How is sensitive data protected?

All documents are encrypted with AES-256-GCM at rest and TLS 1.2+ in transit. A GDPR anonymization layer removes PII before any AI processing. Hosted on Vercel + Supabase (both SOC 2 Type II); Decision Intel’s own product-level audit is targeted for Q4 2026.

How long does integration take?

Less than 30 minutes. Upload documents directly, connect via OAuth for Slack, or use our REST API for bulk processing.

How does outcome tracking work?

Outcomes are detected automatically from follow-up documents, Slack messages, and web intelligence. You confirm with one click. Each reported outcome makes your future analyses more accurate.

How is Decision Intel different from ChatGPT or a general AI assistant?

ChatGPT gives one opinion from one model: ungoverned, untraceable, unaudited. Decision Intel is the reasoning audit platform. Most tools audit your data; we audit your reasoning — and catch the fatal blind spots in strategic memos before the committee does. It measures the noise in your reasoning the same way Kahneman did in the insurance underwriter study, simulates an AI boardroom of CEO, CFO, and board personas, runs what-if interventions against a 143-case public reference library, and compounds every confirmed outcome back into a calibrated Decision Quality Index your audit committee can defend. Not a chatbot; a reasoning audit, checkable from memo to outcome.

Which cognitive biases caused General Electric's collapse?

5 bias patterns are documented in this case, led by Anchoring Bias. The full set: Anchoring Bias, Overconfidence Bias, Sunk Cost Fallacy, Confirmation Bias, Planning Fallacy. Each is mapped to Decision Intel's 22-bias R²F taxonomy with stable IDs and academic citations.

What is Decision Intel's reasoning audit?

Decision Intel runs a 12-node Recognition-Rigor Framework (R²F) pipeline on strategic memos, detecting cognitive biases from a 22-bias canonical taxonomy and producing a Decision Quality Index (DQI) score. The audit produces a hashed, tamper-evident Decision Provenance Record (DPR) suitable for audit-committee review.

All case studies

Catastrophic failureEnergy2015

General Electric

GE Alstom Power Acquisition

Estimated impact: $22B

F14

Decision Quality Index (simulated)

Critical · 5 biases detected, 4 toxic combinations

GE acquired Alstom's power division for $10.6 billion in 2015, betting on continued growth in gas turbine demand. The acquisition coincided with a structural shift toward renewable energy, and GE ultimately wrote down $22 billion in goodwill. CEO Jeff Immelt's confidence in the deal suppressed internal dissent.

Decision context

Whether to acquire Alstom's power and grid business at a premium valuation while the global energy market was shifting from fossil fuels to renewables.

Decision anatomy

Monetary stakes

Very high

Dissent suppressed

Yes

Time pressure

Present

Unanimous consensus

Decision participants

Dissent encouraged

External advisors

Iterative process

Red = risk factor present · Green = protective factor present

Deep hindsight-stripped analysis coming soon. This case is part of our ongoing backfill to reconstruct what the platform would have flagged at decision time. The summary and bias profile below are drawn from primary sources.

Biases present in the decision

★Anchoring Bias

critical

Overconfidence Bias

high

Sunk Cost Fallacy

high

Confirmation Bias

high

Planning Fallacy

medium

★ Primary driver · Severity estimated from bias type and decision outcome

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

General Electric · 5 biases, 4 toxic combinations

Drag to rotate · Scroll to zoom · Click to explore

Decision

Critical

High

Medium

Toxic

Bias Intensity Profile

Severity × confidence across 5 detected biases

Toxic combinations

!Sunk Ship

Commitment to a failing course escalates to justify sunk costs, even as evidence mounts.

!Optimism Trap

Overconfidence and availability bias create a systematically positive outlook that ignores base rates.

!Synergy Mirage

Synergy claims without a named operational mechanism, accountable executive, or 90-day milestone — the canonical M&A failure mode (70-90% of acquisitions miss projected synergies).

!Winner's Curse

Auction-dynamic anchoring drives bids above intrinsic value; "strategic necessity" and "competitive process" language flag the deal-fever pattern.

Reference class base rates

Across all 143 curated case studies in our library:

89%

base failure rate

-0%

partial / mixed

11%

base success rate

■ Failure■ Partial■ Success

Lessons learned

Anchoring to historical gas turbine demand growth blinded GE to the accelerating energy transition.
Sunk cost fallacy led GE to double down on power after the acquisition rather than pivoting when demand dropped.
Overconfidence in integration capabilities led to overpaying for an asset in a declining market.

Source: GE 2018 Annual Report (goodwill impairment); Thomas Gryta and Ted Mann, "Lights Out: Pride, Delusion, and the Fall of General Electric" (2020) (SEC Filing)

Pilot slots available

We caught these patterns in General Electric's own record — before the outcome.

See the full bias auditwe ran — no login, no card. Then run the same 60-second audit on your own next memo.

See a live audit · no login Audit your own memo

Or leave your email, we'll run a strategic memo of your choosing and send the readout within a business day.

Audit your own decision

Workflows that fire on decisions like General Electric’s

The same Recognition-Rigor Framework that documents this case audits memos in the same shape — before the outcome forces the lesson.

For CSOs and Heads of Strategic Planning

Strategic memo audit

Audit a strategic memo for cognitive bias and forecast errors in 60 seconds — before the board sees it.

Audit a strategic memo

For Heads of Corp Dev and M&A advisors

M&A bias audit

Audit an acquisition thesis for the three named M&A failure patterns: Synergy Mirage, Conglomerate Fallacy, Winner's Curse.

Audit an acquisition thesis

For Heads of Corp Dev and Investment Committee chairs

IC memo pre-vote stress test

Stress-test an investment committee memo before the vote — catch Synergy Mirage, Winner's Curse, and Conglomerate Fallacy.

Audit your IC memo

See all 6 workflows for the full audit-tool surface.

Related cases in Energy

Catastrophic failure2007

Bear Stearns

Bear Stearns Hedge Fund Collapse

Catastrophic failure2000

Blockbuster

Blockbuster Rejection of Netflix Partnership

Catastrophic failure2008

Yahoo

Yahoo Rejection of Microsoft Acquisition

Catastrophic failure2011

Solyndra

Solyndra Bankruptcy

Toxic combinations

!Sunk Ship

Commitment to a failing course escalates to justify sunk costs, even as evidence mounts.

!Optimism Trap

Overconfidence and availability bias create a systematically positive outlook that ignores base rates.

!Synergy Mirage

Synergy claims without a named operational mechanism, accountable executive, or 90-day milestone — the canonical M&A failure mode (70-90% of acquisitions miss projected synergies).

!Winner's Curse

Auction-dynamic anchoring drives bids above intrinsic value; "strategic necessity" and "competitive process" language flag the deal-fever pattern.

Lessons learned

Anchoring to historical gas turbine demand growth blinded GE to the accelerating energy transition.

Sunk cost fallacy led GE to double down on power after the acquisition rather than pivoting when demand dropped.

Overconfidence in integration capabilities led to overpaying for an asset in a declining market.