Decision Materials & Advisory
Reporting built to be read, questioned and defended — by the committee, by the board, and by whoever revisits the decision two years later.
- Analysis usually fails at the point of presentation, not at the point of analysis.
- Materials are structured around the decision to be taken, not around the process that produced them.
- The reasoning is documented so that it survives changes of personnel and the passage of time.
When this is relevant
The work has been done. Valuations exist, the underwriting has been run, advisers have reported. What does not exist is a single coherent account that a committee can act on — one that states the decision, the evidence behind it, the assumptions it depends on and the risks that would change it.
This matters more than it appears. A committee that cannot follow the reasoning does not approve more slowly; it approves on trust, or defers. Neither outcome is good for the decision, and neither leaves anything behind for the review that comes afterwards.
A decision that cannot be reconstructed has not been documented. It has only been recorded.
Where REV contributes
REV consolidates fragmented workstreams into materials designed for the people who will use them. Findings from valuation, underwriting, data and technical advisers are reconciled into one narrative, with inconsistencies between them surfaced rather than smoothed over.
The assumptions that drive the outcome are isolated and logged, with their basis and their sensitivity. A reader can see not only what was concluded, but what the conclusion rests on and how much it would take to move it.
Where materials already exist, REV reviews them from the position of the reviewer: what a committee will ask, where the argument is thin, and what is missing that will be requested in the meeting.
- Investment committee papers for an acquisition or disposal
- Board briefing on portfolio position or strategy
- Consolidation of a valuation and evidence pack
- Buyer-facing documentation for income-producing assets
- Disposal narrative and process materials
- Assumption documentation for audit or lender review
- Independent review of an existing committee paper
- Committee-ready paper stating decision, evidence and risk
- Executive summary written for the decision-maker
- Assumption log with basis and sensitivity for each item
- Evidence appendix with sources and provenance
- Risk and sensitivity summary
- Buyer-facing information pack where a process requires one
- Presentation-ready version of the same argument
How the work is structured
- Scope. The decision to be supported, the audience and the governance requirements are established first.
- Consolidation. Existing workstreams are reconciled, with inconsistencies identified rather than absorbed.
- Assumption capture. Drivers of the outcome are isolated, documented and sensitised.
- Senior review. The argument is tested as a reviewer would test it, before it reaches the committee.
- Decision-ready output. Materials are delivered in the format the audience actually works in.
If you have a decision going to committee and the materials need to withstand the questions it will attract, we would be pleased to hear from you.
Discuss a mandate