Decision intelligence · Self-audit

Test the decision before you commit.

A structured self-audit for consequential decisions. Answer honestly across evidence, people, power, risk and implementation reality. We will show you where the decision is exposed, which decision environments would apply, and where independent scrutiny would earn its place. 15–20 minutes. No sales pitch at the end.

Begin the audit

Choose how to start.

Both routes reach the same audit — one starts with the shape of the decision, the other with what the discomfort feels like. Pick whichever way in feels more accurate to where you are right now.

Section 01 · Situation framing 0%
01 Situation framing

Question loading…

Named exposure
One step before the preview

Where should we send the intake preview?

Your answers stay with you. We only ask for contact details so we can send you the intake preview and — if the decision looks like it would benefit from a conversation — follow up once. That is it.

  • Decision environments recommended for your situation, with reasons.
  • Decision environments we would decline, and why.
  • Where the exposure sits across evidence, people, risk and implementation.
  • The engines that would run across the work to keep findings defensible.
Please share your name so we know who to address.
A role helps us understand the decision context.
Please share the organisation.
A valid email is needed so we can send the preview.

We will not add you to a mailing list, share your details, or contact you more than once about this preview. If you would like a follow-up conversation, you tell us — not the other way round.

Intake preview

Your decision, shaped as we would take it in.

Overall exposure

What the audit surfaced.

Assessing…

    Where the work would concentrate

    Decision environments we would recommend.

    Each recommendation is tied to what the audit surfaced in your answers — not a menu selection. Environments we would decline for this decision are named below, with reasons.

      Decision environments we would decline

      Declining is part of the method. Naming what does not apply keeps scope honest and cost proportionate.

        Why the findings hold up

        Behind every finding, the engines are working.

        Decision environments are where the work happens. Engines are how the work stays defensible. These are the methodology engines that run across every engagement.

        Engine 01

        Context Engine

        Assembles the shared context profile every environment consumes. Establishes what is known at the point in time, what is knowable, and what is not.

        Engine 02

        Risk Trajectory Engine

        Traces how risks evolve, transfer, compound and drift from pre-decision through implementation into long-term operation. Sees what point-in-time risk assessment cannot.

        Engine 03

        Direction Engine

        Converts assessed findings into a directed action set. Every direction inherits its evidence rating from the source finding it rests on. Nothing is invented at the recommendation stage.

        Evidence discipline runs through all of it. Every substantive claim carries a stated evidence strength — high, moderate, or low. Personas surface the real range of stakeholder positions, not the headline. Output standards keep the deliverable decision-grade. This is why a Pūtake Labs finding survives scrutiny after the room has moved on.
        Next step

        Bring the decision that needs to withstand scrutiny.

        If any of the above lands, we would like to hear about the decision. A conversation is the honest first step — we decide together whether an engagement is proportionate before any scope is proposed.

        Start a conversation →