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 Research In Motion (BlackBerry)'s collapse?

5 bias patterns are documented in this case, led by Status Quo Bias. The full set: Status Quo Bias, Overconfidence Bias, Anchoring Bias, Confirmation Bias, Loss Aversion. 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 failureTechnology2007

Research In Motion (BlackBerry)

BlackBerry Smartphone Decline

Estimated impact: $75B in peak market cap to near zero

F14

Decision Quality Index (simulated)

Critical · 5 biases detected, 2 toxic combinations

BlackBerry held 43% of the U.S. smartphone market in 2010 but ignored the touchscreen revolution. Co-CEOs Lazaridis and Balsillie dismissed the iPhone as unsuitable for enterprise, anchoring to keyboard superiority. The PlayBook tablet and BB10 OS arrived too late.

Decision context

Whether to pivot to touchscreen smartphones after the iPhone launch or continue focusing on keyboard-centric devices for the enterprise market.

Decision anatomy

Monetary stakes

Very high

Dissent suppressed

Yes

Time pressure

Present

Unanimous consensus

Yes

Decision participants

Dissent encouraged

External advisors

Iterative process

Red = risk factor present · Green = protective factor present

Decision Intel Platform Analysis

Source: Press Release · February 2007

The analysis below was produced from the pre-decision document only. No hindsight. This is what the platform would have surfaced if it had been running in February 2007.

Press Release · February 2007

“2007 co-CEO Jim Balsillie public dismissal of iPhone threat: 'It's OK, we'll be fine'”

Source: Jim Balsillie, co-CEO of Research In Motion

Red flags detectable at decision time

Public dismissal of category-defining competitor
Overreliance on enterprise security moat
Physical keyboard treated as permanent advantage
Consumer market trends ignored

Cognitive biases the platform would have flagged

Overconfidence BiasAnchoring BiasStatus Quo Bias

Hypothetical analysis

A decision intelligence tool would have flagged extreme overconfidence in co-CEO's public dismissal of iPhone. The anchoring to enterprise security and physical keyboards ignored consumer-led adoption patterns that historically disrupted enterprise markets within 3-5 years.

Biases present in the decision

★Status Quo Bias

critical

Overconfidence Bias

high

Anchoring Bias

high

Confirmation Bias

high

Loss Aversion

medium

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

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

Research In Motion (BlackBerry) · 5 biases, 2 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

!Status Quo Lock

Loss aversion combined with status quo bias makes even clearly beneficial change feel impossible.

!Echo Chamber

Group members reinforce each other's views, systematically filtering out dissenting signals.

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

Status quo bias from enterprise keyboard dominance prevented recognition that consumer preferences drive enterprise adoption
Dual-CEO governance structure diffused accountability and prevented decisive strategic pivots
Anchoring to technical superiority (security, battery life) while users prioritized apps and touchscreens

Source: Jacquie McNish and Sean Silcoff, "Losing the Signal: The Untold Story Behind the Extraordinary Rise and Spectacular Fall of BlackBerry" (2015) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

We caught these patterns in Research In Motion (BlackBerry)'s own record — before the outcome.

See the full hindsight-stripped 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 Research In Motion (BlackBerry)’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 any high-stakes decision, before commitment

Decision pre-mortem

Run a structured pre-mortem before the decision is final — surface failure modes the room cannot see from the inside.

Run a pre-mortem

For CSOs and CEOs presenting to a board

Board deck pre-presentation audit

Audit a board deck before the presentation — predict the toughest questions the room will ask.

Audit your board deck

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

Related cases in Technology

Catastrophic failure1975

Eastman Kodak

Kodak Digital Camera Decision

Catastrophic failure2007

Nokia

Nokia Smartphone Market Collapse

Catastrophic failure2005

Myspace (News Corp)

Myspace Decline and Sale

Catastrophic failure1979

Xerox

Xerox PARC Fails to Commercialize the GUI

Lessons learned

Status quo bias from enterprise keyboard dominance prevented recognition that consumer preferences drive enterprise adoption

Dual-CEO governance structure diffused accountability and prevented decisive strategic pivots

Anchoring to technical superiority (security, battery life) while users prioritized apps and touchscreens