StrategyMap AIGet My Free Strategy Map

Methodology

How the report is actually built.

No testimonials, no invented case studies. Here is exactly what StrategyMap asks you for, how it decides what to rank first, and what it deliberately stops short of claiming.

What it asks for

The report is built from a guided intake, not a short quiz. Every recommendation is grounded in what you actually tell us across ten required areas:

  • Business model
  • Team size
  • Revenue range
  • Bottlenecks
  • Cost of the bottleneck (in your own words)
  • Current tools
  • Prior automation attempts
  • Primary goal
  • Timeline
  • Implementation preference

How opportunities are ranked

Impact, 1–5

How directly an opportunity addresses the primary goal and bottlenecks you described — not a generic “AI readiness” score, and not a dollar figure. Each score is accompanied by one sentence explaining why, grounded in your own intake answers.

Implementation Ease, 1–5

How straightforward the opportunity is to put in place given your current tools and team — 1 is very difficult, 5 is very easy. Weighted more heavily when you tell us you need results on a short timeline.

The seven opportunities are ranked by impact first, then implementation ease. This is a judgment call made against a fixed set of written criteria, not a formula that outputs a single number — and once an opportunity is scored and ranked, the report is not allowed to silently reorder or reweight it while writing up the findings. If you compare your report to the criteria above and the ranking doesn’t track, that’s worth telling us.

What the report does not do

Specific does not mean blindly certain. The report ranks and prioritizes — it does not close every open question, and it says so inside the report itself as visible discovery gates rather than fine print you find out about later.

The report does not:

  • Verify system access, connector behavior, or integration permissions before recommending a tool
  • Verify data quality, licensing, or technical feasibility
  • Calculate or guarantee a return on investment, savings figure, or payback period you did not state
  • Certify security, privacy, legal, regulatory, or compliance readiness
  • Confirm a named tool will integrate successfully with what you already run

Rules we hold ourselves to

These govern the report, the paid StrategyMap Decision Sprint, and any partner or outreach material built from either one.

  1. 1.We do not claim a savings, revenue gain, ROI, or payback period you did not state and that the work has not verified.
  2. 2.We do not imply a named tool will integrate successfully until access, plan, connector, and system-of-record questions have been checked.
  3. 3.We do not call the free report implementation-ready — it deliberately preserves discovery gates for exactly that reason.
  4. 4.We do not describe the $500 Decision Sprint as implementation. It produces a pilot decision and a written brief, not a build.
  5. 5.We do not manufacture urgency or scarcity. Capacity limits are stated only when they are operationally real.
  6. 6.You are never required to buy implementation from Common Thread Group. The decision artifact has to be useful even if someone else does the build.

See the report structure

A fictional, public-safe example report shows exactly what you receive — ranked opportunities, quick wins, what to avoid for now, and a 30/60/90-day sequence.

View the sample report

See a sample Pilot Decision Brief

A fictional example of the written brief a Decision Sprint client receives — one workflow, pressure-tested, with a clear go, no-go, or not-yet recommendation.

View the sample brief