The finding
Which constraint is binding, with the evidence and its source for every one of the twenty checks — including the ones we could not answer.
A paid engagement that answers one question: which constraint is actually holding this market back. Two to four weeks, twenty fixed checks, and a written prediction we can be judged against.
Most briefs arrive with the problem already named, and usually the name is awareness. It is the easiest thing to buy, and it is the easiest thing for us to sell.
Sometimes that is right. More often the money is being spent against a barrier that was never binding, and the campaign performs exactly as designed while nothing changes.
We sell the diagnosis on its own, before any proposal to build anything, because an assessment produced by the party hoping to win the build is not an assessment. It also means we can tell you the answer is no campaign — which happens, and which is difficult to say when the fee depends on the alternative.
Published in full. Publishing them costs us nothing; the work is in answering them with evidence rather than assumption. Checks run in this order deliberately: Access first because it is the only constraint that resolves to a fact, and Understanding third because it is what you already believe and have already spent against.
We agree the market, the population and the participation metric that matters. If we think a diagnostic is not what you need, we say so here — before anyone is invoiced.
The two constraints that resolve fastest and are most often binding. Rail inventory, onboarding walkthrough, eligibility and pricing review, incident history, recourse audit.
Comprehension measured by assessment rather than recall. Return-rate curves where data exists. Ecosystem and stakeholder mapping.
The binding constraint, the evidence behind it, the intervention we would recommend — and the registered prediction, including what result would prove us wrong.
Build it with us, build it with someone else, or do nothing. There is no obligation attached, and the findings are yours.
Which constraint is binding, with the evidence and its source for every one of the twenty checks — including the ones we could not answer.
What would relieve it, what it would take, and which other constraints it would relieve at the same time.
A quantified expected change against a named metric, a date, and the result that would count as us being wrong.
What fails if the intervention fails. An intervention that relieves three constraints is also one whose failure binds three.
A fixed fee, agreed at scoping. It varies with the size of the population, whether primary research is required, and how much usable data already exists — not with the size of any work that might follow.
Access to whatever participation data exists, however poor. Whoever owns the P&L in the room at scoping and at findings. And an honest account of what has already been tried.
If the campaign is approved and the diagnostic is needed to justify it, we will find the wrong answer or the right one at the wrong time. Neither helps.
Where the product does not yet exist, or nobody can buy it, the constraint is supply. That is a business problem before it is a participation one.
Evidence takes the time it takes. Anything we could produce in five days would really just be our opinion.
The more precisely you can describe the behaviour that is not occurring, the more useful the scoping conversation will be. We reply within three working days.