Use the six original fictional practice cards. A case fact is what a card states; an interpretation explains what it may mean; a limitation says what is still unknown. Pick or switch among three same-target routes. You may write, move full-word cards, type, dictate, sign or use AAC. Days 5 and 10 bring new public formative cases. No real family finances, workplace details or business idea are requested.
| Day | Your seven-minute task | Evidence to hand in |
|---|---|---|
| 1 · Evidence ladder | Use two of A/B/C. For each, state one card fact, one reasonable interpretation and one claim the card cannot prove. | Two claim/evidence/limit triples. |
| 2 · Life cycle | Place A/B/E where their cases explicitly put them and discuss why C's exact later stage is unresolved. | Stage decisions with cited case details, not age guesses. |
| 3 · Planning chain | Use B's 34/40 baseline and 36/40 proposed objective. Link a goal, measurable objective, possible strategy and tactic. | Chain, two-order gap and an unproven-outcome warning. |
| 4 · Environments | Sort one internal fact, two specific external-operating facts and one question about a wider macro factor across B/C/D. | Four cited classifications or an honestly unresolved macro box. |
| 5 · Fresh check A | Respond to File G before consulting any worked key. | Stage, internal/external factors, objective judgement and a bounded next action. |
| 6 · SWOT | Make a four-box SWOT for D using precise card evidence, then interpret one strength/weakness with an opportunity/threat. | Four cited boxes and one possible implication. |
| 7 · Functions | Show what finance, HR, marketing/communication and operations might each do for B or C's stated goal. | Four distinct roles and one dependency; no promise of success. |
| 8 · Stakeholders | Use C or E to distinguish a stakeholder's known evidence from assumed preferences. | Stakeholder/evidence/question table and an ethical way to learn more. |
| 9 · Criteria | Use F's 12/20 baseline, A 16/20 at $80 and B 15/20 at $30. Compare objective 18/20, projected improvement and narrow cost ratio. | Correct arithmetic, criterion-based tentative recommendation and limit. |
| 10 · Fresh check B | Respond to File H before feedback. | SWOT evidence, two option calculations, relevant functions, decision and missing evidence. |
Decision habit: source detail → concept/tool → implication → criterion → bounded recommendation. A four-box SWOT is a starting tool, not proof that a forecast will happen. Figures and competitor/venue statements here are invented. A response about a fictional case is not personal legal, financial or trading advice.
SubjectNest original learner pages © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, CC BY 4.0.