Decision Governance · Launching October 2026

Every claim on this page is a promise. This document is the proof.

Pronoa runs your highest-stakes decisions through a structured methodology and produces what no analyst, copilot, or model produces on its own: the recommendation, the dissent, and the conditions that would change the call — on one page, in a permanent record you own.

Design partners running live decisions now

Traceable — every claim binds to an assumption you set  ·  Immutable — a logged decision never changes  ·  Falsifiable — the conditions that would change the call are on the page

An actual Pronoa brief — illustrative decision, real structure.
The Asymmetry

Every function got better tools. The decision never did.

Diligence, FP&A, market research, portfolio monitoring, board reporting — all faster, all instrumented. The decision itself, the one function that determines whether the bet was right, still runs on instinct, a spreadsheet, and a conversation nobody wrote down. AI made it trivial to produce a confident memo. Pronoa is the layer above those tools: it doesn't make the memo faster, it makes the decision behind it sound. We call that layer decision governance: structure for how the decision itself gets made — not the evidence beneath it.

What decision governance is →

3weeks
modeling a decision before it reaches the committee — or the board
90minutes
deciding it — most spent defending a conclusion someone already reached
0record
of the assumptions, the dissent, or what would have changed the answer
The System

Five stages, one pipeline — from the first look to the permanent record.

Pronoa structures the entire path a decision travels, not just the deep dive. Each stage hands a cleaner problem to the next.

01 Intake

Every opportunity captured in structured form from first contact. Consequential decisions stop living in email threads and hallway conversations.

Captured
02 Screening

Methodology-driven triage: strategic fit, key assumptions, primary risk — so deep-analysis hours go to the decisions that earn them.

Triaged
03 Deep Analysis

The 18-step methodology takes a live opportunity to a decision-grade brief. Detailed below.

Stress-Tested
04 Comparison

Assumption heat maps across everything in flight — and the moment the same fragile assumption underwrites the expansion plan, the capex budget, and the next acquisition at once.

Ranked
05 Decision Memory

Every call — proceed and pass alike — becomes a permanent, structured record: the Institutional Decision Asset.

Remembered

STAGE 03 IS WHERE THE BRIEF IS PRODUCED — THE METHOD BEHIND IT, BELOW.

The Method

Eighteen steps. Thirty frameworks. One discipline, applied to every decision.

The methodology orchestrates reference-class forecasting, pre-mortem analysis, assumption stress-testing, and twenty-seven other established frameworks into a single sequence — so the rigor is structural, not optional.

Phase I — Framing

The decision is understood before analysis begins.

Structured intake. Authority mapping. Reversibility classification. The decision routes to its archetype — an IC call runs different logic than a one-way-door acquisition.

STEPS 0–4
Phase II — Analysis

Assumptions surfaced. Conviction made explicit.

Every assumption is named and confidence-rated. Stakeholder positions mapped. Courses of action developed to decision-grade depth — including the contrarian one.

STEPS 5–9
Phase III — Stress-Testing · The Signature Layer

Most tools stop at a confident answer. Pronoa reveals what breaks.

Which assumption fails, at what confidence, with what second-order consequences. Fragility ranked. Sensitivity quantified. Graceful failure or catastrophic — known before the committee asks.

The test: hand the sharpest skeptic in the room the brief and ask which assumption they trust least. They can answer from the page — because for the first time, it's on the page.

STEPS 10–13
Phase IV — The Record

A recommendation with its dissent — preserved permanently.

Tiered executive briefs (Board, IC, War Room). A 30-day implementation risk map. And an immutable decision-log entry: the reasoning, exactly as it stood, forever reconstructable.

STEPS 14–17
The Working Surface

The brief is the boardroom page. This is the instrumentation behind it.

Project Cardinal’s board brief opens this page. This is the same decision, one layer down. Strengths the documents support are counted as strengths. Confidence is calibrated per assumption, with the evidence attached — including the evidence that disagrees. And fragility names the one scenario that actually breaks the deal, with the number where it breaks — instead of painting every risk red.

Step 5 · Assumption LedgerProject Cardinal · 9 pinned
Verified StrengthDocument-Citedcompetitive moat
Gross retention has held at 96% across three audited years, and the largest customer is 6.8% of revenue.
Source: audited revenue schedule, FY2023–FY2025 · counted as a strength, not re-framed as a risk
Assumption 4Load-Bearingexecution capabilitySensitivity: High
Existing management can run the core business, execute the automation roadmap, and integrate add-ons simultaneously — without a leadership upgrade.
If wrongIntegration stalls in Year 1. Replacement cost above $4M consumes ~18% of Year-1 EBITDA, and the automation roadmap slips a full cycle.
10%45% — calibrated, not defaulted100%
ChallengesPost-acquisition talent-risk study — concurrent workstreams concentrate key-person risk
SupportsManagement reference calls — 2 of 3 confirm prior parallel execution
ContextRCM consolidation review — integration timelines across 14 comparable deals
Assumption 7Structural Forceregulatory environment
Payer reimbursement rates for the target’s billing categories hold within ±3% through the hold period.
Mechanism: rate revisions set the revenue ceiling independent of execution · horizon 2–4 years · 70%
Step 11 · Fragility7 scenarios · severity earned from the ledger
1 SEVERE · 4 MANAGEABLE · 2 MINOR
Severe · DecisiveBound to Assumption 4
Management bandwidth fails during integration: the automation roadmap and add-on integration compete for the same executives, and EBITDA compresses toward the covenant line the financing was structured to survive.
Breakpoint — computed from the recordContraction beyond 15% breaches the covenant. Replacement cost above $4M consumes 18% of Year-1 EBITDA. Both numbers are in the brief’s stop triggers — the reader knew them before signing.
Trigger: two of three integration workstreams miss first-quarter milestones.
ManageableBound to Assumption 7
Payer rate revision lands within the ±3% band — margin absorbs it. Monitoring trigger set; no structural change to the thesis.
One decisive vulnerability, named and bounded. Not a wall of red.
An actual Pronoa working surface — illustrative decision, real structure.
The Institutional Decision Asset

