{"id":1458,"slug":"five-decision-domains-pricing-demand-risk-retention-targeting","title":"Synthesis: the five inward decisions a proprietary information advantage actually changes","kind":"reference","scope":"business","status":"current","audiences":["kevin","smb-owner","candid-team"],"topics":["agency-methodology","decision-linked-metrics","information-asymmetry"],"reference_body":"**Claim.** A proprietary information advantage changes five specific inward decisions, in descending order of evidence strength after independent validation:\n\n1. **Pricing** — what to charge, by segment, with which fences. Strongest documented support. Anchor domain.\n2. **Demand & timing** — when to staff, buy inventory, bid. Supported but cleanest cases overlap pricing; flag the seam.\n3. **Risk & exposure** — who to extend terms to, which bets to avoid, where to hedge. Well-documented via alt-data credit and Progressive.\n4. **Retention** — who to intervene with, when, on which propensity signal. Capability solid; magnitudes vendor-recycled.\n5. **Targeting & market selection** — where to find the next customers; which segments / territories. Thinnest documented evidence; do not anchor the article here.\n\n**Source.** Synthesised June 2026 from the source brief's domain validation pass, decomposed against the independent evidence in [[research-brief-information-asymmetry-decision-edge-june-2026]].\n\n**Confidence.** Industry-consensus for the framework; per-domain evidence labelled at the domain level. Categories are conventional in operations-research and revenue-management practice — the *grouping into five* is editorial synthesis, not a citation.\n\n**Caveats.** Targeting & selection is the designated next-pass research target. Consider merging it into Retention (propensity / segmentation) if it cannot be independently sourced. See [[gaps-information-asymmetry-decision-edge-next-pass-research]].\n\n**Implication / use.** When writing the affirmative article, the spine is \"which inward decision does the information change, and what would the uninformed competitor do instead?\" — answered five times, with descending confidence. Do not present targeting & selection as parity evidence with pricing.","rationale_body":null,"metadata":null,"links":{"outgoing":[{"slug":"research-brief-dataset-is-the-product","title":"Research brief: The Dataset is the Product — when a service business should own its data (piece 12 of 15)","kind":"reference","scope":"business","link_type":"relates-to"},{"slug":"research-brief-information-asymmetry-decision-edge-june-2026","title":"Research notes (capture-layer): the affirmative, inward decision-edge case for data intelligence — information asymmetry applied to pricing, demand, risk, retention, targeting (June 2026)","kind":"research-notes","scope":"business","link_type":"depends-on"}],"incoming":[{"slug":"rule-inward-decision-edge-seam-not-build-vs-own","title":"Rule: the affirmative info-asymmetry article's seam is inward decisions, not build-vs-own — that is the prior briefs' job","kind":"rule","scope":"business","link_type":"depends-on"}]},"created_at":"2026-06-21T01:14:48.684Z","updated_at":"2026-06-21T01:14:48.684Z"}