Decision, Disagreement & Consensus BoardSAMPLEReady
Sample report with illustrative demo values. Not a real study, customer or market claim.
Download PDFOpen StoryOpen DeckMemoAppendix

Decision, Disagreement & Consensus Board

Decision, Disagreement & Consensus Board

SAMPLE subject: three pricing offers for a design-review service

Directional verdict: A leads, C polarizes, B is priced out.

Not market validation. Not observed behavior. A structured synthetic read of where relevant personas may prefer, reject, misunderstand or disagree.

Confidence: LowPrepared for: SAMPLE / EXEMPLUGenerated: 28/09/2026
Executive summary
  • Variant A (€49 one-off) had the lowest average objection score in this SAMPLE run.
  • Variant B triggered strong price resistance across budget-sensitive personas.
  • Variant C split the panel: subscription fatigue versus low entry price.
10 (SAMPLE)Synthetic personas
3Variants compared
0.41 (SAMPLE)Consensus index
01

Uncertainty flags

  • Small qualitative synthetic panel (SAMPLE n=10).
  • Variant C wording differed in length.
02

Panel construction

CriterionSpread
Buyer roleFounder, PM, freelancer
Budget sensitivityLow / medium / high
Switching frictionHas agency vs none
03

Scoring model

Comprehension is checked first as a disqualifying gate. Eligible options are summarized with median + range, a forced best-worst tally, segment cuts and polarization; disagreement is reported rather than averaged away.

04

Use case

Choosing which offer to put in front of real traffic first.

05

Consensus board

Directional median objection strength by variant (SAMPLE, 0–3).

A · €49B · €99C · €19/mo
Price feels high131
Unclear deliverable212
Trust in reviewer221
Subscription fatigue003

Score scale: 0 none · 1 weak · 2 moderate · 3 strong

06

Confusion watchlist

  • “Review” read as code review by some personas.
  • “48h” unclear: start or delivery?
07

Language to test next

  • “10 prioritized design fixes in 48 hours”
  • “One-off, no subscription”
Next stepMove the strongest variant into a live SKPTST behavior test.

Methodology. SAMPLE method: a 10-persona qualitative depth panel derived from the target audience and frozen as a quota matrix before the run. Options are shown blind, symmetrically and in randomized order. Personas answer independently, rejection reasons come first, comprehension is a hard gate (>2/10 material misreads disqualifies an option), aggregation uses median/range plus best-worst and segment/polarization cuts, and a diversity audit checks for mode collapse. Directional only, not statistical.

The SKP suite
Adversarial research

Research designed to disagree with you.

Explore SKPSIS
Synthetic decision panel

Where ideas meet resistance.

This report
Observe real behavior

Test behavior, not opinions.

Logical next step →Explore SKPTST