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 Toshiba Corporation's failure?

5 bias patterns are documented in this case, led by Authority Bias. The full set: Authority Bias, Groupthink, Framing Effect, Hindsight 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

FailureFinancial Services2015

Toshiba Corporation

Toshiba Accounting Scandal

Estimated impact: ¥152B ($1.2B) in overstated profits; massive reputational damage

F30

Decision Quality Index (simulated)

Critical · 5 biases detected, 2 toxic combinations

Toshiba overstated profits by ¥152B ($1.2B) over seven years through systematic accounting fraud. CEO pressure to meet earnings targets cascaded through the organization as "challenges" that business unit heads understood as mandates to fabricate numbers.

Decision context

Whether to report accurate earnings or use aggressive accounting practices to meet targets set by successive CEOs who framed them as non-negotiable challenges.

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

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

★Authority Bias

critical

Groupthink

high

Framing Effect

medium

Hindsight Bias

medium

Loss Aversion

medium

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

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

Toshiba Corporation · 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

!Yes Committee

Authority bias meets groupthink: the group converges on whatever leadership signals it wants.

!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

Authority bias in Japanese corporate culture amplified top-down pressure into systematic fraud across all business units
Framing earnings targets as "challenges" rather than "mandates" provided plausible deniability while creating identical pressure
Hindsight bias after the scandal revealed that many mid-level managers had recognized the fraud but assumed it was temporary

Source: Toshiba Independent Investigation Committee Report (2015) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

We caught these patterns in Toshiba Corporation'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 Toshiba Corporation’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 VC / PE General Partners

Fund investment thesis audit

Audit a fund investment thesis before the LP raise — catch Narrative Coherence, Reference-Class Blindness, and Optimism Trap.

Audit a fund thesis

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

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

Related cases in Financial Services

Failure2010

HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland)

HBOS Reading Fraud

Catastrophic failure1995

Barings Bank

Barings Bank Collapse

Catastrophic failure2022

FTX

FTX Cryptocurrency Exchange Collapse

Catastrophic failure2021

Greensill Capital

Greensill Capital Collapse

Lessons learned

Authority bias in Japanese corporate culture amplified top-down pressure into systematic fraud across all business units

Framing earnings targets as "challenges" rather than "mandates" provided plausible deniability while creating identical pressure

Hindsight bias after the scandal revealed that many mid-level managers had recognized the fraud but assumed it was temporary