The model forgets. Your decision intelligence compounds.

Because every decision runs through the same structure, every decision is captured in the same form — comparable, queryable, additive. And the decision doesn't end at the record: structured check-ins reconcile every thesis against how reality unfolds — which assumptions held, which broke, where a recorded stop trigger has fired. Over time the record shows where conviction was calibrated and which instincts to trust. The institution gets smarter, not just older.

Post-decision tracking runs from day one: structured check-ins where thesis status is set against the record, on a cadence you choose. Automated thesis tracking — the record that watches itself and flags the drift — arrives in 2027.

AI labs can make your analysts faster. They cannot build your decision intelligence — because they don't have your decisions.

Who It's For

Six rooms where the call gets made. One discipline for all of them.

The decision is the same shape in every one of them — irreversible, capital-committing, assumption-dependent. Pronoa is built around the decision, not the job title.

CEOs & Corporate Strategy

The one-way doors — pivots, market entry, build-versus-buy, the acquisition — run as governed decisions, with the dissent the org chart can't reliably provide. The brief the board wishes it were getting.

Strategic direction · Capital commitments · M&A & divestitures · Board packages
Private Equity

Every deal through the same 18-step analysis. The assumption that actually matters, surfaced before the IC asks. A brief the committee has never seen before.

IC memos · Platform diligence · Portfolio review
Strategy Consulting

A methodology clients can audit. Every engagement produces a brief at the quality tier of firms ten times your size.

Client strategy · Market entry · Restructuring
M&A Advisory

The stress-test the buyer's board will demand, built before the meeting. Close with clarity, not optimism.

Deal memos · Board packages · Go / no-go
Family Offices

IC-grade rigor without institutional headcount — and a record of the reasoning that outlives the people who made it. Continuity of judgment, not only continuity of capital.

Direct deals · Allocation · Generational continuity
Venture Capital

Conviction you can later tell was calibrated, not lucky. Every call recorded — invest and pass alike — so the anti-portfolio is finally visible.

IC evaluation · Follow-on reserves · Pass tracking
Trust & Discretion

Your decisions are your most sensitive asset. The architecture treats them that way.

Zero retention at the model layer.

Zero data retention is active today with our model provider: your content is never used for training, never logged beyond the moment of inference. The model forgets.

Permanent retention at yours.

Every decision preserved inside your private tenant — written once, never edited, never deleted. Tenant-isolated, encrypted, owned by you, not a tool vendor.

Evidence, not opinion.

Published research integrated throughout. Every assumption anchored to external evidence with an explicit confidence level. Every claim traceable to its source.

Expanded enterprise controls — multi-factor authentication, per-user access controls, expiring brief links, and a complete audit trail — arrive as an early 2027 addition, on US-region infrastructure from day one. Pronoa does not replace your judgment — it makes your judgment defensible: to your committee, to your board, to the version of yourself reviewing this decision in eighteen months.

The Decision Gap · Part I
The Confidence Trap
A decision memo carries roughly twenty percent of what the team actually knows — in the IC room and the boardroom alike. The other eighty percent is the trap, and three forces are widening it. The full argument for decision governance.
Read the essay →
Why This Exists

The team always knows more than what’s written down. That gap is where outcomes get decided.

I learned that over three decades as a U.S. Navy SEAL officer, and I’ve found it holds true everywhere decisions get made.

Decisions came in three kinds: decisions that put people at risk, decisions about how to compete as the environment changed, and decisions about what to invest in, what to sustain, and what to sunset. Different rooms, same structure. Someone commits before the picture is complete.

Frame the decision. Pressure-test the assumptions. Name the risks before you commit.

Living that standard taught me something harder than stating it: we did not always meet it. Sometimes the clock beat us. Sometimes the experience in the room could not carry the rigor the decision deserved. Not for lack of discipline — the structure to do better did not exist in the hours available.

That gap followed me my whole career, and for the first time, the technology exists to close it. I built Pronoa to be that structure.

— Scott Sellers, Founder

Launching October 2026

You’ve seen the document. The next one can be yours.

Join the launch list for first access, sample briefs, and a direct line to the founder on fit, pricing, and rollout.

Self-service at launch · Individual, team, and enterprise tiers