Scenario War Room
Tier: POWERFUL
Category: C-Level Advisory
Tags: scenario planning, war room, risk modeling, cascade effects, contingency planning, pre-mortem, crisis simulation
Overview
The Scenario War Room models cascading what-if scenarios across all business functions. Not single-assumption stress tests -- compound adversity that shows how one problem creates the next, and where the cascade can be interrupted. Every scenario produces concrete hedges with costs, owners, and deadlines.
When to Use
- A major risk has probability above 15% and impact above 20% of ARR
- Two or more threats could plausibly co-occur
- A strategic decision has significant downside if wrong
- Board or investors are asking "what's the worst case?"
- Pre-mortem before a major commitment (fundraise, acquisition, market entry)
- Quarterly risk review for leadership team
When NOT to Use
- Single-variable financial sensitivity analysis (use CFO Advisor stress testing)
- Routine project risk assessment (use project management risk frameworks)
- Technical failure mode analysis (use engineering incident planning)
Clarify First
Before generating, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:
Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the artifact.
The 6-Step Cascade Model
Step 1: Define Scenario Variables (Maximum 3)
More than 3 variables creates analysis paralysis, not insight. Choose the 3 that actually keep leadership awake at night.
For each variable, specify:
| Field |
Description |
Example |
| What changes |
Specific, quantified |
"Top customer (28% of ARR) gives 60-day termination notice" |
| Probability |
Your best estimate |
15% |
| Timeline |
When it could hit |
Within 90 days |
| Detection signal |
How you would know it is happening |
Sponsor goes dark, usage drops 25% MoM |
Variable Template:
Variable A: [Specific change]
Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
Detection: [Early warning signal]
First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
Variable B: [Specific change]
Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
Detection: [Early warning signal]
First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
Variable C: [Specific change]
Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
Detection: [Early warning signal]
First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
Step 2: Domain Impact Mapping
For each variable, assess impact across every business function:
| Domain |
Key Questions |
Typical Impact Areas |
| Finance (CFO) |
Burn impact? Runway change? Bridge options? |
Cash, runway, covenant triggers |
| Revenue (CRO) |
ARR gap? Churn cascade? Pipeline affected? |
NRR, expansion, new logo risk |
| Product (CPO) |
Roadmap derailed? PMF at risk? Customer need shift? |
Delivery timeline, feature priority |
| Engineering (CTO) |
Velocity hit? Key person risk? Technical debt impact? |
Capacity, architecture, hiring |
| People (CHRO) |
Attrition cascade? Hiring freeze? Morale impact? |
Retention, culture, bench strength |
| Operations (COO) |
Capacity affected? Process breaks? OKR impact? |
SLAs, efficiency, scale |
| Market (CMO) |
CAC affected? Competitive exposure? Brand risk? |
Pipeline generation, positioning |
| Legal/Compliance |
Regulatory timeline risk? Contract exposure? |
Obligations, deadlines, penalties |
Step 3: Cascade Mapping (The Core)
This is the most valuable step. Map how Variable A triggers consequences that amplify Variable B.
