core module · week 6 · aug 17 to 19
strategic decision-making
three days, three verbs: frame, decide, communicate. these screens hold the votes, the cases, the clocks and the prompts. the thinking happens in the room.
Srivathsan Rmentor · strategic decision-making · his sessions, mon to wed
day 1 · monday
frame: are you solving the right problem?
monday · the morning vote
when good companies die, what killed them?
the wrong answerthey saw the right question and fumbled it
the wrong questionthey answered brilliantly. it was the wrong question.
hands up. count goes on the board in chalk. it stays there all week.
core 1 · the question behind the question
every problem statement smuggles in an answer
"how do we cut costs?" has already decided the problem is cost. "how do we grow sales?" has already decided the product is fine. the first strategic act is not answering. it is interrogating the question you were handed.
the micromax case
2014: india's giant killer
2008enters handsets against nokia and samsung, with none of their money
the weaponsdual SIM, 30-day battery for power-cut india, features the giants ignored
by 2014india's no.1 homegrown phone brand. roughly one in five phones sold
the prideoutsold samsung in india in a quarter. a global top-10 handset maker
it is 2014. you sit on this board. what is the question on the table?
✱
the sealed section.
open only when instructed.
micromax · what happened next
2016: the floor moves
sep 2016jio makes 4G data effectively free. overnight, a phone is a data device
the warehousesmicromax is sitting on months of 3G inventory, optimised for yesterday's question
the rivalsxiaomi, oppo, vivo arrive with 4G phones at the same price, backed by china-scale supply chains
by 2018share collapses from the top of the market to single digits
diagnosis vs solution
they answered "how do we stay the cheapest?"
the market was asking "what is a phone becoming?" a brilliant answer to the wrong question compounds the damage, because it feels like progress. diagnose before you prescribe.
lab a · the reframe clinic
one problem, three frames
pairsyou receive one assigned problem, stated the way its owner would state it.
reframe it three waysthree genuinely different questions that could sit underneath the same symptom.
defend the sharpestpick the frame you'd bet on, and argue it to the pair beside you.
10:00
click or press T to start · double-click to reset
the written exercise · 15 minutes, solo
the capability check
take the frame you just defended. in writing: what would the business need to be genuinely good at for that frame to be the right bet? list capabilities with evidence, not aspiration. then answer honestly: does it have them today?
15:00minutes · click or T
mission 05 · the decision memo in the wild
a real business. a live decision. your memo.
find a real business facing a real decision right now: expand or hold, hire or automate, new line or double down. sit with the owner, understand the choice, and write the decision memo they never had.
the memocontext, the decision, options weighed against named criteria, your recommendation, and what would change your mind.
the fieldworkevenings monday to wednesday. thursday is an optional window. friday afternoon is for drafting.
the standardscored on the quality of the thinking, not on whether the owner agrees with you.
mission 05 · logistics
presentations run virtual, during onam week
each fellow presents their memo to Srivathsan on a live call. date to be confirmed by Srivathsan; watch gravity and your PR's update. scores land in gravity after each call.
presentation date: placeholder, pending Srivathsan's confirmed day.
day 2 · tuesday
decide: how do you choose when nothing is certain?
tuesday · the morning vote
the data says one thing. your gut says another. who gets the casting vote?
the datanumbers over feelings, every time
the gutthe spreadsheet doesn't know what I know
hands up. count goes on the board in chalk. it stays there all week.
core 1 · weighted criteria
name the criteria before you meet the options
decide what matters, and how much, before the options start performing for you. criteria chosen after seeing the options aren't criteria. they're justifications.
core 1 · two kinds of doors
one-way, or two-way?
the two-way doora pricing test: run it tuesday, roll it back thursday if it stings. cheap to reverse, so decide fast and learn.
the one-way doortaking on debt: signed is signed. expensive or impossible to reverse, so slow down and earn the decision.
most teams get this exactly backwards: they agonise over reversible calls and rush the irreversible ones.
core 2 · discussion, not lecture
where have you earned the right to trust your gut?
intuition is pattern recognition, a database built from reps with fast, honest feedback. the question is never "gut or no gut." it is: what is actually in yours, and who put it there?
