{
  "_about": "The hypothesis board. Customer discovery is hypothesis-driven: you start with beliefs and each interview gives each belief a verdict. The verdict vocabulary matters: 'not_probed' is a real verdict, distinct from 'contradicts'. After 100 interviews the tally per hypothesis - and how it splits by segment - IS the bigger picture. Verdicts cite evidence; status is a human/model judgement over the verdicts and is versioned.",
  "_verdicts": "supports | weak_support | qualifies | contradicts | not_probed",
  "hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "H1",
      "statement": "Teams that produce recurring reports spend significant manual effort (more than ~4 hours per cycle) consolidating exports.",
      "origin": "initial", "created_on": "2026-09-01",
      "verdicts": [
        { "transcript_id": "tx_001", "verdict": "supports",   "evidence": ["ev_005", "ev_006"], "note": "6h/week team-wide, 10h at month-end." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_002", "verdict": "qualifies",  "evidence": ["ev_104", "ev_105"], "note": "Was ~2 days/month; now ~2h/month after in-house automation. Supports the past, contradicts the present." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_003", "verdict": "supports",   "evidence": ["ev_202", "ev_203"], "note": "Still 4h/week even with the remap handled - remaining effort is not remapping." }
      ],
      "tally": { "supports": 2, "weak_support": 0, "qualifies": 1, "contradicts": 0, "not_probed": 0, "independent_sources": 2 },
      "status": "holds, with a condition",
      "status_note": "Effort is high where the merge is manual; collapses once mapping is automated (tx_002). But tx_003 shows ~4h/week persists after automation, so remapping is not the whole cost. Hypothesis should split: H1a effort of remapping, H1b effort of everything else.",
      "status_history": [
        { "date": "2026-09-16", "status": "supported (n=1)" },
        { "date": "2026-09-23", "status": "mixed - depends on automation" },
        { "date": "2026-12-11", "status": "holds, with a condition" }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "H2",
      "statement": "Automatic column remapping is a pain point teams will pay to solve.",
      "origin": "initial", "created_on": "2026-09-01",
      "verdicts": [
        { "transcript_id": "tx_001", "verdict": "weak_support", "evidence": ["ev_020", "ev_023"], "note": "Interest in looking, not buying; no budget known." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_002", "verdict": "contradicts",  "evidence": ["ev_112", "ev_106"], "note": "Explicit no. Solved in-house with a mapping table." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_003", "verdict": "supports",     "evidence": ["ev_201", "ev_209", "ev_210", "ev_211"], "note": "Piloted, quoted at 8k, director found money, sign-off pending. Closest thing to a purchase in the corpus - and still not one." }
      ],
      "tally": { "supports": 1, "weak_support": 1, "qualifies": 0, "contradicts": 1, "not_probed": 0, "independent_sources": 2 },
      "status": "segment-dependent",
      "status_note": "The two organisations split on whether they had the capacity to solve it themselves (segment: in_house_scripting). org_B built a script and has no interest; org_A's script failed and they are close to buying. Candidate segmentation variable for the next 20 interviews.",
      "status_history": [
        { "date": "2026-09-16", "status": "weakly supported (n=1)" },
        { "date": "2026-09-23", "status": "contested" },
        { "date": "2026-12-11", "status": "segment-dependent" }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "H3",
      "statement": "Security review is a major blocker to adopting a new reporting tool.",
      "origin": "initial", "created_on": "2026-09-01",
      "verdicts": [
        { "transcript_id": "tx_001", "verdict": "supports",  "evidence": ["ev_024", "ev_025"], "note": "Required if system-connected; ~6 weeks (secondhand)." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_002", "verdict": "qualifies", "evidence": ["ev_114"], "note": "Only for direct ERP connection; file-reading tools are exempt. A design choice avoids the blocker." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_003", "verdict": "supports",  "evidence": ["ev_206", "ev_207"], "note": "9 weeks (firsthand), and only after chasing twice." }
      ],
      "tally": { "supports": 2, "weak_support": 0, "qualifies": 1, "contradicts": 0, "not_probed": 0, "independent_sources": 2 },
      "status": "holds; avoidable by architecture",
      "status_note": "Both orgs gate the review on direct system connection. A tool that operates on exported files may bypass it entirely (tx_002). Whether the org_A pilot needed the review because of its architecture is unknown (tx_003 topics_not_probed).",
      "status_history": [
        { "date": "2026-09-16", "status": "supported (n=1)" },
        { "date": "2026-12-11", "status": "holds; avoidable by architecture" }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "H4",
      "statement": "Column drift is caused by upstream vendors changing export formats.",
      "origin": "initial", "created_on": "2026-09-01",
      "verdicts": [
        { "transcript_id": "tx_001", "verdict": "contradicts", "evidence": ["ev_010"], "note": "Speaker's GUESS was an internal editor, not a vendor. Weak - it was a guess." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_002", "verdict": "supports",    "evidence": ["ev_107"], "note": "Vendor changes POS format quarterly." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_003", "verdict": "contradicts", "evidence": ["ev_208"], "note": "Internal warehouse manager edits the template. Reported as found out; method not stated." }
      ],
      "tally": { "supports": 1, "weak_support": 0, "qualifies": 0, "contradicts": 2, "not_probed": 0, "independent_sources": 2 },
      "status": "too narrow - two distinct causes observed",
      "status_note": "One org has an external cause, the other an internal one. The hypothesis should be reframed as 'drift has multiple causes; the cause determines whether a remap tool or an upstream governance fix is the answer'.",
      "status_history": [
        { "date": "2026-09-23", "status": "contested" },
        { "date": "2026-12-11", "status": "too narrow - two distinct causes observed" }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "H5",
      "statement": "Reconciling conflicting figures between systems is a bigger pain than merging them.",
      "origin": "emergent", "emerged_from": ["ev_109", "ev_113"], "created_on": "2026-09-23",
      "verdicts": [
        { "transcript_id": "tx_001", "verdict": "not_probed", "evidence": [], "note": "Reconciliation never came up and was never asked about. tx_001 predates the hypothesis." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_002", "verdict": "supports",   "evidence": ["ev_109", "ev_113"], "note": "A day per month; would pay for mismatch flagging." },
        { "transcript_id": "tx_003", "verdict": "not_probed", "evidence": [], "note": "Follow-up guide did not include it. Guide v3 should." }
      ],
      "tally": { "supports": 1, "weak_support": 0, "qualifies": 0, "contradicts": 0, "not_probed": 2, "independent_sources": 1 },
      "status": "emergent - untested",
      "status_note": "One source. The two not_probed verdicts are the action item: add g_reconciliation to the guide (done in v3) and ask it in every subsequent interview. Do NOT read tx_001/tx_003 silence as 'they don't have this problem'.",
      "status_history": [
        { "date": "2026-09-23", "status": "emergent - untested" }
      ]
    }
  ]
}