Prioritize Vertical Product Over Generic Brain
Context
The team discussed Databricks/Microsoft-style company-context efforts and the recurring market objection that company brains are hard to trust. The concern: a startup competing directly on generic company-brain infrastructure will face large-company technical pressure and weak buyer attribution.
Decision
Prioritize a product for a specific vertical/use case where the Brain is a substrate and human accountability is part of the workflow value. Do not frame the near-term wedge as “build the best generic company Brain.”
Rationale
- Generic Brain infrastructure is likely to improve quickly through large-company technical investment, especially on retrieval, indexing, and performance.
- The unresolved trust gap is not purely technical; important organizational truth often requires a human who has context and authority.
- A vertical product can encode where human approval matters, what questions to ask, and which output the buyer pays for.
- The team still lacks evidence that account-management-vertical is the winning wedge, so it should stay problem-first and be willing to move.
Evidence
- 2026-06-20-directions-planning-the-week-18-30 — Guy argued that broad company-context architectures will not become accountable without human approval; Saar pushed the group back to finding specific problems and treating Brain as a tool rather than the product.
Consequences
- human-in-the-loop-accountability becomes a core product-design primitive.
- vertical-use-case-led-brain remains the strategic frame, but the vertical choice is still open.
- AM/CS, construction/real-estate, HR, Legal Ops, and hi-tech enterprise should be evaluated by repeated user friction, not by Brain architecture elegance.