Scoring Baselines#

Facilitator Note

FACILITATOR-ONLY. Calibration reference for scoring Strategic Fit and Execution Risk. Use during every round.

---

1. Scoring Framework Recap#

Each decision is scored on two layers that combine into a round total:

Aggressiveness is read-only (drives discussion, no score).

---

2. Strategic Fit — Baseline Calibration#

Strategic Fit asks: Does the decision fit this company's specific position in this specific round?

Not "is the decision good in general." Not "would I make this decision." The standard is fit — does the decision match the company's actual strategic situation in the actual world they are operating in.

-2 — Misaligned with scenario; opportunity cost#

The decision is poorly matched to the company's situation. Examples:

• A Crisis-trajectory company attempting a Transformational growth bet without resource backing
• A retail-media-dependent CPG making a decision that gratuitously antagonizes its largest retail partner
• A premium-positioned company making a mass-market move that breaks its brand thesis
• A company with weak operational AI deployment attempting an aggressive AI-mediated customer-facing product
• A decision that ignores the round's framing entirely (e.g., a Y2 decision that doesn't reference the Y1 outcome at all)

0 — Defensible but not bold#

The decision is reasonable but doesn't capture a clear strategic opportunity. Examples:

• "Continue to invest in our existing AI capabilities" — generic, defensible, but doesn't move the company forward
• An incremental productivity move when the round's framing demands a real strategic choice
• A capital return prioritization that leaves growth optionality on the table
• A defensive hardening move that overcorrects against modest risk

+2 — Captures core opportunity; clear positioning#

The decision is well-matched to the company's situation and captures a genuine strategic opportunity. Examples:

• A retailer leaning into retail media with the timing and capability to compound the moat
• A CPG that recognizes the AI vendor concentration risk and builds distinctive moats in Y1–Y2
• A Surge-trajectory company that uses its strength for a transformational acquisition that fits the moment
• A struggling company that pivots specifically and credibly rather than incrementally
• A decision that explicitly grapples with the Y1 outcome (Y2) or Y5 conditions (Y5) and responds with conviction

+3 / -3 (Red-Flag Exceptions)#

Reserved for decisions that are extraordinarily well-positioned or extraordinarily mismatched. Use rarely.

+3 examples:

• A decision that perfectly anticipates a coming shift and positions the company to capture disproportionate value (in Y5, a company whose Y1–Y2 strategy positions them perfectly for the AI lab competitive entry)
• A transformational M&A move that is structurally correct and credibly executable

-3 examples:

• A decision that bets the company on AI capability that demonstrably is not deployable in the round's timeframe
• A move that creates a competitive crisis without strategic rationale
• A decision that contradicts the company's existing strategy without acknowledgment

---

3. Execution Risk — Baseline Calibration#

Execution Risk asks: Can this company actually execute this decision?

Feasibility, capacity, talent, capital alignment. Not "is the strategy right" — that's Strategic Fit. Here we ask whether the company can deliver.

-2 — Major barriers; ambitious beyond capacity#

Substantial execution headwinds the decision doesn't acknowledge. Examples:

• A small-scale CPG attempting a vertical integration that requires capital they don't have
• A retailer launching a major DTC platform without the technology stack to support it
• A heavily unionized company executing AI-driven labor reduction without addressing labor relations
• An M&A approach that ignores antitrust posture (FTC has demonstrated this won't clear)
• A Crisis-trajectory company attempting a transformational bet without acknowledging resource constraints

0 — Feasible; some change management needed#

The decision is executable but will require real organizational work. Examples:

• A new product launch that requires cross-functional integration
• A pricing change that requires retailer renegotiation
• A workforce restructuring that requires phased communication
• A category expansion that requires new vendor relationships
• The "normal" execution profile — feasible but not trivial

+2 — Straightforward; resources / talent ready#

The company has demonstrated capacity to execute moves of this type. Examples:

• A retailer expanding an already-working retail media business
• A CPG deepening an already-deployed AI marketing creative capability
• A capital return execution that draws on existing balance sheet flexibility
• An adjacency move that leverages existing capabilities (Costco adding a new Kirkland category)
• Internal back-office AI deployment by a company with mature operational AI infrastructure

+3 / -3 (Red-Flag Exceptions)#

+3: The decision matches a company's distinctive operational competence in a way that creates near-zero execution risk. Rare.