Cascade Diagram:
TRIGGER: Customer churn ($560K ARR)
│
├──▶ CFO: Runway drops 14 → 8 months
│ │
│ └──▶ CHRO: Hiring freeze imposed
│ │
│ └──▶ CTO: 3 open engineering reqs frozen, roadmap slips 2 months
│ │
│ └──▶ CPO: Q4 feature launch delayed → 2 more customers at risk
│ │
│ └──▶ CRO: NRR drops → additional churn risk (DEATH SPIRAL ENTRY)
│
└──▶ CRO: Revenue concentration increases (next largest = 22%)
│
└──▶ Investors: Concentration risk flagged → Series A terms worsen
Name the cascades explicitly. Common cascade patterns:
| Cascade Pattern |
Description |
Interruption Point |
| Revenue-to-Runway Death Spiral |
Customer churn → lower runway → hiring freeze → slower product → more churn |
Emergency revenue diversification |
| Key Person Cascade |
Star leaves → team morale drops → followers leave → velocity collapses |
Retention bonuses before departure |
| Market Squeeze |
Competitor raises → price war → margins compress → can't invest in product |
Differentiation, not price matching |
| Trust Cascade |
Incident → customer concern → churn → press → more churn |
Swift, transparent communication |
| Fundraise-Burn Spiral |
Miss target → raise delayed → bridge at bad terms → burn cuts → team loss |
Parallel fundraise tracks |
Step 4: Severity Matrix
Model three scenarios with increasing severity:
| Scenario |
Variables Hit |
Definition |
Recovery Difficulty |
| Base |
1 of 3 |
Single shock, others don't materialize |
Manageable with prepared response |
| Stress |
2 of 3 |
Compound shock, cascade begins |
Requires significant pivot, board involvement |
| Severe |
All 3 |
Full cascade, existential territory |
Requires emergency action, may need board intervention |
For each severity level, quantify:
BASE SCENARIO (Variable A only):
Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
Headcount impact: [freeze / reduction / none]
Timeline to critical: [X] months
Recovery plan: [specific actions]
STRESS SCENARIO (Variables A + B):
Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
Headcount impact: [specifics]
Timeline to critical: [X] months
Recovery plan: [specific actions]
SEVERE SCENARIO (All three):
Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
Headcount impact: [specifics]
Timeline to critical: [X] months
Existential: [yes/no]
Emergency plan: [specific actions requiring board approval]
Step 5: Early Warning Signals (Trigger Points)
Define measurable signals that tell you a scenario is unfolding BEFORE it is confirmed. The value of this exercise is acting early, not reacting late.
Signal Design Criteria:
- Observable (you can actually measure it)
- Leading (appears before the full impact)
- Specific (not just "things feel off")
- Actionable (triggers a specific response)
| Variable |
Signal |
Threshold |
Response |
| Customer churn |
Sponsor stops responding |
> 3 weeks silence |
Exec escalation, QBR request |
| Customer churn |
Usage drops |
> 25% MoM decline |
CS outreach, value review |
| Fundraise delay |
Term sheets |
< 3 after 60 days in process |
Parallel bridge conversations |
| Fundraise delay |
Investor requests |
> 30 day DD extension |
Reduce burn, extend runway |
| Key person departure |
Market compensation |
Counter-offer required in last 90 days |
Retention package, succession plan |
| Key person departure |
External engagement |
Engineer presenting at conferences for competitors |
Direct conversation, role expansion |
Step 6: Hedging Strategies
For each scenario: actions to take NOW (before the scenario materializes) that reduce impact if it does. Hedges have costs -- the goal is cheap insurance, not paranoia.
Hedge Evaluation Criteria:
| Criterion |
Question |
| Cost |
What does this hedge cost to implement? |
| Reversibility |
Can we undo it if the scenario doesn't happen? |
| Lead time |
How long to implement? (Must be shorter than detection-to-impact window) |
| Coverage |
Which scenarios does this hedge protect against? |
| Side effects |
Does this hedge cause other problems? |
Hedge Table Template:
| Hedge |
Cost |
Protects Against |
Owner |
Deadline |
Status |
| Establish $500K credit line |
$5K/year |
Runway shortfall (Base + Stress) |
CFO |
60 days |
Not started |
| 12-month retention bonus for 3 key engineers |
$90K |
Key person departure (all scenarios) |
CHRO |
30 days |
In progress |
| Diversify to <20% revenue per customer |
Sales effort (6 months) |
Single-customer dependency |
CRO |
2 quarters |
Planning |
| Start parallel fundraise track |
CEO time (10 hrs/week) |
Fundraise delay (Stress + Severe) |
CEO |
Immediate |
Not started |
| Pre-negotiate bridge terms with existing investors |
2 board conversations |
Runway crisis (Severe) |
CFO + CEO |
45 days |
Not started |
| Document architecture for bus factor reduction |
