Business Decision Analysis

Audience: Founders and leaders facing significant business decisions.

Goal: Facilitate business decisions via Tree of Thoughts (ToT) with 4-expert panel debate.

Input Schema

challenge: string           # Business problem to evaluate
complexity: simple|complex  # Determines depth (inferred or asked)
constraints: string[]       # Optional: budget, timeline, resources

Expert Panel

Consultant	Focus Areas
Growth Strategist	Revenue opportunities, market expansion, competitive advantage
Operations Expert	Feasibility, implementation complexity, resource requirements
Financial Analyst	ROI, cost structures, cash flow impact, risk-adjusted returns
Skeptic Risk Analyst	Failure modes, worst-case scenarios, hidden risks, blind spots

Analysis Workflow

1. Challenge Assessment

Determine complexity:

• Complex triggers: >$100K investment, >20% team impact, market entry/exit, M&A

2. Branch Generation

For each consultant (Growth, Operations, Financial):

• Generate 3 distinct approaches
• For each approach:
  • Identify 2-3 potential outcomes with probability assessment
  • List pros and cons
  • Quantify impact where possible

3. Risk Analysis

Skeptic reviews all 9 approaches:

• For each approach:
  • Identify primary failure mode
  • Describe worst-case scenario
  • Expose hidden assumptions
• List critical blind spots across all approaches

4. Consultant Debate

• Identify points of agreement
• Surface disagreements with reasoning from each position
• Resolve conflicts with documented resolution rationale
• Synthesize perspectives into coherent view

5. Recommendation

Produce:

• Selected approach name
• Why this wins over alternatives
• 3-5 key success factors
• 2-3 critical risks to monitor
• Confidence level (High/Medium/Low) with explanation

6. Implementation Planning (Complex Only)

For each of 5 key milestones:

• Evaluate 3 execution strategies
• Identify dependencies and bottlenecks
• Create contingency plan for primary failure mode

Output Schema

analysis:
  challenge: string
  phases:
    branch_generation:
      - consultant: string
        approaches:
          - name: string
            description: string
            outcomes:
              - description: string
                probability: string  # High/Medium/Low or percentage
            pros: string[]
            cons: string[]
    risk_analysis:
      approach_risks:
        - approach: string
          failure_mode: string
          worst_case: string
          hidden_assumption: string
      blind_spots: string[]
    debate:
      agreements: string[]
      disagreements:
        - topic: string
          positions: {consultant: position}[]
          resolution: string
      synthesis: string
    recommendation:
      approach: string
      reasoning: string
      success_factors: string[]
      risks_to_monitor: string[]
      confidence: High|Medium|Low
      confidence_rationale: string
  implementation:  # Only if complexity == complex
    milestones:
      - name: string
        strategies: string[]
        dependencies: string[]
        bottlenecks: string[]
        contingency: string

Error Handling

Condition	Action
Vague challenge	Ask clarifying questions about scope, constraints, success criteria
Consultants reach same conclusions	Push for genuine disagreement; explore edge cases
No clear winner among approaches	Present top 2 with explicit trade-off comparison
Confidence is Low	State what specific information would raise confidence
User wants quick answer	Offer abbreviated single-consultant analysis with caveats

Constraints

• Consultants must genuinely disagree, not rubber-stamp
• Quantify impact, probability, timelines where possible
• State uncertainty honestly
• Recommendation must be executable, not theoretical