Decision, Disagreement & Consensus BoardSAMPLEReadyDecision, Disagreement & Consensus Board
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.
Not market validation. Not observed behavior. A structured synthetic read of where relevant personas may prefer, reject, misunderstand or disagree.
Uncertainty flags
- Small qualitative synthetic panel (SAMPLE n=10).
- Variant C wording differed in length.
Panel construction
| Criterion | Spread |
|---|---|
| Buyer role | Founder, PM, freelancer |
| Budget sensitivity | Low / medium / high |
| Switching friction | Has agency vs none |
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.
Use case
Choosing which offer to put in front of real traffic first.
Consensus board
Directional median objection strength by variant (SAMPLE, 0–3).
| A · €49 | B · €99 | C · €19/mo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price feels high | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| Unclear deliverable | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| Trust in reviewer | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Subscription fatigue | 0 | 0 | 3 |
Score scale: 0 none · 1 weak · 2 moderate · 3 strong
Confusion watchlist
- “Review” read as code review by some personas.
- “48h” unclear: start or delivery?
Language to test next
- “10 prioritized design fixes in 48 hours”
- “One-off, no subscription”
Synthetic decision panelWhere ideas meet resistance.
This report