Too many plausible use cases
The team needs one opportunity connected to a user, a business result, and evidence that can change a decision.
Five-day Product Direction Sprint
Know what deserves to be built—before the build gets expensive.
For founder-led software and SaaS teams with an important AI opportunity, competing assumptions, and a real decision to make. In five focused days, we narrow the release, make its largest uncertainty inspectable, and recommend the next commitment from evidence produced and available.
Five working days · Fixed US$3,000 · Complete on its own
When the sprint fits
The opportunity feels real. The responsible release does not—yet.
This is the point between “we should do something with AI” and committing engineering time, budget, or organizational attention.
A promising idea with a critical unknown
The largest risk may be the experience, AI behavior, data, integration, or the workflow around the technology.
A team waiting for a build boundary
Product, design, and engineering need the same definition of what is in, out, later, and good enough to release.
Shared responsibility
I lead the decision. Your team supplies the truth.
Three client conversations anchor the work. Analysis and artifact production continue between them.
- Decision framing and use-case prioritization
- The agreed evidence-generating artifact
- Preliminary technical and evaluation direction
- The final recommendation and handover
- Business and customer context
- Access to existing research and constraints
- The accountable sponsor for three conversations
- Approval of the resulting next move
The right artifact for the risk
Which uncertainty could reverse the next commitment?
The fit call identifies the leading question. The written scope names one evidence-generating artifact, the agreed inspection or test, and the result that could change the decision.
Eligibility gate
Do your current evidence and business context let us name one user, problem, business objective, and decision?
- No
- The fixed Sprint is not yet the responsible scope. Use separately scoped research or preparation—or stop.
- Yes
- Prioritize the uncertainty most likely to reverse the next commitment and feasible to examine in five days.
Choose one leading risk routeArtifact → agreed inspection or test → findings → recommendation
Alternative AExperience + control Can intended users understand, use, and control the critical journey?
- Use when
- Workflow, comprehension, or AI trust depends on how people review, correct, control, and recover.
- Primary artifact
- Clickable critical-journey prototype
- Can tell you
- Where the agreed review exposes task, interpretation, control, or failure-state problems.
- Cannot prove
- Demand, production feasibility, or behavior at scale.
Alternative BTechnical feasibility Can the required AI, data, integration, cost, or latency meet a named threshold?
- Use when
- One measurable dependency or AI output-quality threshold could make the release unworkable.
- Primary artifact
- Bounded feasibility test
- Can tell you
- Whether a technical spike or scored behavior sample meets the named threshold with available data and constraints.
- Cannot prove
- Production readiness, exhaustive security, comprehensive AI safety, or performance at scale.
Alternative COperating workflow Can roles, handoffs, exceptions, and connected systems support the intended outcome?
- Use when
- Value or failure crosses people, approvals, data, operational steps, and system boundaries.
- Primary artifact
- Workflow and authority model
- Can tell you
- Where ownership, dependencies, handoffs, controls, and recovery paths are incomplete.
- Cannot prove
- Usability, technical feasibility, adoption, or implemented automation.
Five working days · three decision conversations
From contested opportunity to a defensible next move.
Kickoff, evidence review, and final recommendation and decision review anchor the week. Work between them adapts to what the evidence reveals; exact session times, participants, and response windows are agreed before the Sprint starts.
- 5Working days
- 1Leading risk
- 1Primary artifact
- US$3,000Fixed fee
Client conversation · live decision gateBetween-session work · Gabriel analyzes, produces, and documents
Day 01 · FrameClient conversation 1 · Kickoff Lock the decision frame
Align the user, problem, business objective, existing evidence, assumptions, constraints, and decision the Sprint must support.
Client gate
The sponsor confirms business truth, non-goals, missing evidence, required access, and the leading question.
Working outputAgreed opportunity and evidence briefDay 02 · Choose + prepareGabriel working between sessions Bound and prepare the candidate release
Compare plausible use cases, define one candidate focused release, and prepare the first reviewable version of the agreed artifact and inspection setup.
Client availability
Answer only material clarification or access requests inside the agreed response window.
Working outputCandidate release boundary and review-ready artifactDay 03 · Produce + inspectClient conversation 2 · Evidence review Examine the leading uncertainty
Finalize as needed, then use the bounded artifact with the agreed people and/or data against the agreed criteria or threshold, as applicable; record observations and contradictions.
Client gate
Required reviewers or data are available; the sponsor chooses continue, narrow, reframe, or stop.
Working outputObservations, results, and recorded evidence-review route decisionDay 04 · Interpret + prepareGabriel working between sessions Make the recommendation actionable
Separate findings from interpretation, limitations, and open risks; refine the candidate release and draft preliminary technical and evaluation direction.
Client availability
Resolve only final factual or authority questions that materially block the recommendation.
Working outputDraft decision package and recommended 90-day directionDay 05 · Recommend + recordClient conversation 3 · Decision review + handover Resolve the next-decision path
Synthesize available evidence, new findings, limitations, tradeoffs, and unresolved risks; Gabriel recommends build, narrow, buy, defer, or stop.
Client gate
The sponsor records the next commitment—or records the remaining decision owner and date if approval is pending.
Final handoffConnected editable decision package and walkthrough
One connected decision package
Four parts—not twelve disconnected deliverables.
Every component supports one product decision and remains editable for handoff. The Sprint produces one primary evidence-generating artifact chosen around the largest uncertainty; it does not promise all three risk routes together.
- Decision and release boundary
Defined user, intended outcome, prioritized use case, critical journey, and explicit in, out, and later scope. - Primary evidence-generating artifact
One artifact selected from the risk map above, its agreed inspection or test, and the findings produced.
- Preliminary technical and evaluation direction
Major integrations, AI authority or conventional acceptance, assumptions, dependencies, unresolved risks, success measures, and release conditions. - Recommendation, roadmap, and handover
Build, narrow, buy, defer, or stop; preliminary phases and estimate range; recommended 90-day direction; recorded walkthrough and editable files.
Method preview—not client Sprint proof
Inspect the structure behind the decision.
The Auteur Framework explains how I make direction, evidence, and accountability explicit. The Vivid case shows related product judgment carried into a working release. Neither is presented as the result of a paid five-day client Sprint.
Clear boundaries
Five days only works when one decision leads.
Not a production build
The primary evidence-generating artifact makes one uncertainty inspectable. Production implementation, deployment, and ongoing support are separate.
Not open-ended discovery
Existing research and evidence are reviewed. Recruiting and running a new research program requires separate scope.
Not automatic presales
The final recommendation may be to use your team, another provider, an existing tool, a smaller release—or no build at all.
Choose the responsible first step
Bring one opportunity and the decision that is stuck.
The fit call determines whether five days can materially reduce the risk. If not, I will say so.