india lens · the IPL auction
a fixed purse, a live room, and adrenaline
every franchise walks in with weighted criteria: role gaps, overseas slots, a price ceiling per player. then the paddle war starts, a rival bids, and the ceiling quietly moves. the auction is a live experiment in whether criteria survive contact with competition.
discuss: why does the winning bid so often belong to the team that regrets it? and what would it take to be the franchise that stops?
lab b · the strategic choice
one cheque. three moves. eighteen months.
you run a 50-person series A company. the board has funded exactly one of the following. choose, and be ready to defend the arithmetic.
move 1launch the second productyour team has a prototype and two eager pilot customers
move 2expand to three new citiesthe playbook from city one, run three more times
move 3rebuild the core for enterprisebigger contracts, longer sales cycles, a harder product
lab b · the worksheet
argue with arithmetic
1
pick four criteriarevenue inside 12 months, distance from what you're already good at, reversibility, team conviction, or your own four
2
weight them to 100before scoring a single move. the weights are the strategy
3
score each move 1 to 5per criterion. multiply, total, rank
4
then the real questionif the arithmetic disagrees with your gut, which one is wrong, and how do you find out?
15:00
click or press T to start · double-click to reset
day 3 · wednesday
communicate: can the room carry your decision without you?
wednesday · the morning vote
the room misunderstood your decision. whose failure is that?
theirsthe decision was sound. they should have listened harder
yoursa decision that can't travel wasn't finished
hands up. count goes on the board in chalk. it stays there all week.
core 1 · the decision memo
the template, section by section
1
contextthree lines. what situation forces this decision now
2
the decision to makeone sentence, phrased as a question. this is the frame, choose it deliberately
3
options consideredincluding the ones you rejected, and the honest case for each
4
criteria and weightswhat mattered, how much, decided before the scoring
5
the recommendationone option, committed to, with the confidence level said out loud
6
what would change my mindthe evidence that would flip this memo. name it now, not after
7
the askwhat you need from the reader, by when
core 2 · the vote
a rival just cut prices 30%. do you answer in 48 hours, or study for two weeks?
48 hoursspeed is the strategy. hesitation reads as weakness
two weeksrigour is the strategy. panic pricing is how margins die
hands up. count goes on the board in chalk. it stays there all week.
✱
the room has voted.
hold here until the count is chalked.
the reveal · what the research found
fast deciders don't use less information. they use fresher information.
studies of decision-making in fast-moving markets found the quickest executive teams examined more alternatives and more real-time data than the slow ones, not less. speed and rigour are not opposites: the false choice is the trap. and the doors rule still governs everything: fast on the reversible, slow on the irreversible.
core 2 · communicating under uncertainty
say the confidence out loud
"I'm at 70% on this, and here's what would move me" beats both false certainty and false humility. the room can work with a number. it cannot work with a mood.
lab c · the pre-mortem
it is 18 months from now. the decision failed.
not "what could go wrong?" but "it went wrong. write the history of why." two rounds: your own lab-b decision first, then a partner's. the future-past tense is the trick: it gives pessimism permission to speak.
lab c · the rules of silence
paper slips. no laptops. no names.
one failure cause per slip, written in silence. silence is the mechanism: the moment the room starts talking, the loudest plausible story wins and the real risks go quiet.
7:00
click or press T to start · double-click to reset
friday · 16:00 to 16:30 · SOF-run
week close: the board doesn't lie.
the chalked predictions · ten minutes
three votes, still on the board
mondaywrong answer, or wrong question: what kills companies?
tuesdaydata or gut: who gets the casting vote?
wednesdaythe room misunderstood: whose failure?
the chalk hasn't moved since you voted. have you? re-vote each one, and let anyone who switched sides say why.
mission 05 · the clock
friday afternoon is for drafting
fieldwork should be done. the memo gets written today. presentations run virtual during onam week, on Srivathsan's confirmed day, watch gravity and your PR. scores land in gravity after each call.
the break
happy onam. classes resume august 31.
you return to financial literacy, with Akshay and Noel. bring the memo habit with you: it works on money too.
the school of future