The problem with AI
Ask one model if your plan is sound
and it will find reasons to agree with you.
Delphi's approach
Multiple models. Distinct roles.
None of them are trying to please you.
Every Delphi deployment starts with four core perspectives that cover the fundamentals of rigorous decision analysis. From there, you can add as many custom perspectives as your organization needs.
The core four
Advocate
Builds the strongest case for proceeding
Skeptic
Finds the weaknesses and fatal flaws
Risk Analyst
Maps what breaks and when
Second-order
Traces the consequences you haven't considered
They reason independently. They don't see each other's work. When they disagree, you learn something.
Each perspective is its own intelligence
These aren't prompts on top of a chatbot. Each perspective is a specialized system with its own knowledge, its own way of reasoning, and its own memory of your organization and past decisions.
Specialized knowledge
The Risk Analyst understands how to map failure modes. The Second-order Thinker knows how to trace consequences through complex systems. Each perspective brings expertise the others don't have.
Organizational memory
Perspectives remember context across sessions. They know your industry, your risk tolerance, your past decisions and what happened after. They get smarter about your organization over time.
Independent reasoning
Each perspective works in isolation until synthesis. No anchoring, no groupthink, no pressure to agree. When they conflict, that conflict is signal.
How it compares
| Feature | Delphi | ChatGPT & Others |
|---|---|---|
| Perspectives | Multiple specialized models, each with a distinct role | One generalist model |
| Default behavior | Challenges your assumptions | Agrees with your framing |
| Objections | Surface automatically from the Skeptic | Only if you ask for them |
| Risk analysis | Dedicated perspective mapping failure modes | Generic response if prompted |
| Second-order effects | Dedicated perspective tracing consequences | Rarely considered |
| Output | Structured verdict, risks, assumptions, blind spots | Unstructured prose |
| Context | Remembers your organization and past decisions | Starts fresh every conversation |
| Customization | Perspectives configured for your industry | Same model for everyone |
Extensible
Add perspectives for your specific needs
The core four cover the fundamentals, but your organization has specific concerns that deserve dedicated analysis. Add as many custom perspectives as you need, each configured for your context.
Custom perspectives understand your industry, your regulatory environment, your competitive landscape, and your internal decision-making criteria. A sovereign wealth fund thinks differently than a logistics company. Delphi adapts.
Example custom perspectives
Regulatory Analyst
Configured for PDPL, ADGM regulations, and GCC compliance requirements
Portfolio Strategist
Understands your existing holdings and concentration limits
Stakeholder Mapper
Tracks board dynamics, investor expectations, and internal politics
What you get
Verdict
Proceed, proceed with caution, reconsider, or stop
Strengths & Risks
What's working and what could break
Assumptions
What needs to be true for this to work
Blind spots
What you might be missing
Try it on a decision you're facing.
Bring something real. See what surfaces when four perspectives argue independently about your specific situation.