Failure 07 — No decision resilience scoring before commit

The plan you commit to today is a single best guess against an uncertain future. The question every CxO should be asking before signing it is: of the commitments I am making today, which ones survive as time unfolds and shocks materialize? Which break, and on what day? In current planning systems, that question is unanswerable — stress-testing happens at the plan level, runs as a separate workstream, and never flows back into the commit logic.

Decision Resilience Scoring answers it commit by commit. The Day-1 decisions — a production allocation, a sourcing split, a JIT-vs-safety lead-time PO, a capacity reservation — each carry a forward score and a named break day. The MIC worked example makes it concrete. A PO release sized at 11-day JIT scope scores 38% resilience; lookahead identifies the break day at Day 12, triggered by a specific iteration cluster (Supplier S2 at P85 lead time AND demand at P75 simultaneously). The same PO at 4-day safety scope scores 96% — same supply chain, different posture on one decision, absorbs the slips through P95 and holds through Day 15.

The 70/30 sourcing split between S2 and S3 scores 91% Day 1, 83% Day 5, 74% Day 9, then 38% Day 12 — a cliff that corresponds to the same named iteration cluster. The planner sees the cliff before commit. The mitigation — shifting the split to 60/40 or 50/50 — is a defensible decision, not a hunch. Every break day is named, every cluster is traceable, every alternative is scored before signature. The war room compresses from "what just happened" to "what should we sign."