Skip to content
Product Metrics Assessmentpath:/request/

Independent judgement for decision safety.

Request an assessment.

This is an independent assessment of whether your current product metrics and behavioural signals can safely support the decisions being made.

Reaching out allows an initial read: confirm the decision context, set a responsible scope, and identify the minimum evidence required for a defensible judgement.

Assessment-only. Implementation, execution, and ongoing analytics ownership remain internal.

Send a short note with enough context to identify the decision owner and what is being decided. If you are forwarding this internally, the same note can be used as the internal ask.

If you’re unsure what matters, include what you have. Scoping exists to prevent unnecessary work.

Email
If you prefer, include a calendar link. I’ll suggest a time after an initial read.
What to include
  • The decision being made (or the decision that keeps stalling).
  • Who owns that decision.
  • Which metrics/signals are being relied on.
  • What feels off (contradiction, drift, disagreement, loss of meaning).
  • Any upcoming change that increases scrutiny (scale, review, audit, migration, leadership transition).
If you need implementation ownership to transfer externally (instrumentation work, dashboard builds, KPI selection), an assessment is unlikely to fit. Trust & Fit explains the boundaries and why they exist.

Scoping is used to define a bounded assessment: what is being judged, what evidence is required, and what will be delivered.

After scope is agreed, work usually completes within weeks rather than months. The engagement completes when the written assessment artefact is delivered.

  • Deliverable is a written assessment artefact (judgement, assumptions, interpretive dependencies, failure modes).
  • Inputs are minimal and determined during scoping (definitions, dashboards as evidence, telemetry descriptions, decision context).
  • Outputs are descriptive rather than prescriptive, written to be defensible under scrutiny.
  • Implementation ownership and accountability remain internal.
Quality safeguards
If the assessment can’t be conducted responsibly (for example: access cannot be provided, scope implies execution ownership, or independence cannot be maintained), I will conclude that clearly and explain why.