You don't need another market study. You need a decision.

A market study tells you how large a market is. A decision brief tells you whether to enter it. Those are not the same document, and confusing them is the most expensive habit in growth-stage expansion.

The study arrives at 80 pages of context. It is genuinely interesting. It is also unfalsifiable — nothing in it can be wrong, because nothing in it commits to anything. The board reads the summary, asks two questions the study cannot answer, and defers.

A decision brief inverts the order. It begins with the commitment: this much capital, over this period, to build this presence in this market. Every piece of evidence is then judged by one test — does it change the answer? Market size that does not change the answer is trivia.

Three questions carry the brief. Should we enter, given what else the same capital could buy? Where exactly should we compete, down to the segment and the first buyer? And how do we win there against incumbents who have more local advantage than we do?

The fourth question is the one that separates a serious brief from an optimistic one: what would have to be true for this to fail, and what would we see first? A recommendation without stated failure conditions is a forecast, not a decision.

Boards do not reward confidence. They reward a leader who can say: here is the call, here is what it rests on, and here is the evidence that would make me reverse it. That is the standard a decision brief is written to.