The hard part isn't the idea. It's the committee.
Inside a large company, a good idea and a well-sourced idea are not the same object. Stage gates are lost to a single question — how do you know? — and a slide of assumptions has no answer to it. Every opportunity here arrives with its evidence attached: cited sources per dimension, an explicit cap where evidence was missing, and a confidence number you can present without overclaiming.
Auditable line by line: sixteen dimensions, each recording the cited evidence that lifted it and the cap that fired when nothing did.
Dimensions without verified evidence are capped at 6/10 by design, so the number in your deck can never quietly be an assumption.
The Openness pillar maps who already owns the space — usually the second question after “why should we be the ones to build it?”
The boards corporate innovation teams watch
Live free-tier snapshots from asset-heavy industries where incumbents have the data advantage.
Manufacturing
Live boardInsurance
Live boardEnergy & Utilities
Live boardFree-tier snapshot — the full boards, analysis and score history are one free sign-up away.
Start free, upgrade when it pays for itself
Pro covers twelve domains with deep-research reports — enough to keep a portfolio of business units under standing coverage for less than a single external study.
Frequently asked questions
How is this different from commissioning a consulting study?
A study is a snapshot bought at a fixed moment; these boards re-rank on every discovery run and every score is traceable to public sources you can open yourself. The material overlaps — market, competition, feasibility — but you can interrogate the inputs rather than the conclusions, and you are not re-buying it next quarter.
Our review board will ask how the score was produced. What do we tell them?
That it is one published formula: four weighted pillars — Demand 30%, Monetization 30%, Buildability 20%, Openness 20% — each the mean of four scored dimensions, and that any dimension whose evidence is absent, dead or stale is capped at 6 out of 10 before averaging. The methodology page states it in full, and every opportunity shows its own breakdown.
Can we assess an internal concept rather than browse boards?
Yes. Submit the concept and it is scored with the same formula and the same evidence rules — which is often the most useful output for an innovation team, because it produces an independent, source-backed read on an idea the organisation already has opinions about.
Does it account for regulatory exposure?
Regulatory risk is one of the four Buildability dimensions, scored per opportunity — which matters most in exactly the regulated industries where corporate innovation teams operate. It is a scored signal to investigate, not legal advice.
How do we show the board that a low score isn't just missing data?
Confidence is deliberately kept out of the score and reported separately, precisely so the two are distinguishable. A low score with high confidence is a weak opportunity; a moderate score with low confidence is an opportunity nobody has evidence about yet — often the more interesting case for a corporate with proprietary data.
More general questions are answered on the FAQ page.
Evidence first. Then conviction.
Free to start — no credit card required.
Also built for indie hackers, product managers, agencies, investors, startup founders, venture studios, fractional ctos, ai & ml engineers, micro-saas operators, accelerators & incubators, product designers, growth marketers, non-technical domain experts, angel investors, no-code builders and students & career switchers.