Decision Support for Founders & Executives
A structured, quantified second brain for one consequential decision, with the analysis sized to the stakes.
For a single high-stakes choice, an acquisition, a key hire structure, a shutdown, a bet-the-company launch, we run a compressed decision-analysis process: frame the real decision, model it, price the value of further information, and write the memo. Sometimes the most valuable output is permission to stop analyzing.
Who this is for
Founders and executives facing one hard, high-stakes, hard-to-reverse call, often alone with it.
How the work is done
Frame the decision
Separate the decision from the outcome; state objectives, alternatives, and information gaps. Reference-class forecasting anchors expectations in base rates for decisions of this type before your specifics adjust them, the outside view first, then the inside view.
Model it
An influence diagram or decision tree sized to the problem, with expected values computed across scenarios and your actual risk tolerance made explicit (a founder with one company is not risk-neutral, and the model should not pretend otherwise).
Price further analysis
Expected value of perfect information (EVPI) tells us the ceiling on what more research is worth. If the decision is insensitive to the open questions, we say so and stop, analysis has a cost and a deadline.
Stress and commit
A premortem on the chosen path, explicit tripwires that would trigger reversal, and a one-page decision memo that records reasoning at the moment of choice, the raw material of calibration and better future decisions.
How the Decision Support for Founders & Executives engagement runs
We begin with the decision, use the evidence that can genuinely change it, and make the reasoning reviewable from first input to final handover.
What we need to begin
- The decision stated as a choice between named alternatives, with the date it must be made.
- Whatever analysis already exists, including the version the client does not trust.
- The objectives the decision serves, and how the decider would trade them off against each other.
- The decider's actual risk position: what a bad outcome costs them financially and personally.
If an input is unavailable, we state the gap, its effect on confidence, and the agreed workaround. It is never quietly ignored.
Your four-phase engagement map
-
Phase 1
Frame the decision
Separate the decision from the outcome; state objectives, alternatives, and information gaps; anchor with reference-class base rates before adjusting for specifics.
-
Phase 2
Model it
An influence diagram or decision tree sized to the problem, with expected values across scenarios and the decider's real risk tolerance made explicit.
-
Phase 3
Price further analysis
Use expected value of perfect information to set the ceiling on more research; if the decision is insensitive to open questions, say so and stop.
-
Phase 4
Stress and commit
A premortem on the chosen path, explicit reversal tripwires, and a one-page memo recording the reasoning at the moment of choice.
Methods and models we draw on
- Decision-quality framework
- Reference-class forecasting & base rates
- Decision trees & influence diagrams
- Expected value of perfect information (EVPI)
- Utility & risk-tolerance modeling
- Bayesian updating
- Premortems & tripwires
Methods are chosen for the problem, not the brochure, expect a subset of these, applied properly, plus whatever the evidence demands.
The decision this enables
A decision made deliberately, documented honestly, and monitorable, whatever the outcome.