-3: The decision is structurally infeasible. The company cannot execute regardless of intent. Examples: an M&A that will clearly be blocked by antitrust; a product launch that requires capabilities that genuinely don't exist; a financial commitment beyond the company's capital structure.

---

4. Worked Examples — Strategic Fit + Execution Risk#

The following examples calibrate both dimensions simultaneously for plausible Y1 decisions.

Example 1: Walmart Y1 — Aggressive Walmart Connect Expansion#

Adjustment: +2 on Strategic Fit, 0 on Execution Risk (using the banded -2/0/+2 framework strictly). Round to nearest band: 0 on Execution Risk captures the supplier-relationship overhang. Total: +2 from facilitator.

Example 2: Kraft Heinz Y1 — Doubled-Down Brand Reinvestment with $600M Plus Premium Acquisition#

Total: 0 from facilitator. The decision is strategically right but operationally aggressive for the moment.

Example 3: Sprouts Y1 — "Become the Amazon-Compatible Specialty Brand"#

Adjustment: -2 / 0 banded framework: -2 Strategic Fit, 0 Execution Risk. Total: -2 from facilitator.

Example 4: Costco Y1 — "Continue Disciplined Investment in Operational AI; No Retail Media Launch; No Marketplace"#

Total: +4 from facilitator. Note: this is the maximum facilitator score without red-flag exception. Peer Ranking will add ±2.

Example 5: Best Buy Y2 — Major Best Buy Health Divestiture Combined with Aggressive AI-Device Vendor Exclusivity Push#

Total: +2 from facilitator.

Example 6: P&G Y2 — Coalition DSP with Unilever and PepsiCo to Bypass Walmart Connect#

Total: 0 from facilitator. Bold strategy with real execution headwinds.

---

5. Peer Ranking — How to Translate Aggregated Rankings#

After Resolution phase ends, run Peer Ranking. Each participant privately ranks all other companies on Most likely to succeed and Greatest impact (1 = best down to N = worst, where N = number of companies in the room minus 1 — they cannot rank themselves).

Aggregation:

• For each axis, identify the top of group (lowest cumulative rank) and bottom of group (highest cumulative rank)
• Top of Success: +1; Bottom of Success: -1; everyone else: 0
• Top of Impact: +1; Bottom of Impact: -1; everyone else: 0

If there is a tie at the top or bottom (two companies with identical aggregate ranks), both receive the bonus / penalty.

Aggressiveness is a separate public poll — show of hands or verbal vote — and is read-only. No score effect. The point is to make boldness visible.

---

6. Round Total and Cumulative Tracking#

Per round, sum:

Strategic Fit (±2 or ±3) + Execution Risk (±2 or ±3) + Peer Success (±1) + Peer Impact (±1)

Round total range: -6 to +6 (or -8 to +8 with red-flag exception).

Track cumulative across rounds:

Health Signal is calculated at end of Y2, using cumulative Y1+Y2. Thresholds:

Y5 and Y6 round totals continue to accumulate but do not change Health Signal — that was settled at end of Y2.

---

7. Scoring Pacing — When to Score#

• During Resolution phase: Form an initial impression of Strategic Fit and Execution Risk for each decision while you are working through the consultations
• During Peer Ranking and Discussion: Finalize the facilitator score (you have heard the room's response now)
• Before next round: Confirm cumulative tracking is up to date

Do not score before reading all worksheets and running Resolution. Score in light of how the decision actually played out in the room, not just how it looked on paper.

---

8. Edge Cases#

• A decision that does nothing. "We continue as we are." Score: 0 Strategic Fit, 0 Execution Risk. Defensible by default.
• A decision that is unintelligible or non-responsive. Strategically Misaligned (-2 Strategic Fit). Try to resolve in the moment by asking the participant for clarification. If they cannot, apply the fallback (see Base Case Fallback).
• A decision with multiple parts. Score on the dominant element. If two parts conflict (e.g., aggressive growth + capital return), note the conflict and let it lower Strategic Fit.
• A decision that produces an unexpected positive outcome despite weak strategy. The Strategic Fit score reflects the strategy; Peer Ranking will capture the outcome impression. Both can be true.
• An emergent company (Anthropic Shopping, TrueGoods) in Y5. Scored on the same framework. Strategic Fit evaluates fit to their Y5 strategic situation; no Continuity Note penalty (their seat started in Y5).

---

Document Version: Project Threshold V8.1 — Scoring Baselines Last Updated: May 2026