2 engineering weeks |
Key person departure |
CTO |
30 days |
Not started |
Output Format
Every war room session produces this structured output:
SCENARIO: [Name]
DATE: [Date of analysis]
PARTICIPANTS: [Who was involved]
VARIABLES:
A: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
B: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
C: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
MOST LIKELY PATH: [Which combination actually plays out, with reasoning]
SEVERITY LEVELS:
Base (A only): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
Recovery: [2-3 specific actions]
Stress (A+B): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
Recovery: [3-4 specific actions]
Severe (A+B+C): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
Existential: [yes/no]
Emergency: [actions requiring board approval]
CASCADE MAP:
[A] → [domain impact] → [triggers B amplification] → [domain impact] → [end state]
Interruption points: [where cascade can be broken]
EARLY WARNING SIGNALS:
1. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
2. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
3. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
HEDGES (implement now):
1. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
2. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
3. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
RECOMMENDED DECISION:
[One paragraph: what to do, in what order, and why]
REVIEW DATE: [When to re-run this analysis — typically 90 days or after any variable shifts]
Common Scenarios by Company Stage
Seed Stage
- Co-founder departure + product misses launch deadline
- Runway runs out + bridge terms are predatory
- Key technical hire falls through + competitor ships first
Series A
- Miss ARR target + fundraise delayed
- Top customer churns + competitor raises large round
- Key engineer leaves + critical feature deadline
Series B+
- Market contraction + burn multiple spikes above 3x
- Lead investor wants strategic pivot + team resists
- Regulatory change + product requires rearchitecture
War Room Ground Rules
- Maximum 3 variables per scenario. More is noise. Model the ones that actually matter.
- Quantify or estimate. "Revenue drops" is not useful. "$420K ARR at risk over 60 days" is. Use ranges if uncertain.
- Don't stop at first-order effects. The real damage is always in the cascade.
- Model recovery, not just impact. Every scenario must have a "what we do" path.
- Separate base case from sensitivity. Don't conflate "what probably happens" with "what could happen."
- 3-4 scenarios per planning cycle. More creates analysis paralysis.
- Review every 90 days. Probabilities and variables change. Stale scenarios give false comfort.
- No judgment-free zone. People must feel safe naming ugly scenarios.
Related Skills
| Skill |
Use When |
| ceo-advisor |
Strategic decisions that scenarios inform |
| cfo-advisor |
Financial modeling for scenario impacts |
| coo-advisor |
Operational contingency planning |
| internal-narrative |
Communicating scenario outcomes to stakeholders |
| cs-onboard |
Company context that feeds scenario variables |
Troubleshooting
| Problem |
Likely Cause |
Resolution |
| Scenarios feel too abstract to act on |
Variables not specific or quantified enough |
Require dollar amounts, percentages, and timelines for every variable; "revenue drops" is not actionable, "$420K ARR at risk over 60 days" is |
| Team generates only obvious, low-probability scenarios |
Conformity bias; not applying Shell scenario planning method of challenging mental models |
Use inversion technique: "What would guarantee our failure?"; bring in external perspective; reference industry-specific historical precedents |
| Cascade mapping stops at first-order effects |
Facilitator not pushing past immediate consequences |
Require minimum 3 levels of cascade for each variable; use "and then what?" prompting for each domain impact |
| Hedges identified but never implemented |
No ownership, deadline, or cost attached |
Every hedge must have: cost estimate, owner name, deadline, and status tracking; review in weekly leadership meeting |
| War room sessions take too long (> 4 hours) |
Too many variables or trying to model every scenario |
Enforce maximum 3 variables and 3-4 scenarios per session; use severity matrix to focus on highest-impact combinations |
| Early warning signals not being monitored |
Signals assigned but not integrated into existing reporting |
Add signals to existing dashboards and weekly scorecards; assign specific person to monitor each signal |
| Participants reluctant to name worst-case scenarios |
Fear of being seen as negative or alarmist |
Establish ground rules explicitly; cite Shell's experience: "the value is in surfacing what others won't say"; reward naming hard truths |
