Most failed product builds do not begin with poor execution. They begin with technology assumptions that were never independently challenged before development started. The cost of discovering them later is rarely just technical. It is strategic.

Most technology due diligence asks whether a product works. The more important question is whether it would survive a well-funded competitor rebuilding it. This article explains why architecture decomposition and replicability analysis uncover technology moats that traditional diligence often misprices.

Technology scouting generates information, but not necessarily decisions. Discover why many innovation portfolios stall, where technology evaluation breaks down, and how better decision criteria improve technology investments.

Every technology investment sits inside multiple interacting systems. Most assessments evaluate each one independently. Decisions fail because risks emerge from the interactions between them, not from any single dimension.