How each person decides
Written from the job they actually do. How to brief them, how they close, and what wastes the seat. A colleague can use it on Monday.
Dnmcs Teams
See how your executive team will decide when it gets hard.
Each person takes a private assessment. You get a Working With Me card, a report for each pair that matters, and a map of the room. Open them before the next fight, raise, or hire.
Product walkthrough coming soon
A short look at inviting the team and opening the reports. No video is embedded on this page yet.
16:9 placeholder · not a live demo
The product
What you get
A read of how this team decides, grounded in the seat each person holds: the work they own, how they are measured, and what to open before the next difficult date.
Where a pair complements
Two seats with different jobs. Who closes, who keeps the story honest, and the move the pair only makes together.
Where the same pair breaks
The unowned call: pricing, a launch date, a raise narrative. Named as work, not as a personality clash.
Decision rights
Who owns the final call, who can refuse once, and the date rule. Write it before the partner meeting does it for you.
Where control sits
Which seat holds the close, which seat holds the cost, and whether a second chair exists.
The conversation you are avoiding
The question the org chart cannot answer, plus a “use this before” prompt for the next difficult date.
Northwind sample
Sample reports
The assessment collects the seat, not only how someone thinks: title, the functions they own, what a normal week looks like, and how their objectives are measured. Click the cards. Northwind is a sample team.
Working With Me card
A colleague should be able to open this and brief you, push you, or stop you without guessing.
Maya Chen
The seat
CEO. She owns the close and the raise narrative. In a normal week she sits with the enterprise pipeline, the two dates that can slip, and the board pack. Measured on revenue and a dated story the board can repeat.
How Maya actually closes
A named customer is a green light. Once she can point at a person who will pay, she wants a date, an owner, and a sentence the board can repeat. She will take market risk to keep the raise on the calendar. A people-decision she will rename as timing and park.
Do not bring a tour of options. Bring one recommendation, the cost of being wrong, and who is on the hook. Three equal paths and she will pick the fastest one. Then you will spend a month unsaying it.
- She hears extra research as delay unless it is attached to a customer name.
- She will override a slow pair if the raise narrative needs a locked story.
- She decides in the meeting. If you needed another night, say so before she starts.
Say this Monday“Maya, I need a no on the enterprise SKU this week. Recommendation: kill it. Cost of being wrong: two design-partner conversations. Owner: me. Date: Friday.”
How to put work in front of her
First sentence is the ask. Second is the recommendation. Third is the date. Do not lead with context. Do not send a long memo the night before a board meeting and expect a careful no.
She hears dissent after a direction is on the page. Put a straw direction down, then argue. If you wait to be invited, the meeting ends with a date and you become the person who “never said anything.”
- Ask → recommendation → what we lose if we’re wrong → who owns the next step.
- Name the one thing you need her to stop doing.
- Do not ask her to “weigh in” without a recommendation. Do not soften a people-risk into “alignment.”
Say this Monday“Ask: approve Jordan’s pause on the launch narrative. Recommendation: yes, until he can name two customers who would repeat it. I need you not to lock the date in Tuesday’s staff meeting.”
The moves that waste this seat
- Do not surprise her with a people-problem in a group setting. She will close it to end the discomfort, and you will own the wreckage.
- Do not treat her speed as a quirk. It is how she protects the close and the raise date. If you need time, buy it with a customer name or a written cost of being wrong.
- Do not send “thoughts?” She will reply with a date.
- Do not let Sam and Priya build a model she never asked for, then drop it the morning of the raise. Bring the model while the bet is still a bet.
- Do not assume she knows she is skipping you. Write the sentence.
The lineIf the risk is a person, say the person’s name. Maya will not infer it from your tone.
Strategic pair report
Two seats, two jobs. Complement, the call nobody owns, who has the right to close, and the sentence to say next.
CEO × CMO
CEO · the close
Maya Chen
Owns the quarter and the raise narrative. Measured on revenue and a dated board story. Wants a launch date and an owner on pricing.
CMO · market-true
Jordan Hale
Owns whether a buyer would repeat the sentence. Measured on a true story, not on the close. Wants two named customers before Friday.
What this pair only does together
Maya dates the bet. Jordan keeps the story honest in the market. Together they can lock pricing and a launch once a customer is named. He walks in with the sentence a buyer would actually say. She puts a date on it so the raise narrative does not stay a draft.
