Format · Red-team

Stress-test the idea — before the market does.

A falsification council that deliberately argues the negative case: why a segment would NOT adopt, NOT pay, or churn. Each persona takes an explicit adversarial lens — skeptic, blocker, switching-cost, status-quo, risk — and the objections come back grouped into a structured case-against.

01The falsification move — for decisions that must survive attack

One move inside a run.

A council that argues the case against you.

  • Stress a pricing or positioning bet before it’s expensive
  • Hear the strongest objection while it’s still cheap to fix
  • Get the case-against grouped by theme and severity — optionally beside the case-for
  • Walk into the room with the counter-arguments ready

02On the record

It disagrees with you — with quotes.

churn-risk
The new tier removes the one feature my team actually pays for. That’s a churn trigger, not an upsell.
Lena · Head of growth
objection
Per-seat pricing punishes exactly the teams you want expanding. I’d cap it.
Marcus · CFO, scale-up
blocker
“AI-powered” reads as risk to my security team. Lead with local-first or you lose us at review.
Sofia · Procurement

What you get

The case against — structured.

Concrete objections grouped by theme: how many personas raise each blocker, the worst severity, and the case-for beside it when you ask for both.

Who balks, why, and how badly

The case against — structured.

03Inside a run

The jobs that reach for it.

04Get it

Three ways to run it.

05Questions

Won’t it just be negative about everything?

The lenses are adversarial but the objections must be concrete and grounded in each persona’s context — and you can run it with both stances to get the case-for and case-against on the same question.