Base Case Fallback Bank
Base Case Fallback Bank#
Overview#
This document defines base case fallback scores for industries that do not receive explicit actions from participants in a given round.
Key Principles:
- Deterministic: Same fallback applies to all instances of an industry across all participants and rounds
- Facilitator-only scoring: Fallbacks score Strategic Fit + Execution Risk only (no peer ranking — peers can't rank a non-existent decision)
- Small deltas: Typically 0 to +2 per dimension, creating fallback totals in the 0 to +2 range
- Plausible: Represent defensive but reasonable moves (cost control, operational efficiency, status-quo)
- Automatic: Applied directly by facilitator; no participant input required
- Not negotiable: Fallback scores are fixed; participants cannot argue them up or down
V7.5 changes: Tail Risk dimension removed. Fallback totals are now /4 (Strategic Fit + Execution Risk) instead of /9 (legacy three-dimension system).
When to apply: After scoring all explicit industry decisions, identify any industry that received no explicit action. Apply its fallback score directly from this bank.
Fallback Scores by Industry#
Retail (Omnichannel Retailers)#
Fallback Rationale: Maintain pilot-phase demand forecasting in select stores; optimize inventory within existing systems; no new capex or major staffing changes.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Neutral; maintains position but doesn't capture opportunity |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Proven tech; existing infrastructure; low change-management burden |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Defensive; preserves optionality |
CPG (Consumer Goods Manufacturer)#
Fallback Rationale: Accelerate minor R&D cycles using existing tools; minor marketing automation with human review; no DTC expansion.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Neutral; cost efficiency, doesn't drive growth |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Existing teams; minor process changes; low adoption risk |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Defensive operational efficiency |
Healthcare Provider (Hospital System)#
Fallback Rationale: Deploy operational AI (scheduling, resource allocation); defer major clinical diagnostic AI; maintain standard clinical governance.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Operational efficiency; doesn't drive clinical outcomes or revenue |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Operational AI proven; workflow integration standard; physician adoption manageable |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Defensive operational efficiency without clinical risk escalation |
Healthcare Payer (Health Insurer)#
Fallback Rationale: Deploy fraud detection + payment integrity AI; continue prior authorization automation with human review; no aggressive claim denial.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | +1 | Fraud detection improves medical loss ratio; proven ROI |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Fraud detection proven; payment integrity standard; compliance clear |
| TOTAL | +2/4 | Defensive cost-control with member satisfaction safeguards |
Finance (Bank + Insurance)#
Fallback Rationale: Continue current fraud detection arms race; invest in bias auditing and fair lending compliance infrastructure; no major new deployment.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | +1 | Defensive but strategically important; reduces regulatory tail risk |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Compliance infrastructure proven; existing vendor relationships |
| TOTAL | +2/4 | Defensive risk mitigation |
Consulting (Big Four / MBB)#
Fallback Rationale: Deploy copilots to research + analysis functions (proven use case); maintain junior hiring at current levels; defer vertical AI build and pricing model changes.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | +1 | Copilots improve delivery; maintains junior talent pipeline |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Copilot adoption straightforward; existing vendor relationships |
| TOTAL | +2/4 | Defensive productivity move; preserves talent model |
Law (AmLaw 50)#
Fallback Rationale: Pilot AI research tools in 2–3 practice groups with mandatory attorney review; maintain billable hour model; maintain associate hiring; defer pricing changes; monitor bar rule developments.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Conservative; minor efficiency gains, doesn't transform delivery model |
| Execution Risk | +1 | AI research tools proven; attorney review manageable; limited scope |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Conservative but defensible; preserves current economics |
Manufacturing (Heavy Manufacturing)#
Fallback Rationale: Selective predictive maintenance in highest-ROI plants (pilot); continue "no-layoff" retraining commitment; no aggressive automation.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Cost reduction at 2–3 plants; not enterprise-wide transformation |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Predictive maintenance proven; phased OT/IT integration manageable |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Conservative but labor-cooperative |
Logistics (Freight/3PL/Warehouse)#
Fallback Rationale: Deploy route optimization to subset of fleet (pilot); driver engagement program; defer autonomous vehicle decisions.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | +1 | Route optimization proven ROI; meaningful savings at limited scope |
| Execution Risk | +1 | Technology proven; driver adoption managed via engagement program |
| TOTAL | +2/4 | Proven, labor-safe cost reduction |
Big Tech (Cloud, Ads, Devices, Enterprise Software)#
Fallback Rationale: Continue incremental AI infrastructure investments; integrate AI into existing products cautiously; defer transformational launches. Excludes foundation model development.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | +1 | Incremental AI features maintain competitive position |
| Execution Risk | +1 | AI feature integration proven; existing infrastructure and talent |
| TOTAL | +2/4 | Defensive infrastructure + product evolution |
B2B/B2C SaaS (Workday/Salesforce-Class)#
Fallback Rationale: Bundle AI copilots into standard product SKU; maintain pricing; defer AI-native product launches.
| Dimension | Score | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic Fit | 0 | Bundling maintains lock-in; doesn't drive premium pricing |
| Execution Risk | +1 | AI feature bundling proven; existing infrastructure |
| TOTAL | +1/4 | Defensive feature parity with margin pressure |
Fallback Summary Table (11 Industries)#
| Industry | Strat Fit | Exec Risk | Total /4 | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retail | 0 | +1 | +1 | Pilot demand forecasting |
| CPG | 0 | +1 | +1 | Minor R&D + marketing automation |
| Healthcare Provider | 0 | +1 | +1 | Operational AI (scheduling) |
| Healthcare Payer | +1 | +1 | +2 | Fraud detection + prior auth |
| Finance | +1 | +1 | +2 | Compliance + fraud defense |
| Consulting | +1 | +1 | +2 | Copilot deployment + talent preservation |
| Law | 0 | +1 | +1 | Pilot AI tools + attorney review |
| Manufacturing | 0 | +1 | +1 | Selective predictive maintenance |
| Logistics | +1 | +1 | +2 | Route optimization pilot |
| Big Tech | +1 | +1 | +2 | Incremental AI infrastructure |
| B2B/B2C SaaS | 0 | +1 | +1 | AI copilots bundled |
How to Apply Fallback Scoring#
Example: Participant Covering Retail + CPG Submits Only Retail Decision#
- Retail explicit decision scored normally (e.g., Strat Fit +2 + Exec Risk +1 + Peer Success +1 + Peer Impact 0 = +4/6)
- CPG receives no explicit action → fallback applied
- CPG fallback = Strat Fit 0 + Exec Risk +1 = +1/4
- Both posted: Retail +4/6 (explicit), CPG +1/4 (fallback)
- Cumulative scores updated; conditions determined for next round
Key: Peer ranking only applies to explicit decisions (peers can't rank a fallback). Fallback total is /4 (facilitator only).
Facilitator Checklist#
After scoring all explicit decisions:
- Identify industries with no explicit action
- Reference table above for each fallback industry
- Apply pre-defined fallback score
- Announce: "[Industry] falls back to +[n]/4 — [brief rationale]"
- Update cumulative scores; determine Industry Health conditions for next round outcome narration
Important: Fallbacks are deterministic. Do NOT negotiate. Participants who want to improve a fallback industry's score must submit an explicit decision next round.