Success Criteria
- Each scenario session produces exactly 3 variables, 3 severity levels, and a cascade map with interruption points identified
- Early warning signals are specific enough to be monitored: observable, leading, and actionable with defined thresholds
- Hedges are costed, owned, and have deadlines within 7 days of the war room session
- At least one hedge per scenario is implemented (not just planned) within 30 days
- Scenario review conducted every 90 days with probability updates based on new information
- When an early warning signal fires, the pre-planned response is executed within the defined timeline
- War room output is concise enough for board consumption: one-page summary per scenario
Scope & Limitations
- In scope: Multi-variable scenario construction, cascade modeling across all business functions, severity matrix analysis, early warning signal design, hedge strategy with cost-benefit analysis, scenario review cadence
- Out of scope: Single-variable financial sensitivity analysis (use CFO Advisor stress testing); technical failure mode analysis (use engineering incident planning); routine project risk assessment (use project management frameworks); insurance and risk transfer (use specialized broker)
- Limitation: Scenario probabilities are subjective estimates, not actuarial calculations; value is in preparedness, not prediction accuracy
- Limitation: Framework assumes scenarios are independent or correlated; black swan events by definition are not modelable
- Limitation: Cascade mapping is based on common organizational patterns; unique company structures may have different cascade paths
- Limitation: Maximum 3 variables per scenario is a deliberate constraint; more variables create analysis paralysis, not better insight
Integration Points
| Skill |
Integration |
Data Flow |
ceo-advisor |
Strategic decisions informed by scenario analysis |
War room scenarios → CEO decision inputs |
cfo-advisor |
Financial modeling for scenario impacts and hedge costs |
War room financial impacts → CFO stress test models |
coo-advisor |
Operational contingency planning and cascade interruption |
War room cascade map → COO contingency plans |
executive-mentor |
Pre-mortem failure modes feed into scenario variables |
Mentor failure modes → War room variables |
internal-narrative |
Crisis scenarios require pre-built communication plans |
War room crisis scenarios → Narrative crisis templates |
org-health-diagnostic |
Health dimension scores surface scenario variables |
Health red flags → War room variable candidates |
strategic-alignment |
Scenario outcomes may require strategic realignment |
War room outcomes → Alignment reassessment |
Python Tools
| Tool |
Purpose |
Usage |
scripts/scenario_builder.py |
Build structured scenarios with variables, probabilities, detection signals, and severity levels |
python scripts/scenario_builder.py --name "Customer Concentration Risk" --variable "Top customer churns" --probability 20 --impact 500000 --timeline 90 --json |
scripts/impact_matrix_calculator.py |
Calculate compound impact across multiple variables with severity matrix and cascade risk scoring |
python scripts/impact_matrix_calculator.py --variables "churn:500000:0.2" "fundraise_delay:0:0.3" "key_departure:0:0.15" --arr 2000000 --runway-months 14 --json |
scripts/decision_tree_analyzer.py |
Build and evaluate decision trees with expected value calculations for strategic options |
python scripts/decision_tree_analyzer.py --decision "Enter Japan market" --option "Direct:0.6:2000000:-500000" --option "Partnership:0.75:1000000:-200000" --option "Wait:1.0:0:0" --json |
1---2name: scenario-war-room3description: Cross-functional what-if modeling for compound adversity -- shows how one problem cascades into the next. Use when facing complex risk scenarios, strategic decisions with major downside, or multi-variable threats.4license: MIT + Commons Clause5---6# Scenario War Room
7
8**Tier:** POWERFUL
9**Category:** C-Level Advisory
10**Tags:** scenario planning, war room, risk modeling, cascade effects, contingency planning, pre-mortem, crisis simulation
11
12## Overview
13
14The Scenario War Room models cascading what-if scenarios across all business functions. Not single-assumption stress tests -- compound adversity that shows how one problem creates the next, and where the cascade can be interrupted. Every scenario produces concrete hedges with costs, owners, and deadlines.
15
16---
17
18## When to Use
19
20- A major risk has probability above 15% and impact above 20% of ARR
21- Two or more threats could plausibly co-occur
22- A strategic decision has significant downside if wrong
23- Board or investors are asking "what's the worst case?"
