PrerequisiteComplete Module 5 (Cost and Value), with a cost/value sheet in hand
0 / 2 completed
Learning objectives
Assemble the hypothesis card, evaluation results, and cost/value into a decision brief.
Recommend one of the Evidence Review's four decisions (Proceed to Readiness, Iterate, Hold, No-Go), backed by evidence.
Answer follow-up questions about the hypothesis, failure cases, and cost estimates in a mock sponsor review.
Evidence, decisions, and the mock review
60 min
Writing the decision brief
The decision brief is IL 201's final deliverable: it must let a sponsor make a decision from evidence without having lived through every daily detail. Every conclusion must trace back to specific evidence from Modules 1-5, not just say "we believe."
Module 5 cost/value sheet: one-time vs. recurring cost, estimate tags
Limitations and risk
Assembled in this module: data-scope limits, under-sampled categories, responsible-AI risk
Recommended decision
One of the four Evidence Review decisions, with rationale and required conditions
Warning
Common mistake: the decision brief presents only the results that favor the solution (e.g. overall accuracy), leaving out the critical errors or under-sampled categories that Module 4 already disclosed. Checking whether a brief cherry-picks evidence is one of the sponsor review's jobs.
Key takeaway: Every conclusion in the decision brief must point to a specific piece of evidence from Modules 1-5; selectively presenting favorable results destroys the brief's credibility.
60 min
The four decisions and a mock sponsor review
The Evidence Review's four decisions (reusing the platform's existing EVIDENCE gate decision dictionary)
Decision
When it applies
Proceed to Readiness
The hypothesis held, critical errors are within an acceptable range, and evidence is sufficient to move into the IL 202 readiness review
Iterate
The direction is right but the prototype or evaluation design needs revision and retesting, e.g. a category with too high a critical-error rate
Hold
Evidence is insufficient to judge (e.g. too small a sample) or an external condition is not yet ready; revisit once more evidence is gathered
No-Go
The hypothesis was not supported or cost exceeds achievable value, with sufficient evidence to justify stopping investment
Info
These four decisions sit at a different gate than the Value Gate decision from IL 101 Module 1, and are consistent with the gate decision dictionaries used later in IL 301/IL 302: all managed by the platform's existing gate decision dictionary; this course does not define a new vocabulary.
Done
After Proceed to Readiness, the charter needs the sponsor and process owner to approve the minimum data-use screening for the IL 202 readiness review. A synthetic self-study exercise does not need a real industry sponsor, but the brief must state "synthetic exercise, not equivalent to a formal project."
1Exercise Complete your own decision-brief draft, choose one Evidence Review decision, and write at least three concrete pieces of evidence supporting it.
2Mock review Swap roles with a peer who plays the sponsor. Have them ask at least two follow-up questions about your hypothesis, failure cases, and cost estimates, and practice answering with evidence rather than restating your conclusion.
Check yourself
A project's acceptance test shows the critical-error rate within an acceptable range and the hypothesis held, but the minimum data-use screening has not been completed. Under the Evidence Review's four decisions, what is the most appropriate recommendation?
Key takeaway: A decision brief that survives a sponsor's follow-up questions relies on concrete, checkable evidence behind every decision, not on how confidently the conclusion is written.