Use them for
Naming the next beachhead. Killing a feature nobody would pay to keep. Drafting a raise narrative a partner can retell.
The gift
A close plus a market that can repeat it. Alone, Maya locks a fiction. Alone, Jordan stays in an endless draft.
The unowned call: pricing and the launch date
Maya hears “I need another week on the story” as a slip in the raise. Jordan hears “lock it Friday” as a sentence the company will have to unsay in the partner meeting. Neither is wrong. Nobody has written who owns the call.
- Jordan brings market doubt on the price and the launch sentence.
- Maya hears delay and sets a date so the board pack can close.
- Jordan complies in the room and reopens it in Slack.
- The team learns that “decided” means “until Jordan writes again.”
The problem is not chemistry. The pricing floor and the launch date have no owner.
Write who owns the final call, and by when
| Call | Owner | Maya | Jordan | Date rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positioning | Jordan | Can refuse once, in writing | Must name two customers | Before the raise narrative is drafted |
| Launch date | Maya | Sets the date | Can move it with a named customer | Not during the partner meeting |
| Pricing floor | Shared · Sam holds the model | Closes if a customer is named | Blocks if the story is untrue | Five days before the raise |
The missing sentenceJordan owns positioning. Maya owns the date. If they conflict, Sam puts the cost on one page and they decide by Thursday, not in the partner meeting.
Scripts for the next staff meeting
Maya to Jordan
“I will not lock a date until you give me one sentence a customer would repeat. You have until Thursday. After that I own the close.”
Jordan to Maya
“If we lock Friday, we unsay this in the partner meeting. Two named customers or give me the week. I will not reopen it in Slack.”
The pair to the room“Positioning is Jordan’s. The date is Maya’s. Dissent goes on the page before Thursday. Silence is not a later veto.”
Team dynamics map
Four seats, who holds which job, where control sits, and the conversation nobody has put on a calendar.
Northwind · four seats
Close at CEO
Market-true at CMO
Second chair open
Maya holds the close and the raise. Jordan holds whether the market would repeat the sentence. Priya holds the build. Sam holds the cost. Control sits with Maya. Nobody has named a second chair. The conversation they keep avoiding is who runs the room when she is on the raise.
How this room actually moves
Once a customer is named, Maya and Jordan can lock a price and a launch. Priya and Sam want the model on the page first. Nobody has said this out loud, so every pricing review feels personal. It is two jobs arriving at different times, plus an unowned close when Maya is out.
What the seats cover
Close, market-true, build, and cost are all in the room. That is the company’s advantage, once someone writes who owns the date.
Where it breaks
The model arrives after the date is already in the board pack, so Priya and Sam read as resistance. The second chair is still a blank.
The conversation this room is avoiding: who is actually second when Maya is on the raise. The org chart does not answer it.
Use this beforeDrafting the raise narrative. Hiring a C-level onto this team. Locking pricing. The fight you already had once and scheduled again.
Maya · CEO · close and raise
Owns revenue and a dated board story. Control seat. Treats a people-decision as timing. Has not named who runs the room when she is on the raise.
- Job: close the quarter and lock the raise narrative.
- Measured on: revenue, and a story a partner can retell.
- Gap: second chair is still unassigned.
Ask her“Who decides if you are on the raise, and by which Friday is that written down?”
Jordan · CMO · market-true
Owns whether a buyer would repeat the sentence. Will not lock a launch story he cannot defend in the market. Writes the dissent he does not say in the meeting.
- Job: keep pricing and positioning true in the market.
- Measured on: a sentence a customer would repeat.
- Gap: owns positioning only if someone writes that down. Today, nobody has.
Ask him“Name two customers who would repeat this sentence. If you cannot, say so before Maya locks Friday.”
Priya · CTO · the build
Owns the system. Will stall the build rather than argue in the staff meeting. The room reads her silence as agreement. It is not.
- Job: make the product hold at the date Maya wants to lock.
- Measured on: whether the model is true, not whether the board pack closed.
- Gap: the constraint arrives in a pull request, after the date is set.
Ask her“What would have to be true in the model for you to ship Friday? Say it in the meeting, not in the pull request.”
Sam · CFO · the cost
Owns the cost of locking Friday. Rarely first voice. The room uses him as a veto after Maya has already closed. That is too late for a raise.