24- Pre-mortem before a major commitment (fundraise, acquisition, market entry)
25- Quarterly risk review for leadership team
26
27## When NOT to Use
28
29- Single-variable financial sensitivity analysis (use CFO Advisor stress testing)
30- Routine project risk assessment (use project management risk frameworks)
31- Technical failure mode analysis (use engineering incident planning)
32
33---
34
35## Clarify First
36
37Before generating, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:
38
39- [ ] **The (maximum 3) variables that actually keep leadership awake** — the entire model is built around these; the wrong variables produce a useless scenario
40- [ ] **Probability, timeline, and quantified impact for each variable** — "revenue drops" is not actionable; "$420K ARR at risk over 60 days" is, and severity levels depend on it
41- [ ] **Current baseline** (ARR, runway in months, headcount) — cascade and severity math (e.g., runway going 14→8 months) requires the starting numbers
42- [ ] **Company stage** — common scenario patterns and what counts as existential differ by stage
43
44Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the artifact.
45
46---
47
48## The 6-Step Cascade Model
49
50### Step 1: Define Scenario Variables (Maximum 3)
51
52More than 3 variables creates analysis paralysis, not insight. Choose the 3 that actually keep leadership awake at night.
53
54For each variable, specify:
55
56| Field | Description | Example |
57|-------|-----------|---------|
58| **What changes** | Specific, quantified | "Top customer (28% of ARR) gives 60-day termination notice" |
59| **Probability** | Your best estimate | 15% |
60| **Timeline** | When it could hit | Within 90 days |
61| **Detection signal** | How you would know it is happening | Sponsor goes dark, usage drops 25% MoM |
62
63**Variable Template:**
64```
65Variable A: [Specific change]
66 Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
67 Detection: [Early warning signal]
68 First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
69
70Variable B: [Specific change]
71 Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
72 Detection: [Early warning signal]
73 First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
74
75Variable C: [Specific change]
76 Probability: [X]% | Timeline: [When]
77 Detection: [Early warning signal]
78 First-order impact: [Immediate consequence]
79```
80
81### Step 2: Domain Impact Mapping
82
83For each variable, assess impact across every business function:
84
85| Domain | Key Questions | Typical Impact Areas |
86|--------|-------------|---------------------|
87| **Finance (CFO)** | Burn impact? Runway change? Bridge options? | Cash, runway, covenant triggers |
88| **Revenue (CRO)** | ARR gap? Churn cascade? Pipeline affected? | NRR, expansion, new logo risk |
89| **Product (CPO)** | Roadmap derailed? PMF at risk? Customer need shift? | Delivery timeline, feature priority |
90| **Engineering (CTO)** | Velocity hit? Key person risk? Technical debt impact? | Capacity, architecture, hiring |
91| **People (CHRO)** | Attrition cascade? Hiring freeze? Morale impact? | Retention, culture, bench strength |
92| **Operations (COO)** | Capacity affected? Process breaks? OKR impact? | SLAs, efficiency, scale |
93| **Market (CMO)** | CAC affected? Competitive exposure? Brand risk? | Pipeline generation, positioning |
94| **Legal/Compliance** | Regulatory timeline risk? Contract exposure? | Obligations, deadlines, penalties |
95
96### Step 3: Cascade Mapping (The Core)
97
98This is the most valuable step. Map how Variable A triggers consequences that amplify Variable B.
99
100**Cascade Diagram:**
101```
102TRIGGER: Customer churn ($560K ARR)
103 │
104 ├──▶ CFO: Runway drops 14 → 8 months
105 │ │
106 │ └──▶ CHRO: Hiring freeze imposed
107 │ │
108 │ └──▶ CTO: 3 open engineering reqs frozen, roadmap slips 2 months
109 │ │
110 │ └──▶ CPO: Q4 feature launch delayed → 2 more customers at risk
111 │ │
112 │ └──▶ CRO: NRR drops → additional churn risk (DEATH SPIRAL ENTRY)
113 │
114 └──▶ CRO: Revenue concentration increases (next largest = 22%)
115 │
116 └──▶ Investors: Concentration risk flagged → Series A terms worsen
117```
118
119**Name the cascades explicitly.** Common cascade patterns:
120
121| Cascade Pattern | Description | Interruption Point |
122|----------------|-------------|-------------------|
123| Revenue-to-Runway Death Spiral | Customer churn → lower runway → hiring freeze → slower product → more churn | Emergency revenue diversification |
124| Key Person Cascade | Star leaves → team morale drops → followers leave → velocity collapses | Retention bonuses before departure |
