Skip to content
B4Math
Sign inRun a decision rehearsal
Decision rehearsal software

Rehearse business decisions before they become expensive.

Describe the decision and the evidence you have. B4Math maps likely customer reactions, exposes weak assumptions, and returns a decision memo with the next test that could change the recommendation.

Run a decision rehearsal View an example memo
You provide
A decision, context, constraints, and available evidence
You receive
Scenarios, assumptions, risks, a recommendation, and next test
B4Math
Fictional sample
02Scenario comparisonRanges, not promises
Decision signalConditional go
Viable-outcome range56-72%Share of modeled variations that meet the stated goal
Evidence confidenceDirectional58 / 100 evidence coverage
UpsideAnnual proof lands

ROI-led buyers accept the new anchor; protected renewals limit churn.

68-79%
BaseProof is mixed

New-logo revenue rises, while budget-led teams delay or choose annual terms.

56-72%
DownsideValue proof misses

Conversion loss offsets expansion and sales must retreat to the old anchor.

24-39%
Illustrative demoSynthetic responses are hypotheses, not customer research or a prediction guarantee.
How it works

A visible chain from evidence to action.

The workflow keeps facts, assumptions, modeled reactions, and recommendations separate so a team can challenge the result instead of accepting a black box.

  1. 01

    Frame the decision

    Confirm the proposed change, audience, goal, constraints, horizon, and success metric.

    Structured input
  2. 02

    Audit the evidence

    Separate user-supplied facts, imported signals, model assumptions, and missing information.

    Assumption ledger
  3. 03

    Stress-test reactions

    Compare segment responses and scenario ranges while changing the assumptions that matter most.

    Sensitivity analysis
  4. 04

    Choose the next move

    Read the recommendation, downside, reversal condition, rollout, stop rule, and cheapest next test.

    Decision memo
Use cases

Use it where learning after launch costs too much.

Explore every use case
01

Pricing and packaging

Which customers absorb the change, and which assumption could erase the upside?

Elasticity / migration / value proof 02

Product launch

Where will adoption stall before the team commits release and campaign resources?

Activation / urgency / channel 03

Ideal customer profile

Does higher account value justify more proof, procurement, and sales-cycle risk?

Fit / buying committee / cycle 04

Market entry

Which beachhead remains viable after local alternatives and acquisition cost are considered?

Wedge / substitutes / distribution 05

Positioning

Does a new category claim improve comprehension enough to change buyer behavior?

Message / objection / intent 06

Growth priority

What must be true before the next channel or motion earns more budget?

Conversion / capacity / stop rule
Transparent assumptions

See which beliefs are carrying the recommendation.

Every important claim has an origin, confidence level, likely impact, and sensitivity flag. Missing evidence stays visible.

ClaimOriginConfidenceImpact
Qualified buyers connect the increase to avoided operating cost.User evidenceMediumHigh sensitivity
Existing annual contracts remain protected through renewal.User factHighMedium
Competitors do not answer with a material discount.Model assumptionLowHigh sensitivity
Observed willingness to pay at the $129 anchor.Missing evidenceUnknownDecision critical
Sensitivity preview

Move an assumption. Watch the decision move.

Updated viable-outcome range56-72%

The recommendation remains a conditional go. Value proof is still the decision-critical assumption.

Scenario comparison

A range only matters when its conditions are visible.

B4Math shows the trigger, likely customer response, business effect, uncertainty range, and mitigation for each branch.

ScenarioWhat makes it trueCustomer responseBusiness effectModeled range
Proof-led rolloutFive or more annual commitments; renewal protection holdsROI-led teams accept; existing customers wait for renewalExpansion outweighs conversion loss68-79%
Narrow adoptionValue proof is credible only for the strongest segmentQualified teams accept; budget-led teams deferModest lift with longer sales conversations56-72%
Value-proof missFewer than five commitments; objections center on ROIProspects delay or choose the old anchorConversion loss erases the price gain24-39%
Example recommendation

The conclusion reads like a decision, not a dashboard.

Editorial emphasis is reserved for the recommendation. Operational details remain compact and easy to challenge.

Decision memo / Fictional sampleNorthstar CRM
Directional evidence
Conditional go

Pilot the $129 anchor with new annual-plan buyers before changing public pricing.

The price has credible upside in the ROI-led segment, but the evidence does not support a broad public change yet.

Strongest support
Annual-plan buyers already frame the product against avoided launch and research cost.
Main downside
Value proof is weaker than the size of the price increase.
Recommendation changes if
Hold the price if fewer than 5 of 15 qualified buyers accept the annual anchor.
Missing evidence
Observed willingness to pay at $129 and renewal response from protected cohorts.
Next cheapest test
15 buyer conversations and 5 written annual-plan commitments.
Stop condition
Stop after 15 qualified conversations if acceptance stays below five commitments.
Suggested rollout

Offer the new anchor to net-new annual buyers, preserve existing contracts, and review conversion, sales-cycle length, and objection mix after 30 days.

Founder and product teams

Bring one decision you cannot afford to learn from too late.

Run the public example now. Create a workspace or request a pilot when the decision needs private evidence and a facilitated review.

Run a decision rehearsalRequest a pilot