TL;DR
Thorsten Meyer AI published Outcome-First Decisions, an AGPL-3.0 open-source framework for reviewing initiatives by current outcomes and ongoing cost. Its Worth Filter produces three verdicts: keep, change or kill. The source material does not provide adoption data or independent results.
Thorsten Meyer AI has published Outcome-First Decisions, an open-source decision framework that classifies initiatives as keep, change or kill based on current outcomes and ongoing cost, according to source material from the site. The framework is presented for operators and teams managing multiple projects and is intended to formalize a review step for deciding whether work should continue, change or end.
The framework centers on what the source calls the Worth Filter. That filter asks whether the outcome an initiative is producing now is worth the cost of continuing it. The source says the filter rejects backward-looking inputs such as sunk cost, effort already spent and attachment to a project identity.
Outcome-First Decisions returns one of three verdicts. Keep means the outcome justifies continued cost. Change means the underlying project may still have value, but the current form is not working. Kill means the outcome does not justify the cost, and the initiative should end cleanly so attention, upkeep and capital can be redirected.
The source material says the project is open source under the AGPL-3.0 license, local-first and provider-agnostic. It is presented as Day 8 of a 19-part Built in Public series and as part of a broader operator portfolio described by Thorsten Meyer AI.
Outcome-First Decisions — keep, change, or kill
The hardest decision isn’t what to start — it’s what to stop. Judge every initiative by the outcome it produces now, not the effort already spent.
Independent commentary, produced with AI assistance under human editorial oversight. The views are the author’s own and may change. Outcome-First Decisions is open source under AGPL-3.0, provided “as is” without warranty; see the repository LICENSE. The framework’s verdicts are reasoning aids based on the inputs given and may be wrong — decision support, not decisions; verify independently before acting. Product and company names are trademarks of their respective owners; mention does not imply endorsement.
Portfolio Review Use Case
The release is positioned as a tool for reviewing projects that continue despite unclear current results. Thorsten Meyer AI argues that stopping work can create capacity more cheaply than starting another initiative.
That claim is the author’s interpretation, not an independently measured result. The source material does not show how teams should weight inputs, who should review the verdicts or how often recommendations are expected to be followed. The source also says the framework is decision support, not a substitute for human judgment.
Type Project Book, The: Typographic projects to sharpen your creative skills & diversify your portfolio
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Day Eight Decision Layer
Outcome-First Decisions is framed as the review component in a sequence described by the source as validate, plan and review. The Day 8 dispatch says the Decision layer is complete with the addition of this keep, change or kill review.
The source places the framework inside an 18-product operator portfolio that includes content, platform, market, defense and diagnostic projects. Only limited implementation detail is provided in the supplied material, but the source says the framework is available on GitHub and licensed under AGPL-3.0.
Monitoring, Supervisory and Evaluation Tools for Community-based Initiatives
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Adoption Data Is Missing
The source material does not provide adoption figures, GitHub activity counts, independent evaluations or case outcomes showing how the framework performs in practice. It also does not include detailed scoring rules beyond the Worth Filter and the three verdict categories. It remains unclear how much automation is included in the released repository.
Outcome-Based Performance Management for Hybrid Teams: The Manager’s Framework for OKRs, Continuous Feedback, Fair Reviews, and High-Impact Productivity
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Repository And Series Continue
Readers can inspect the GitHub repository, license and implementation details when evaluating the framework. The Built in Public series is scheduled to continue after Day 8, which may provide more detail on how Outcome-First Decisions connects to the rest of the operator portfolio.
SWOT Analysis Notebook: Strategic Planning and Personal Success: Master Your Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats with Expert Management Tools for Better Success
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What is Outcome-First Decisions?
It is an open-source framework from Thorsten Meyer AI for reviewing initiatives by asking whether their current outcome is worth their ongoing cost.
What are the three possible verdicts?
The framework assigns keep, change or kill. Keep means continue, change means alter the project deliberately and kill means stop the initiative.
What does the Worth Filter exclude?
According to the source, it excludes sunk cost, effort already spent and identity-based attachment. The filter focuses on forward-looking outcome and cost.
Is this financial or legal advice?
No. The source describes the framework as a reasoning aid. It says verdicts may be wrong and should be checked independently before action.
What is still unknown?
The source does not show adoption data, external validation or detailed performance results. It is also unclear from the supplied material how automated the GitHub release is.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