125| Market Squeeze | Competitor raises → price war → margins compress → can't invest in product | Differentiation, not price matching |
126| Trust Cascade | Incident → customer concern → churn → press → more churn | Swift, transparent communication |
127| Fundraise-Burn Spiral | Miss target → raise delayed → bridge at bad terms → burn cuts → team loss | Parallel fundraise tracks |
128
129### Step 4: Severity Matrix
130
131Model three scenarios with increasing severity:
132
133| Scenario | Variables Hit | Definition | Recovery Difficulty |
134|----------|-------------|-----------|-------------------|
135| **Base** | 1 of 3 | Single shock, others don't materialize | Manageable with prepared response |
136| **Stress** | 2 of 3 | Compound shock, cascade begins | Requires significant pivot, board involvement |
137| **Severe** | All 3 | Full cascade, existential territory | Requires emergency action, may need board intervention |
138
139For each severity level, quantify:
140
141```
142BASE SCENARIO (Variable A only):
143 Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
144 ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
145 Headcount impact: [freeze / reduction / none]
146 Timeline to critical: [X] months
147 Recovery plan: [specific actions]
148
149STRESS SCENARIO (Variables A + B):
150 Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
151 ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
152 Headcount impact: [specifics]
153 Timeline to critical: [X] months
154 Recovery plan: [specific actions]
155
156SEVERE SCENARIO (All three):
157 Runway impact: [X] months → [Y] months
158 ARR impact: -$[X] ([Y]% of total)
159 Headcount impact: [specifics]
160 Timeline to critical: [X] months
161 Existential: [yes/no]
162 Emergency plan: [specific actions requiring board approval]
163```
164
165### Step 5: Early Warning Signals (Trigger Points)
166
167Define measurable signals that tell you a scenario is unfolding BEFORE it is confirmed. The value of this exercise is acting early, not reacting late.
168
169**Signal Design Criteria:**
170- Observable (you can actually measure it)
171- Leading (appears before the full impact)
172- Specific (not just "things feel off")
173- Actionable (triggers a specific response)
174
175| Variable | Signal | Threshold | Response |
176|----------|--------|-----------|----------|
177| Customer churn | Sponsor stops responding | > 3 weeks silence | Exec escalation, QBR request |
178| Customer churn | Usage drops | > 25% MoM decline | CS outreach, value review |
179| Fundraise delay | Term sheets | < 3 after 60 days in process | Parallel bridge conversations |
180| Fundraise delay | Investor requests | > 30 day DD extension | Reduce burn, extend runway |
181| Key person departure | Market compensation | Counter-offer required in last 90 days | Retention package, succession plan |
182| Key person departure | External engagement | Engineer presenting at conferences for competitors | Direct conversation, role expansion |
183
184### Step 6: Hedging Strategies
185
186For each scenario: actions to take NOW (before the scenario materializes) that reduce impact if it does. Hedges have costs -- the goal is cheap insurance, not paranoia.
187
188**Hedge Evaluation Criteria:**
189
190| Criterion | Question |
191|-----------|----------|
192| Cost | What does this hedge cost to implement? |
193| Reversibility | Can we undo it if the scenario doesn't happen? |
194| Lead time | How long to implement? (Must be shorter than detection-to-impact window) |
195| Coverage | Which scenarios does this hedge protect against? |
196| Side effects | Does this hedge cause other problems? |
197
198**Hedge Table Template:**
199
200| Hedge | Cost | Protects Against | Owner | Deadline | Status |
201|-------|------|-----------------|-------|----------|--------|
202| Establish $500K credit line | $5K/year | Runway shortfall (Base + Stress) | CFO | 60 days | Not started |
203| 12-month retention bonus for 3 key engineers | $90K | Key person departure (all scenarios) | CHRO | 30 days | In progress |
204| Diversify to <20% revenue per customer | Sales effort (6 months) | Single-customer dependency | CRO | 2 quarters | Planning |
205| Start parallel fundraise track | CEO time (10 hrs/week) | Fundraise delay (Stress + Severe) | CEO | Immediate | Not started |
206| Pre-negotiate bridge terms with existing investors | 2 board conversations | Runway crisis (Severe) | CFO + CEO | 45 days | Not started |
207| Document architecture for bus factor reduction | 2 engineering weeks | Key person departure | CTO | 30 days | Not started |
