Reality Skill
FICTIONAL SAMPLELeader · 2/8 All examples ↗

Chapters & perspectives

Each chapter is a prepared point in the same decision. Switching perspective changes access, not the outcome.
Team room

Confirm the decision question and who holds the decision right.

Find the shared question, scope, decider and visibility rule.

Next chapter →
Why this matters

The situation: A fictional company tests regional demand without overwhelming onboarding.

The opening record holds a shared objective without choosing a route.

Company decision record available to the decision team.

In your own decision: Share the context, collect independent views, and record how each important concern changes the decision.

Demo options

Sample data · practice stays here · no AI calls or account changes

Team decision Workspace: Northstar Components (fictional)

Growth without overload

draft You manage this record
Tools

Case tools

Choose a tool when it helps the current work. Locations stay stable and results remain separate until you carry them into the case.

Where are you stuck?

Understand

Challenge

Explore

Evidence

People

Record

Pages of this decision

Growth without overload

Team decision room

Who can do what
  • The person explicitly assigned decision authority records the commitment. Being an administrator or advisor does not automatically give someone that authority.
  • Participants provide their own perspective before seeing the shared responses. They do not gain authority to decide for the company.
  • An advisor contributes advice within the client’s permission. The client retains decision authority; access to one client does not grant access to another.
  • Sealed contributions are not available early. Protected feedback hides the author’s identity from other participants until voluntary reveal; company administrators cannot reveal it. Wording and a small group can still make the author guessable.

The team decision journey

  1. Context sharedRecorded
  2. Perspectives sealedNot yet recorded
  3. Contributions revealedNot yet recorded
  4. Differences examinedNot yet recorded
  5. Accountable decisionNot yet recorded
  6. Reality DateNot yet recorded

Your next step

collecting sealed views

There is no action for you yet. Submitted views remain sealed until reveal.

Decision black box

Decision black box

A summary of the record you are allowed to see. Missing information remains visible as a gap.

GoalObjective
Should we enter a second region this quarter?
Contributors
Maya Chen Operations lead Core team member 3 Core team member 4 Core team member 5 Core team member 6 Core team member 7
Independent perspectives
Sealed or unavailable to your role
Material disagreement
Sealed or unavailable to your role
AssumptionAssumptions examined
Sealed or unavailable to your role
OptionAlternatives considered
Sealed or unavailable to your role
Decision owner
Maya Chen, COO (fictional)
CommitmentFinal commitment
Sealed or unavailable to your role
ReviewReview date
Not recorded
Outcome and lesson
Not recorded
The six concepts on your map
GoalWhat should become possibleEvidenceWhat supports or challenges a claimAssumptionWhat must holdOptionA route to considerCommitmentThe chosen actionReviewWhat reality revealed
Room details and participants

Decision contract

What this round is for

collecting sealed views

Decision question

Should we enter a second region this quarter?

In scope
Grow in a second region without weakening customer trust.
Out of scope
Not recorded
Stakes
Not recorded
Decision lead
Maya Chen, COO (fictional)
Decision rule
The lead decides once the minimum sealed input is present; unanswered and declined seats remain visible
Answer deadline
5 Oct 2026, 12:00
Attribution after reveal
Current submitted participants see names after reveal
Reality date
Not recorded

Independent round

Who has answered

collecting

Only collection status is visible now. No one — including the decision lead — can read an answer until the round is revealed.

0 of 7 submitted

  • Maya Chen · you · decision lead opened
  • Operations lead · participant invited
  • Core team member 3 · participant invited
  • Core team member 4 · participant invited
  • Core team member 5 · participant invited
  • Core team member 6 · participant invited
  • Core team member 7 · participant invited

Protected Feedback

Hear the risks people won’t raise in the room. Add a separate note alongside your independent contribution.

Anonymous to your team—including the decision-maker and company admins. The service retains a protected authorship link for your own management and voluntary reveal; infrastructure operators have technical access. This is not untraceable reporting or a guarantee against retaliation.

Invited team members, including those who declined, can read notes after a successful reveal. Failed rounds stay sealed.

How visibility works

During independent collection, notes stay sealed. After a successful round reveal, the invited decision team can read them—even participants who declined. Later notes appear immediately on refresh, without visible posting times. Failed rounds stay sealed.

Discuss the concern, not who wrote it. Do not pressure anyone to reveal authorship. Leadership cannot unlock anonymous identities.

Small teams, wording, events and timing can still identify you. Remove names and identifying details. No software can guarantee anonymity. For an urgent safety issue, use your established escalation channel; do not wait for this round.

Add a feedback note

Before sending: remove names and distinctive details. Do not assume that hiding your name hides who you are. Device draft recovery may also retain your writing on this browser.

Example: Our launch assumes the recovery process works, but we have not tested it under load.

Peer notes are sealed. Only your own notes are shown here.

Protected notes and leadership responses are kept alongside the decision record and outcome review. They do not rewrite the original commitment.

Service operator access and incident review

Company admins cannot request an identity unlock in this interface. Suspected serious misuse must follow the service operator’s restricted incident-review procedure; anonymity from infrastructure operators is not promised. Previously downloaded copies cannot be recalled.

Incident review starts with the reported content and access history, not the author’s identity. Exceptional identity access requires documented necessity and service-security authorization. Criticism or an executive’s curiosity is not sufficient. There is no automatic disclosure to a company administrator.