Governance Review for Failed Conjoint & Pricing Studies
This work applies when a pricing or conjoint study is complete, the decision window has closed, and leadership wants to understand why the effort failed to support a decision — so it does not happen again.
Time pressure is off.
The spend is sunk.
The task is no longer to decide.
If time pressure remains or a decision is still unfolding, this work shifts from governance review to Rescue.
When this is the right intervention
Post-mortems don’t create better decisions. They create earlier governance next time.
This is appropriate when:
- A pricing or conjoint effort concluded, but did not meaningfully inform action
- Results appeared reasonable, yet did not resolve the real question
- Leadership is uneasy about how the decision was supported, even if no error is obvious
- The objective is prevention, not defense or blame
- Learning is allowed again
If additional time or reruns would have solved the issue, they already would have.
What this review examines
This is a decision-focused governance review, conducted after the fact, to identify where decision evidence broke down.
The review centers on the materials used for deliberation, including:
- the original problem framing and decision mandate
- RFPs, proposals, and vendor positioning
- rationale used for method and partner selection
- correspondence, escalations, and mid-course adjustments
- how results were interpreted and presented for decision
Data and modeling are not examined at this stage. They are only engaged later if required to isolate or demonstrate the source of failure.
The objective is understanding, not direction.
Scope boundary
This work assumes the goal is internal learning and prevention.
If legal recourse, discovery, or adversarial review is required, formal litigation forensics is the appropriate path.
What comes out of a post-mortem
Typically:
- a clear account of why the decision evidence failed to reduce uncertainty
- identification of silent failure modes that standard diagnostics miss
- separation of method limits from execution quality
- language leadership can use to discuss the outcome without escalation
- clarity on what must change before the next decision of this type
No new recommendation is produced.
Fees
Governance Intake Review (Required): $5,000
A paid review to understand the situation and examine decision artifacts, including:
- the original decision mandate
- RFPs, proposals, and vendor selection rationale
- any final recommendation or report (if available)
- correspondence and deliberation materials
The initial phase concludes with a written governance review that identifies where decision support broke down and whether analytic evidence was sufficient for the decision that was made.
After the Governance Review, if artifacts suggest analytic design or data issues materially contributed to the outcome, the engagement naturally leads to an optional Analytic Post-Mortem scoped under those conditions.
Analytic Post-Mortem (If Needed): from $25k
If the Governance Review indicates that data, modeling, or analytic design contributed materially to the failure, a focused analytic post-mortem may be proposed.
This work involves direct engagement with data and models and is narrowly scoped to prove cause, not to suggest action.
Request a Governance Intake Review
This is a selective, after-the-fact review for situations where completed pricing or conjoint work failed to support a decision, and the objective is learning — not action.
Submission does not guarantee acceptance.