Whether you need a second opinion, support through a negotiation, or an independent assessment, the problem you face defines the format: a decision note, a field mission, a board presentation, or a retainer. SDI is built to move quickly when the situation requires.
SDI does not accept concurrent mandates where client interests overlap. All work is conducted on a confidential basis.
Grounded in Tokyo. Operating globally.
Strategy. Decision. Insight.
In a fragmented world.
Formats
The most frequent engagement formats are described below.
Decision Note. A signed, written recommendation on a specific question, produced when the decision can be made on the basis of an existing body of information, with at most limited additional inquiry. Concise, conclusive, built to be acted on.
A Japanese food processing company preparing to enter West Africa has identified a local distributor as its preferred partner. The distributor has strong retail networks in three countries, established relationships with local authorities, and exclusivity agreements with two competing Asian brands that are about to expire. The due diligence is mixed. The risk consultant has flagged governance concerns and opaque ownership structure. The commercial team says no comparable alternative exists and the expiring exclusivities create a six-month window: after which a Korean competitor will almost certainly move in. The legal department says the joint venture structure can be designed to ring-fence exposure. The strategy department has produced a scenario analysis with three options. The board has read everything. The board has decided nothing.
SDI provides a defensible basis for the decision-maker: a single recommendation that integrates what everyone has produced, accounts for the timeline pressure, and concludes — proceed now on these terms, renegotiate this specific point before signing, or walk away and accept the competitive consequence.
Second Opinion. An independent evaluation of work produced by other advisors or internal teams, when the question is what to make of the analysis rather than what to decide on its basis. Analytical in posture, focused on what holds, what does not, and what should be retained.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Assessment. When a decision requires information that does not yet exist, SDI conducts the necessary investigation — engaging directly with the actors who hold the information, recouping signals across sources, building the corpus the situation demands — and delivers a signed recommendation built on what the investigation establishes. Applies to market entry viability, partnership feasibility, exposure to a regulatory or political development, due diligence on a target. The form remains decision support; the depth of inquiry adjusts to what the decision requires.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Briefing. Preparation of a senior leader before a critical exchange — a board meeting, a negotiation, a public intervention, an institutional encounter. The format begins with an issues note that defines the objectives in advance, and continues with a briefing document built around those objectives: the position to hold, the talking points and anticipated objections, and the context and analysis needed to read what unfolds. For a sequence of exchanges, the same architecture extends into a full briefing book.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Decision Rehearsal. Structured working sessions with the leader before a difficult decision, to surface assumptions, identify blind spots, and clarify what is actually being decided.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Negotiation Support. Counsel through a critical negotiation, at the table or between sessions, with a clear view at each step on what to hold, concede, or refuse.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Field Mission. On-the-ground engagement in the country or jurisdiction concerned — for diagnosis when distance prevents reading the situation, or for accompaniment when a critical exchange requires direct presence.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Presentation. A structured exposition delivered to a board, committee, or executive group — either directly by SDI, or by a leader prepared by SDI.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
Standing Presence. Regular availability over a defined period, for leaders facing a sequence of critical situations rather than a single moment. SDI stands alongside the leader as sparring partner and senior counsel — accompanying decisions, missions, negotiations, and exchanges where an independent voice adds clarity.
The form varies with the configuration: a discreet counsel for the leader's own arbitrations, an analytical presence supporting strategic decisions without internal exposure, or the senior chief of staff a leader needs alongside an internal team that does not have the function — or to complement an internal chief of staff who lacks the specific expertise the situation requires. In each form, SDI works directly with the leader and remains outside the internal organisation.
A firm is engaged in a project in a Caucasus country alongside a multilateral development bank. The project is technically sound and commercially viable. But geopolitical tensions involving the host country have made several MDB shareholders uncomfortable. Board approval, initially expected as routine, has been postponed twice. No formal objection has been raised. No one says the project is dead. But no one moves it forward either. The firm has already committed resources and the host government expects delivery. Without the MDB, the project loses not just co-financing but the institutional shield that made the exposure acceptable in the first place.
SDI, building on its direct experience of multilateral Boards’ dynamics, investigates what the MDB's silence actually means. The assessment is not a scenario matrix, it is a direct judgment on whether board approval remains realistic or has been quietly shelved, and a recommendation on whether to wait, restructure the financing, or withdraw before the commitment deepens further.
