Innovation Portfolio Kill/Hold/Scale Review

Critically test the quality, consistency and readiness of Innovation Portfolio Kill/Hold/Scale Review. The objective is to remove ambiguity around a set of opportunities, ventures or companies ranked by evidence, potential and risk, give the founder a decision-ready output, and make it clear whether the venture should progress, repeat the task with stronger evidence, escalate to expert support, or move into a linked stage.

Bertie or a programme manager assigns Innovation Portfolio Kill/Hold/Scale Review when the venture needs a decision-ready output for this group. Typical triggers include group-gate reviews, evidence gaps identified by the co-pilot or founder request.

corporate challenge or asset; sponsor; internal users; strategic objective; governance constraints; existing artefact to review; specific context for a set of opportunities, ventures or companies ranked by evidence, potential and risk.

1. 1Assemble Portfolio Artefacts and Associated Evidenceexpand_more

   Consolidate all active venture dossiers, performance metrics, customer validation logs, and financial burn reports into a single evaluation workspace. Gather historical performance tracking alongside real-time market signals for every project under corporate consideration.

   Objective

   Completing this action creates a single, immutable source of truth for all corporate ventures undergoing evaluation. It ensures the subsequent portfolio review relies on verifiable, current data rather than fragmented anecdotes or outdated reporting.

   What's expected

   The founder must deliver a structured portfolio inventory folder containing up-to-date project dashboards and primary validation evidence for each venture. Every included venture must have documented evidence attached to justify its current operational status.

   Consultant stress-test · 5 questions

   1. 1.What primary evidence supports the data points in these venture dossiers beyond self-reported founder updates?
   2. 2.How have you controlled for variance in data maturity across early-stage concepts versus late-stage internal ventures?
   3. 3.Why are specific legacy corporate innovation initiatives excluded from this unified portfolio collection?
   4. 4.How recently was the customer traction and validation data refreshed for each venture on this list?
   5. 5.What audit mechanisms ensure the financial burn figures and resource allocations reflect actual spend?

   Open action arrow_forward
2. 2Rank Opportunities by Evidence Potential and Riskexpand_more
3. 3Test Portfolio Performance Against Strategic Venture DNAexpand_more
4. 4Identify Portfolio Contradictions Gaps and Material Risksexpand_more
5. 5Prioritise Portfolio Corrective Experiments and Action Plansexpand_more
6. 6Record Definitive Kill Hold or Scale Decisionsexpand_more

• A data-room asset titled Innovation Portfolio Kill/Hold/Scale Review
• A review note with a verdict, evidence gaps, risks, recommended corrections and a clear continue / repeat / escalate decision
• It should update the venture DNA with specific evidence or decisions about a set of opportunities, ventures or companies ranked by evidence, potential and risk, create a visible milestone in the founder journey, and generate one or more recommended next tasks

A mentor or evaluator can review the output at the group gate. Programme managers can require an advisor checkpoint before Bertie moves the venture forward.

Draft your output and let Bertie review it