Skip to content
Institute · Method

One lens, used with discipline.

Research, advisory, education and public speaking share the same method. The format changes; the rigour does not: the same rules hold for a report and for a private board session.

The lens has a name in the manifesto: OPIC, the long-term perspective. In practice it means observing human decisions in the age of AI from a single fixed point — who answers, for what, on what information — and refusing the shortcuts that make an analysis brilliant but unusable.

How an analysis is made

Primary sources, verification, synthesis.

Every analysis by the institute — public or private — passes through three steps, always in the same order.

01

Primary sources

Regulatory texts, verifiable public data, interviews at senior level, direct observation of boards. Secondary sources are used, but never suffice on their own.

02

Verification

Every figure, date and regulatory statement is checked against its source. Whatever fails verification leaves the analysis, however convenient it would be to keep.

03

An executive read

The output is written for people with thirty minutes, not three hundred pages: clear theses, cited evidence, operational implications. Synthesis is work, not a cut.

How an engagement is structured

Framing, cycles, direction.

The journey is the same for every advisory module. Confidentiality covers the whole engagement: content and clients never become public references.

01

Framing

A session with senior leadership: context, decisions ahead, priorities. From here come the perimeter, cadence and format of the engagement.

02

Cycles of work

Private sessions with the board or the executive committee, at an agreed cadence, with an agenda built on the real decisions.

03

Direction

Documents in resolvable form and availability in critical windows, when the timing of a decision refuses to wait for the calendar.

Independence

Judgement is worth as much as its freedom.

Antropic sells no technology, implements no systems and takes no sponsorship from vendors. That is a matter of positioning, not a contractual detail: the institute's only mandate is the quality of the decision.

For the same reason the analyses cite their sources, the reports separate facts from theses, and the position papers give reasons for their recommendations. Decision-makers should be able to verify, not asked to trust.

Method

The same rigour, from the public report to the private session.

The manifesto