The method

Every market move turns on the same six questions — a new market, a new product into one you know, or a push for more share where you already are. Five of them carry the decision; the last one runs after launch and checks the answers held. What your move does is decide which of them you actually have to answer — and where the money gets committed.

The route, at full depth

Drawn on the hardest move — a new product into a new market — so every question is open and every commitment is present. Nothing sits between the first three: analysis is cheap there, so gating it would gate nothing. Cost decides where a commitment goes; sequence never does.

  1. 1

    Is the need real?

    The need

    Answered by Needs Analyzer

  2. 2

    Is the market worth it?

    The market

    Answered by Market Size Calculator · Value Chain Mapping · Regulatory Risk Analyzer

  3. Fund developmenta commitment

    Fund development of a new product?

    Spends: R&D budget, lab slots, and the team that could be doing something else

  4. 4

    Can we make it?

    The build

    Answered byDevelopmentNew productProduction readinessNew productCapacityInvestment case

    Commit capacitya commitment

    Build or book it?

    Spends: capacity, and capex if it isn't already there

  5. 5

    How do we enter?

    The entry

    Answered by Growth Plan Developer

    Launcha commitment

    Go — this way, at this price?

    Spends: launch budget, targets, and the entry option itself

  6. 6

    Is it working?

    The proof

    Answered byActual sales vs planKPI trackingMarket trackingReview cadenceScale/fix/exit triggersAssumptions retired

    Reviewa check

    Scale, fix, or exit?

    Spends: continued funding

Four moves, four routes

The numbering never changes. What changes is which questions stay at full depth, which lighten, and which collapse — and a collapsed question is never deleted. It stays openable, and the router writes down what collapsing it assumed, as a claim you can reopen.

Market entry

Market development

123456two commitments

New product, market you know

Product development

123456three commitments

New product, new market

Diversification

123456three commitments

More of where you already are

Penetration

123456two commitments

Filled = full depth · outline = lightened or reshaped by the move · dashed = collapsed, never deleted. Hover any stop for the router’s own note on what it did and why.

Seeing it work

Two things the description above can assert but not show: what your move does to the route, and what you are left holding once a tool is finished with a question.

Pick a move, and watch the route change

Two questions — what are you taking, and where — decide which of the questions you actually have to answer, and where the money gets committed. Every figure below is deriveRoute()’s real output.

Existing product
New product
New
market
Existing
market
Edition
Market development5 stops · 2 commitments
1Need?
2Worth it?
3Win it?
4Make it?
collapsed
5Enter?
6Working?
Commit capacityLaunch
What that changed

3 Win it? A proven product in an unfamiliar market — the edge has to be re-argued against local alternatives, not assumed.

4 Make it? Existing product — this collapses to two checks: does capacity cover the ramp, and what does qualification take.

⚠ Recorded as an assumption: Accessible capacity covers the year-3 ramp.

⚠ Recorded as an assumption: The product enters this market as it is — no development work is required to serve it.

What a tool leaves behind

Every tool ends the same way — a rating on the one factor it is qualified to judge, how far the work behind it has got, and the evidence logged along the way. That is what the map reads.

Open any tool and it lands on a factor — the one thing that tool is qualified to judge. There are ten of them across the six questions, and nine plot where you land on the map.

A rating, on a scale that means something

Not a number you invent. Each of the five steps is written out — what a 4 looks like, what a 10 looks like — so the level is a sentence you picked, and anyone can see which sentence you disagreed with.

And how far the work behind it has actually got

The same 10 means two different things on the first afternoon and after three customer calls. So a rating carries its own confidence — at the bottom of the ladder the tool says it plainly: this rating is a first guess, not a finding. It still counts in full either way; nothing is quietly discounted behind your back.

And any one of them can be the deal-breaker

Flag a factor as a knockout and a low rating caps the whole recommendation at No-Go, however good everything else looks — the trap in every scored 2×2, where a big enough market outvotes the thing that actually kills it.

Inside the tool — one factor, as the app draws it
8of 10
Unmet Needs

Clear need

Real unmet need evidenced by customer input; a credible reason to switch exists.

Near readythe rating is well supportedNeeds Analyzer
4of 10
Regulatory RiskKnocked out

Elevated

Significant regulatory uncertainty, long approval timelines, or possible restriction of something the offer depends on.

Early researchtreat this rating as provisionalRegulatory Risk Analyzer

Higher is always better — on a risk factor (regulatory, substitution, competition) a high level means low risk.

An illustration — the component is the one the app renders on every question page.