- Job: put the cost of the date on one page before the staff meeting.
- Measured on: cash, burn, and whether the raise story survives the model.
- Gap: speaks after the date is set, so he is decorating a decision.
Ask him“Put the cost of locking Friday on one page before the staff meeting. If you wait until after, you are decorating a decision.”
Your AI · private MCP
Ask your own AI about this team. Dnmcs is the source of truth it is allowed to see.
Connect Claude, ChatGPT, or Grok through a private MCP. The model reasons on your credits. Dnmcs only serves authorized Working With Me cards, pair reports, and the team map. Raw answers stay private. OAuth-style connect. Granular scopes. A connected model only sees cards and reports you have already previewed and shared.
Your model, your credits
Dnmcs does not host Claude, ChatGPT, or Grok, and it does not bill tokens. The customer’s AI does the reasoning.
Authorized context only
Scopes are per artifact. A connected model can read a card or a pair report you have already previewed and shared. Raw answers stay private.
OAuth-style connect
Grant, narrow, or revoke. A new audience or a wider scope needs a new yes. The window below is a mock of that layer on this page. Same Northwind sample. It is not a live connection and not a customer testimonial.
Claude
Ask about this team. Dnmcs context only
Complement versus echo
Does this table cover the missing move, or does it repeat itself?
Dnmcs does not assign personality badges. It shows the seat each person holds, how they decide, and where control sits. That is enough to see whether the group covers itself.
Complement
People hold different jobs, move at different speeds, and trust different kinds of evidence. One person dates the bet. Another keeps the story honest. A third wants the model before the date. The tension is usable once you name it.
- The close and the market-true check sit in different seats.
- Someone will enter the fight. Someone else will hold the cost.
- Delegation is real. Control is not piled on one name.
Echo chamber
Four people who decide the same way: same pace, same avoidance, same need for more evidence, same grip on control. Fast rooms get faster. Slow rooms stall. Nobody covers the missing move, and the next difficult call feels unanimous until it breaks.
- Everyone closes, or everyone waits.
- Dissent happens after the meeting, if at all.
- The org chart has titles. The room has one decision style.
People who have seen a lot of teams keep naming the same failure.
“Cofounder relationships are among the most important in the entire company.”
“This relationship has to be built of top quality materials and carefully maintained. It’s the basis of everything.”
“You haven’t seen someone’s true colors unless you’ve worked with them on a startup.”
“If two people are in charge, this variance will cause conflict and delay.”
Why this matters
People problems on the founding team are an operating risk.
~65%
High-potential startups fail on people problems
About 65% of high-potential startups fail because of people problems on the founding team, not because the market simply vanished.
The operating risk is the team you already have. See how they decide before the next fight, raise, or hire.
Finding: Noam Wasserman, The Founder’s Dilemmas (Princeton University Press, 2012). Research on ~10,000 founders, Harvard Business School. Founder-team and people problems.
1st $
Turnover risk rises at first outside financing
Founding-team turnover risk rises when the first outside money arrives. The raise is when unspoken decision rights get stress-tested.
Know who closes, who waits, and who owns the call before that process starts.
Finding: Wasserman, The Founder’s Dilemmas (2012).
~73%
Founder-CEO replacements were fired
About 73% of founder-CEO replacements were fired rather than stepped down. The succession conversation is rarely voluntary.
Better to see where control concentrates, and whether a second chair exists, while the team is still intact.
Wasserman, The Founder’s Dilemmas (2012); widely cited from that research.
~29%
Prior friendship, later turnover
Each prior friendship on a founding team is associated with higher later founder turnover, about 29% in Wasserman’s data.
History is not a working agreement. Friends still need decision rights in writing before the next difficult call.
Wasserman, The Founder’s Dilemmas (2012).
Personality diversity on founding teams relates to outcomes
Founder personality, and the diversity of it on the team, relates to startup outcomes. That is a research finding about founders. It is not a claim that Dnmcs predicted those outcomes, or that you should hire from a test.
Dnmcs is for the executive team you already have. It does not screen candidates and it does not score people for a firing decision.
McCarthy et al., 2023, Scientific Reports. Journal article.
What’s in the plan
One annual plan. Open it when the conversation actually matters.
There are no seat tiers and no daily product. You buy the team plan once and use the cards, the pair reports, and the map when the next difficult conversation arrives.
