# The coupled decision gaps Two interlocking gaps keep this problem unsolved. (i) Predictive gap. Founders struggle to predict how stakeholders will actually respond to incremental quality or timing moves—will another prototype secure a purchase order, or will a supplier soften terms once demand is signalled? (Cachon & Lariviere, 2005; [[📜🟩_mitchell97_identify(stakeholders, salience)]]). (ii) Prescriptive gap. Even if reactions could be forecast, entrepreneurs lack a tractable way to prescribe optimal quality of value proposition which further informs time and cash investment across stakeholder groups ([[📜🟧_kavadias03_sequence(projects,priority)]], [[📜🟧_kavadias02_allocate(dynamic-portfolio,NPD)]]). Prediction without prescription is paralysis; prescription without prediction is blind execution. Contemporary heuristics—Lean-Startup validation loops ([[camuffo24-theory-driven-strategic-management-decisions.pdf]], [[📜🟧_camuffo19_structure(experiments, learning)]]), effectuation theory ([[📜🟦_sarasvathy01_leverage(contingencies, uncertainty)]]), or capability-centred operations advice (Fine et al., 2022)—tackle fragments of either gap but never fuse the two. This fragmentation proves costly: 42% of startups fail can be interpreted as quality-commitment mismatches ([[📜🟪_cb18_validate(demand, before-scaling)]]), as entrepreneurs resort to trial-and-error ([[📜🟧_kerr14_systematize(experimentation, entrepreneurship)]]) or learn from samples of one ([[📜🟪_march91_extract(organizations, small-histories)]]).