208
209---
210
211## Output Format
212
213Every war room session produces this structured output:
214
215```
216SCENARIO: [Name]
217DATE: [Date of analysis]
218PARTICIPANTS: [Who was involved]
219
220VARIABLES:
221 A: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
222 B: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
223 C: [Description] — Probability: [X]%, Timeline: [When]
224
225MOST LIKELY PATH: [Which combination actually plays out, with reasoning]
226
227SEVERITY LEVELS:
228 Base (A only): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
229 Recovery: [2-3 specific actions]
230 Stress (A+B): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
231 Recovery: [3-4 specific actions]
232 Severe (A+B+C): Runway [X]→[Y]mo, ARR impact -$[X]
233 Existential: [yes/no]
234 Emergency: [actions requiring board approval]
235
236CASCADE MAP:
237 [A] → [domain impact] → [triggers B amplification] → [domain impact] → [end state]
238 Interruption points: [where cascade can be broken]
239
240EARLY WARNING SIGNALS:
241 1. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
242 2. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
243 3. [Signal] → indicates [scenario], threshold: [specific]
244
245HEDGES (implement now):
246 1. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
247 2. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
248 3. [Action] — cost: $[X] — protects: [scenarios] — owner: [role] — deadline: [date]
249
250RECOMMENDED DECISION:
251 [One paragraph: what to do, in what order, and why]
252
253REVIEW DATE: [When to re-run this analysis — typically 90 days or after any variable shifts]
254```
255
256---
257
258## Common Scenarios by Company Stage
259
260### Seed Stage
261- Co-founder departure + product misses launch deadline
262- Runway runs out + bridge terms are predatory
263- Key technical hire falls through + competitor ships first
264
265### Series A
266- Miss ARR target + fundraise delayed
267- Top customer churns + competitor raises large round
268- Key engineer leaves + critical feature deadline
269
270### Series B+
271- Market contraction + burn multiple spikes above 3x
272- Lead investor wants strategic pivot + team resists
273- Regulatory change + product requires rearchitecture
274
275---
276
277## War Room Ground Rules
278
2791. **Maximum 3 variables per scenario.** More is noise. Model the ones that actually matter.
2802. **Quantify or estimate.** "Revenue drops" is not useful. "$420K ARR at risk over 60 days" is. Use ranges if uncertain.
2813. **Don't stop at first-order effects.** The real damage is always in the cascade.
2824. **Model recovery, not just impact.** Every scenario must have a "what we do" path.
2835. **Separate base case from sensitivity.** Don't conflate "what probably happens" with "what could happen."
2846. **3-4 scenarios per planning cycle.** More creates analysis paralysis.
2857. **Review every 90 days.** Probabilities and variables change. Stale scenarios give false comfort.
2868. **No judgment-free zone.** People must feel safe naming ugly scenarios.
287
288---
289
290## Related Skills
291
292| Skill | Use When |
293|-------|----------|
294| **ceo-advisor** | Strategic decisions that scenarios inform |
295| **cfo-advisor** | Financial modeling for scenario impacts |
296| **coo-advisor** | Operational contingency planning |
297| **internal-narrative** | Communicating scenario outcomes to stakeholders |
298| **cs-onboard** | Company context that feeds scenario variables |
299
300---
301
302## Troubleshooting
303
304| Problem | Likely Cause | Resolution |
305|---------|-------------|------------|
306| Scenarios feel too abstract to act on | Variables not specific or quantified enough | Require dollar amounts, percentages, and timelines for every variable; "revenue drops" is not actionable, "$420K ARR at risk over 60 days" is |
307| Team generates only obvious, low-probability scenarios | Conformity bias; not applying Shell scenario planning method of challenging mental models | Use inversion technique: "What would guarantee our failure?"; bring in external perspective; reference industry-specific historical precedents |
308| Cascade mapping stops at first-order effects | Facilitator not pushing past immediate consequences | Require minimum 3 levels of cascade for each variable; use "and then what?" prompting for each domain impact |
309| Hedges identified but never implemented | No ownership, deadline, or cost attached | Every hedge must have: cost estimate, owner name, deadline, and status tracking; review in weekly leadership meeting |