- For up to 12 executive members
- One-time assessment per person, completed in private
- Assessment collects the seat: title, functions owned, a normal week, and how objectives are measured
- Working With Me card for every seat on the team
- Strategic pair reports for CEO and CMO, co-founders, and other pairs that matter
- Team dynamics map of the room
- Read of how each seat decides, where pairs collide, and where control sits
- Complement versus echo-chamber read of the group
- “Use this before” prompts on the reports
- Onboarding of later members on the same annual plan
- Raw answers stay private. They are not shown to the CEO and they do not appear in a pair report.
- Ask your own AI about authorized cards through a private MCP
How it works
Invite the people who already sit there.
There is no daily product to log into. One sitting per person, then the reports. Open them before the next difficult conversation.
-
Invite the people who already sit there
Co-founders, the C-suite, the pair that keeps missing each other. You send the invites. This is for the team you already have. It is not a screen for candidates.
-
Each person completes a private assessment
They name the seat they hold: job title, the functions they actually own, what they do in a normal week, how their objectives are measured, and whether those objectives are about revenue, product, people, or cost. Raw answers stay private.
-
The three reports appear
Each person gets a Working With Me card. Strategic pairs get a report. The team gets a dynamics map. Later hires can be onboarded on the same plan.
-
Open them before the next difficult conversation
Use the card, the pair, and the map before the hire, the raise, or the fight you have been postponing.
Privacy and consent
Raw answers stay private. Sharing only happens if someone says yes.
This only works if people can be honest. The assessment is private. Nothing derived is visible to teammates until the person has previewed it and agreed.
Never shared
Your raw answers stay with you. The CEO does not see them. Teammates do not see them. They do not appear in a pair report or the team map.
What can be shared
Authorized conclusions only: your Working With Me card, pair reports, and the team map, after you preview exactly what will be shown.
Who sees it
Only the teammates you authorize for that card or report. There is no company-wide feed of assessments.
If the scope changes
A new audience or a wider share needs a new yes. The old consent does not stretch to cover it.
Pricing
One plan. $999 a year.
There are no seat tiers and no monthly SKU. You buy the team plan once and use the cards, the pair reports, and the map when the next difficult conversation arrives.
The team plan
$999 / year
- For up to 12 executive members
- Assessments for the people already on the executive team
- A Working With Me card for each person
- Strategic pair reports for CEO and CMO, co-founders, and other pairs that matter
- A team dynamics map of the room
- Onboarding of later members on the same plan
Who this is for
For the people already on the team.
This is for
- A CEO who just had a fight with a co-founder and needs the working relationship written down.
- An executive team hiring a C-level who wants the group honest from day one.
- A digital-first startup or SME heading into a raise, a pivot, or a conversation the group keeps postponing.
This is not
- A hiring test or a candidate screen.
- A wellness app, therapy, or a clinical product.
- A personality badge for the sidebar.
- A daily decision chat.
FAQ
Questions
How long does this take?
Each person completes one assessment in a single sitting. There is nothing to do every day after that. The value is the Working With Me card, the pair reports, and the map, opened when the next difficult conversation arrives.
What does the assessment ask?
It collects the seat as well as how the person decides: job title, the functions they actually own, what they do in a normal week, how their objectives are measured, and whether those objectives are about revenue, product, people, or cost.
Will my CEO see my raw answers?
No. Raw answers are never shared. The CEO, and anyone else, sees only the derived cards and reports you have previewed and authorized.
Is this MBTI?
No. Dnmcs does not assign you a type. It shows how this specific team decides under pressure: how you work, how a pair collides, and how the room is put together.
Does Dnmcs run Claude or ChatGPT?
No. You connect the model you already use. It reasons on your credits. Dnmcs only serves the cards, pair reports, and map you have authorized. Raw answers stay private.
Who can see my card?
Only the teammates you authorize. You preview what will be shared. If the audience or the scope changes, you will be asked again.
Is this used to hire or fire people?
No. Dnmcs is not a screening tool and not a performance score. It is for people already on the team, or already hired onto it.
What about people we hire later?
New members can be onboarded on the same annual plan. They complete the assessment, and their card and reports update the map.
What language is the product in?
English. Every customer-facing string is written in English.
You already know who is in the room.
The org chart does not show how they decide when it counts.