Questions worth
answering clearly.

No. Specialist due diligence tests an asset, fact pattern, risk or workstream. Decision Diligence tests the governing judgement constructed across those inputs.

No. Their work remains essential. Cortavian examines whether the combined evidence supports the decision being taken, on which assumptions and under what conditions.

No. Focused Decision Diligence applies the complete method to one bounded decision and produces a concise Decision Record. Full engagements add evidence depth, controlled re-testing and fuller reporting.

The decision context and available material relevant to it: existing analysis, diligence outputs, business cases, financial information, assumptions, stakeholder positions and other decision evidence.

The gap is named and its consequence is reflected in confidence, conditions or the recommendation. Missing evidence is not treated as if it were supportive evidence.

Cortavian reaches an independent judgement and issues a recommendation. The client retains responsibility and authority for the decision itself.

No. Technology may support disciplined examination, but Cortavian is operator-assisted and human-accountable. A human mandate holder reviews and releases the issued judgement.

Timing depends on the decision, evidence availability and route. It is agreed in writing after triage; urgency never silently removes required challenge.

The evidence boundary, access, retention and reporting route are agreed for the matter. The engagement letter governs the specific confidentiality obligations.

Yes. Board Decision Diligence can be tailored to linked decisions, stakeholders and formal governance thresholds while preserving independent judgement.