall fast enough to be irrelevant.
- Why multiple perspectives matter
- Adoption realism, infrastructure economics, and pricing structure sit in three different disciplines. Each one alone produces a confident but incomplete answer.
- A finding that could change the action
- Cost per active account inverts the build-versus-license comparison precisely at the adoption level the company forecasts, turning a yes/no choice into a threshold-conditional decision.
Is your decision a good candidate?
If most of these are true, a review is more likely to create value. If several are not, we will tell you and suggest something cheaper.
- There is a named decision owner.
- The decision is expected within 30 to 90 days.
- At least two real alternatives remain open.
- New information could genuinely change the chosen action.
- The consequence of being wrong exceeds the cost of the review.
- The question crosses at least two functional boundaries.