Nine output layers. One final committee deliverable.
The platform produces layered outputs serving different needs: internal quality records, external research artefacts, the committee-table summary, and the institutional Word file that becomes the document of record.
Internal Criteria Score Table
Score plus evidence trail across 50 modules × 20 criteria. Functions as an internal quality report.
Internal · Workflow 2
Contradiction / Risk-Signal Map
Internal map of risks and verification needs. Summarised in the committee memo; the raw version stays internal.
Internal · Workflow 3
External Research Query Set
Repeatable, auditable query set copied into external research tools. Links are mandatory.
Tooling · Workflow 4
Final Decision Note
0–100 score, decision label, context-specific one-line conclusion. The single summary that goes to the decision table.
Committee · Workflow 9
Committee Package
Pre-read items, critical discussion questions and the post-meeting action set. For pre-meeting, in-meeting and post-meeting use.
Committee · Workflow 10
Committee Memo
1–2 page concise memo for rapid distribution; chair/member-level reading.
Committee · Workflow 11
Word-Ready Text
Executive committee report text ready to paste into Word; passed through a final language-quality pass.
Delivery · Workflow 12
DD Request List
Additional information and document requests gathered in one pass. Internal use; optionally packaged for delivery to the founder.
Optional · Workflow 13
Institutional Word File
Final .docx ready for committee presentation. Technical markers removed; compliant with the institutional document standard.
Delivery · Workflow 14
Four labels. Aligned tone. No softening at the negative end.
The final outcome resolves to one of four label families. The label carries score, rationale and decision tone together; the signal-loss prohibition applies particularly here.
Direct approval tone
High score, clear rationale, solid evidence chain, no — or soft — risk signals. Can be taken to the committee in a direct approval tone; requests for additional information are limited.
Positive with clarifications
Score points positive but certain areas need to be clarified; risk signals at mid level. Specific additional information or verification is requested for the committee decision.
Cannot yet decide
Score uncertain, the evidence chain is incomplete, and the committee cannot decide until the main areas of uncertainty are resolved. Additional files, external verification or structural information are requested.
Decline at item level
Low score, dense risk signals, deal-breakers present. Taken to the committee in a negative tone; rationale is given at the concrete-item level — not softened with hedging language.
Six rules govern the final delivery.
Heading hierarchy
Standard mappings [H1] = Heading 1, [H2] = Heading 2, [H3] = Heading 3 are preserved through the conversion.
Bullet markers
Converted to native list structures; no tables are created where the source has none.
Link discipline
URLs appear only in the references section; not carried into the main body.
Technical-marker cleanup
Markers such as [H1] or [PAGE_BREAK] do not appear in the final document. Internal process, tools and methodology are not disclosed.
Institutional appearance
No excessive emphasis, coloured formatting or decorative elements. Premium but restrained.
File naming convention
Investment_Committee_Decision_Support_Note_[PROJECT]_[DATE].docx — file-safe characters preferred over diacritics.