Skip to content
CounterBrain — Casebook

Twelve decisions. Twelve blind spots caught before the cost.

Each case below tells a multi-million-euro decision, the moment when everyone was ready to say «yes», and the uncomfortable question that changed everything. It is what a cognitive contradictor does and an assistant never will: attack the judgment before reality does.

Defense

€1.2 billion for the «X-class» heavy weapon, before the budget window closes

The decision

There is a gap to fill in defense and a long-standing supplier ready to fill it with a powerful platform. The political and budget window is open now, and everyone is pushing to sign.

Test outcome

yes → conditional yes

Decision consequence in the scenario

Avoided a €1.2 bn commitment on a weapon that a mass attack could have neutralized; requirement realigned to the real threat.

Open the case →
Private Equity

Buying «NovaPack» at 11 times earnings: €340 million for sustainable packaging

The decision

A company growing 25% a year, in a sector driven by sustainability. The price is high — 11 times annual earnings — but «the trajectory justifies it».

Test outcome

11x → renegotiated

Decision consequence in the scenario

Over €60M not paid for momentary growth as if it were forever.

Open the case →
Banking

Increasing office-building loans by 30% in city «M»

The decision

Growing in mortgages on office real estate: attractive yields, buildings as collateral, long-standing relationships with developers.

Test outcome

+30% → selective

Decision consequence in the scenario

Avoided a concentration disguised as diversification in a declining market, before the next downturn.

Open the case →
Pharma

Taking the drug «BX-204» to Phase III: €180 million over three years

The decision

The Phase II trial gave a positive, statistically solid result. Inside the company there's a push to start Phase III before the competitor.

Test outcome

Phase III → adaptive

Decision consequence in the scenario

Avoided a €180M trial potentially aimed at the wrong target.

Open the case →
Energy

Approving a €900 million plant, designed to last 25 years

The decision

A large, heavily fossil-intensive energy infrastructure. At today's prices and consumption, it pays back in 8 years.

Test outcome

25 years → with options

Decision consequence in the scenario

Reduced the risk of a stranded asset on €900M, turning a bet into an option.

Open the case →
Tech/AI

Building our AI platform in-house: €40 million and 18 months

The decision

Developing internally — for «control, differentiation and intellectual property» — instead of buying the technology or partnering.

Test outcome

in-house → buy + defend

Decision consequence in the scenario

Recovered 12+ months of market lead and avoided spending on a part destined to become a commodity.

Open the case →
Supply chain

Reshoring the production of a critical component: €120 million

The decision

Bringing a strategic component «back home» to reduce geopolitical risk, with public incentives covering part of the cost.

Test outcome

single site → two suppliers

Decision consequence in the scenario

Real security instead of shifted risk, with half the capital exposed.

Open the case →
Insurance

Increasing property policies by 50% in a fast-growing coastal area

The decision

Growing where premiums are high and demand is racing, with catastrophe models judged «under control».

Test outcome

+50% → risk covered

Decision consequence in the scenario

Avoided a concentration that a single hurricane could have turned into a capital loss.

Open the case →
Healthcare

Investing €25 million in diagnostic AI across the whole hospital network

The decision

Adopting a more accurate system (in the vendor's tests) to improve efficiency and quality of care.

Test outcome

whole network → validated pilot

Decision consequence in the scenario

Avoided €25M of unused technology and a clinical-legal risk from over-trusting the machine.

Open the case →
Public policy

A €500 million incentive to accelerate the adoption of a technology

The decision

A broad incentive to hit a public target, perceived as popular and «good for everyone».

Test outcome

broad → targeted

Decision consequence in the scenario

Same target at a fraction of the cost; avoided a €500M transfer benefiting the wealthiest.

Open the case →
Board/Crisis

Responding to an accusation gone viral with a hard, legal defense

The decision

Reacting to the media attack by firmly denying and threatening legal action.

Test outcome

hard line → change of course

Decision consequence in the scenario

Crisis put out in days instead of weeks; avoided an own goal of «the more you deny it, the more they talk about it».

Open the case →
Expansion

Entering foreign market «P» with a €70 million direct investment

The decision

Replicating abroad the model that wins at home, betting on the advantage of arriving first in a huge market.

Test outcome

direct → staged

Decision consequence in the scenario

A €70M leap turned into calibrated bets, with far less capital at risk until the market confirms.

Open the case →
Methodological note — read first

These twelve cases are composite teaching cases, in the method of the Harvard Business Review: built from recurring decision patterns in each sector, merged and anonymized to protect confidentiality. Names, figures and outcomes are illustrative and do not describe a single client engagement. The «sources» indicate the type of evidence the engine cites with provenance in production.

Why this way: inflating a track record would be the first error the method itself would flag. That is why no case carries a Δ-CSI score: a score is shown only when the complete, versioned scorecard can be reproduced. The strength of these cases is in the method.

Fixed schema: assumptions · counter-intuitive scenario · falsification · burden of proof · confidence · provenanceTest outcome: how the challenge changes the decision in the scenario
↑