A decision is only as sound as the thinking behind it
Difficult decisions often combine incomplete evidence, competing priorities and pressure to move. A plausible answer can arrive before the real question has been agreed, while the knowledge needed to reach a stronger decision may already be spread across your team.
Using Red Team Thinking® tools and broader critical-thinking practices, I guide your team through a live decision, strategy or problem. The structure helps the team surface its knowledge, distinguish evidence from interpretation and make uncertainty explicit; the decision remains yours.
What we can cover
- The decision that actually needs to be made and who owns it.
- Assumptions, evidence gaps and alternative explanations.
- Options and explicit criteria for comparing them.
- Blind spots, dependencies and unintended consequences.
- What further evidence would materially change the choice.
- AI-generated analysis that needs human verification and challenge.
How the work happens
I run these from half a day to several days, depending on your situation, in person or remotely. Around 20 people is the ideal size for close, high-level collaboration. I have also run sessions of around 50, which suit a mix of learning and collaboration. At that size it is harder for everyone to contribute, so I plan the format with that in mind. You leave with an agreed way forward.
Frame
I guide the team to define the question, desired outcome, constraints and decision point.
Examine
I facilitate a structured examination of the available evidence, interpretations, assumptions and options without pretending uncertainty can be eliminated.
Challenge
The team tests its reasoning, looks for missing perspectives and identifies where confidence exceeds the evidence.
Decide and act
I guide the team to record its rationale, remaining uncertainty and practical next steps so the decision can move into delivery.
The decision record
I facilitate a concise decision record containing:
- the agreed question and owner;
- explicit comparison criteria;
- an evidence-and-assumption map;
- tested options and prioritised risks;
- the rationale and remaining uncertainty; and
- an actionable next-step plan.
The goal is a decision people can understand, explain and use, not a longer report.
Engagements of this kind are confidential. The Red Team Thinking® conference talk illustrates the underlying approach.
When this is useful
- The stakes are high or the choice is hard to reverse.
- Evidence is incomplete or senior people interpret it differently.
- The organisation is moving before success has been defined.
- A persuasive proposal has not received objective challenge.
- An AI-produced answer appears confident but has not been verified.
AI-assisted decision support, critically challenged
I also facilitate workshops on AI-assisted decisions, helping teams gain value from AI without accepting its output on trust. My AI verification loop explains the underlying discipline.
What an AI-focused session covers
- Where AI strengthens a decision process, and where handing it control weakens one.
- Practical techniques for interrogating AI-generated analysis: what is evidence, what is assumption, and what has been missed.
- Treating confident AI output as a hypothesis to test rather than an answer to adopt.
- Working through real decisions or AI outputs the team already has in front of it.
This is useful when a team uses AI for analysis or drafting but has no consistent verification practice, or when a specific AI-assisted strategy, business case or analysis needs objective scrutiny before anyone relies on it.
When this isn’t the right fit
This is not the right fit if you want a consultant to supply the answer or take ownership of the decision and its outcomes. Nor is it a substitute for delivery support once the choice has been made; its purpose is to help your team reach and explain a sound decision.
Make the next decision clearer
Describe the choice, what is at stake and when it must be made. We can agree a proportionate next step.
Book me now: Book me