310| War room sessions take too long (> 4 hours) | Too many variables or trying to model every scenario | Enforce maximum 3 variables and 3-4 scenarios per session; use severity matrix to focus on highest-impact combinations |
311| Early warning signals not being monitored | Signals assigned but not integrated into existing reporting | Add signals to existing dashboards and weekly scorecards; assign specific person to monitor each signal |
312| Participants reluctant to name worst-case scenarios | Fear of being seen as negative or alarmist | Establish ground rules explicitly; cite Shell's experience: "the value is in surfacing what others won't say"; reward naming hard truths |
313
314---
315
316## Success Criteria
317
318- Each scenario session produces exactly 3 variables, 3 severity levels, and a cascade map with interruption points identified
319- Early warning signals are specific enough to be monitored: observable, leading, and actionable with defined thresholds
320- Hedges are costed, owned, and have deadlines within 7 days of the war room session
321- At least one hedge per scenario is implemented (not just planned) within 30 days
322- Scenario review conducted every 90 days with probability updates based on new information
323- When an early warning signal fires, the pre-planned response is executed within the defined timeline
324- War room output is concise enough for board consumption: one-page summary per scenario
325
326---
327
328## Scope & Limitations
329
330- **In scope:** Multi-variable scenario construction, cascade modeling across all business functions, severity matrix analysis, early warning signal design, hedge strategy with cost-benefit analysis, scenario review cadence
331- **Out of scope:** Single-variable financial sensitivity analysis (use CFO Advisor stress testing); technical failure mode analysis (use engineering incident planning); routine project risk assessment (use project management frameworks); insurance and risk transfer (use specialized broker)
332- **Limitation:** Scenario probabilities are subjective estimates, not actuarial calculations; value is in preparedness, not prediction accuracy
333- **Limitation:** Framework assumes scenarios are independent or correlated; black swan events by definition are not modelable
334- **Limitation:** Cascade mapping is based on common organizational patterns; unique company structures may have different cascade paths
335- **Limitation:** Maximum 3 variables per scenario is a deliberate constraint; more variables create analysis paralysis, not better insight
336
337---
338
339## Integration Points
340
341| Skill | Integration | Data Flow |
342|-------|-------------|-----------|
343| `ceo-advisor` | Strategic decisions informed by scenario analysis | War room scenarios → CEO decision inputs |
344| `cfo-advisor` | Financial modeling for scenario impacts and hedge costs | War room financial impacts → CFO stress test models |
345| `coo-advisor` | Operational contingency planning and cascade interruption | War room cascade map → COO contingency plans |
346| `executive-mentor` | Pre-mortem failure modes feed into scenario variables | Mentor failure modes → War room variables |
347| `internal-narrative` | Crisis scenarios require pre-built communication plans | War room crisis scenarios → Narrative crisis templates |
348| `org-health-diagnostic` | Health dimension scores surface scenario variables | Health red flags → War room variable candidates |
349| `strategic-alignment` | Scenario outcomes may require strategic realignment | War room outcomes → Alignment reassessment |
350
351---
352
353## Python Tools
354
355| Tool | Purpose | Usage |
356|------|---------|-------|
357| `scripts/scenario_builder.py` | Build structured scenarios with variables, probabilities, detection signals, and severity levels | `python scripts/scenario_builder.py --name "Customer Concentration Risk" --variable "Top customer churns" --probability 20 --impact 500000 --timeline 90 --json` |
358| `scripts/impact_matrix_calculator.py` | Calculate compound impact across multiple variables with severity matrix and cascade risk scoring | `python scripts/impact_matrix_calculator.py --variables "churn:500000:0.2" "fundraise_delay:0:0.3" "key_departure:0:0.15" --arr 2000000 --runway-months 14 --json` |
359| `scripts/decision_tree_analyzer.py` | Build and evaluate decision trees with expected value calculations for strategic options | `python scripts/decision_tree_analyzer.py --decision "Enter Japan market" --option "Direct:0.6:2000000:-500000" --option "Partnership:0.75:1000000:-200000" --option "Wait:1.0:0:0" --json` |