
Groups cannot design the best possible goals and actions unaided.
Noone can learn and remember to perform each Group Design step the right way, every time, unaided.

Best Possible requires multiple calculations that humans cannot perform mentally.




























It automates what groups cannot reliably do manually: gathering and quantifying opinions before dialogue begins, measuring alignment, designing optimal agendas, and tracking whether decisions hold during implementation. Decision quality moves from craft to controlled process.
Yes. The concepts, frames, and methods can be applied manually. SchellingPoint's software automates the most complex and error-prone steps, and creates the ability to design best possible/optimal goals and actions.
They’re designed to work together. Training builds conceptual understanding. Software automates what groups can’t reliably do manually. Used together, they close the most quality leaks — and move group decision design from occasional success to consistent capability.
It gathers every participant’s opinion independently before dialogue begins — something that can’t be done reliably in a meeting without anchoring or social pressure. It then runs optimization logic to identify the configuration of goals and actions with the highest fit, feasibility, and alignment. And it measures where the group actually agrees, not just where they appear to.
No. The methodology is embedded in the workflow — the right step is proposed at the right time, so users get expert-level output without mastering the underlying framework. It’s designed for immediate use.
Those tools facilitate discussion. SchellingPoint structures the decision design itself — what questions get asked, in what order, and how the answers combine into a verified output. It’s the difference between a whiteboard and a design specification.
The AI runs optimization mathematics across participant inputs to identify the configuration of goals and actions that maximizes fit, feasibility, and alignment. It also adapts the process to the group’s specific inputs — proposing the right dialogue method for each item and flagging misalignment that group discussion might obscure.
A structured decision design document — foundation assumptions, measurable goals, enabling actions, safeguarding actions, coordinated actions, and owners - organized as a Case for Action, Target Outcomes, and Action Roadmap. Every element traces back to its source inputs. What was raised but not discussed is documented, too.