Spoke · Template · 5 min read

Go/No-Go decision template (free)

Score the seven criteria below and leave with a filled-in decision record. Or take the four raw blocks — rubric, meeting agenda, decision record, follow-up tracker — and paste them into Notion, Google Docs, or Sheets.

For the methodology behind the template — when to run Go/No-Go, the 7 criteria explained, the meeting structure — read the full Go/No-Go guide.

Free · No signup · Nothing leaves your browser

Score the decision, get the record

The same seven criteria and the same threshold as the rubric below — applied for you. Score each one, and you leave with a filled-in decision record, not an empty template. The raw copy-paste blocks are still below if you prefer them.

What are you deciding on · optional

1.Problem real
Critical
1 = No specific people identified · 3 = A few candidates, mixed evidence · 5 = 5+ confirmed, recent, severe
2.Market exists
Critical
1 = No data, "we think it's big" · 3 = Top-down only, no SOM · 5 = Top-down + bottom-up agree, sources cited
3.Will pay
Critical
1 = Verbal interest only · 3 = Mixed signals (some yes, some no skin) · 5 = Pre-orders, deposits, or LOIs in hand
4.Team capabilities
High
1 = Major capability gap, no plan to fill · 3 = Gaps named, hiring plan exists · 5 = All key capabilities on team
5.Unit economics
High
1 = No model, "we'll figure it out" · 3 = Rough estimates, defensible thesis · 5 = Detailed model with margins, CAC, LTV
6.Runway
High
1 = Less than time-to-validation · 3 = 1–2x time-to-validation · 5 = Comfortably 2x+ time-to-validation
7.Disqualifying risks
Medium
1 = Major risks unaddressed · 3 = Risks named, mitigation in progress · 5 = No critical risks unaddressed

0 of 7 scored

Short answer

What is the Go/No-Go threshold?

GO needs an average of 4.0 or better and every critical criterion at 4 or better. An average below 3.0 is a NO-GO. A critical criterion at 1 or 2 is a NO-GO whatever the average says; a critical at 3 caps you at WAIT.

The short version

Seven criteria, scored 1 to 5 against written anchors. Three are critical and are not compensated for by strength elsewhere
GO: average 4.0 or better AND every critical criterion at 4 or better
NO-GO: average below 3.0, OR any critical criterion at 1 or 2, regardless of how the average looks
WAIT: everything else, and it arrives two ways — the average did not clear 4.0, or one critical criterion is holding back an otherwise passing set
A score of 1 means no data, and it is a valid score. Skipping a criterion you are unsure about is what corrupts the average

Block 1: Scoring rubric

7 criteria, 1–5 scale, with anchored descriptions for scores 1, 3, and 5 to keep scoring honest. Paste into Google Sheets — add columns for each attendee, formula AVERAGE() for the row mean.

Criterion	Weight	Score 1	Score 3	Score 5
Problem real	Critical	No specific people identified	A few candidates, mixed evidence	5+ confirmed, recent, severe
Market exists	Critical	No data, "we think it's big"	Top-down only, no SOM	Top-down + bottom-up agree, sources cited
Will pay	Critical	Verbal interest only	Mixed signals (some yes, some no skin)	Pre-orders, deposits, or LOIs in hand
Team capabilities	High	Major capability gap, no plan to fill	Gaps named, hiring plan exists	All key capabilities on team
Unit economics	High	No model, "we'll figure it out"	Rough estimates, defensible thesis	Detailed model with margins, CAC, LTV
Runway	High	Less than time-to-validation	1–2x time-to-validation	Comfortably 2x+ time-to-validation
Disqualifying risks	Medium	Major risks unaddressed	Risks named, mitigation in progress	No critical risks unaddressed

Decision rule (set before meeting): GO if the average is 4.0 or better AND every critical criterion is at 4 or better. NO-GO if the average is below 3.0, or any critical criterion is at 1–2. Everything else is WAIT — including a strong average held back by one critical at 3, which is a gap to close rather than a reason to stop.

Block 2: Meeting agenda

Total: 60–75 minutes. 3–5 attendees who can challenge each other.

# GO/NO-GO MEETING — [Initiative name] Date: [YYYY-MM-DD] Attendees: [Names + roles] Decision threshold: GO = avg >= 4.0 AND every critical >= 4 NO-GO = avg < 3.0 OR any critical at 1-2 WAIT = everything else Pre-read distributed: [Date, link] ## 0:00–0:05 Frame the decision Owner states: what we're deciding, what success looks like, what failure looks like. No discussion yet. ## 0:05–0:50 Round 1 — Each criterion, silent score then discuss For each of 7 criteria: - Owner reads criterion + supporting evidence (60 sec) - Each attendee writes score 1–5 silently (30 sec) - Scores revealed simultaneously - Discuss disagreements (3–5 min per criterion) ## 0:50–1:05 Round 2 — Aggregate and decide - Calculate averages per criterion + overall - Compare against threshold (set in pre-read) - Output: GO / WAIT / NO-GO ## 1:05–1:15 Round 3 — Commit or kill GO → Owner names: next steps, budget, timeline, kill triggers WAIT → Owner names: specific experiment, deadline, re-decision date NO-GO → Owner writes 3-paragraph postmortem within 48 hours ## After meeting - Decision record published within 24h - All attendees acknowledge in writing - Calendar item set for re-decision (if WAIT) or check-in (if GO)

Block 3: Decision record

The artifact you publish after the meeting. Future-you will thank present-you for writing this clearly.

# DECISION RECORD: [Initiative name] Decision: GO / WAIT / NO-GO Date: [YYYY-MM-DD] Owner: [Name] Attendees: [Names] ## Context [2-3 paragraph background: what we considered, why now] ## Scores | Criterion | Avg | Range | Notes | |--------------------|-----|-------|-------| | Problem real | X.X | min-max | [key disagreement] | | Market exists | ... | | Will pay | ... | | Team capabilities | ... | | Unit economics | ... | | Runway | ... | | Disqualifying risks| ... | | **OVERALL** | X.X | ## Decision [GO/WAIT/NO-GO + 1-sentence rationale tied to scores] ## Next steps (if GO) - [Action] — [Owner] — [Deadline] - [Action] — [Owner] — [Deadline] - Kill trigger: if [specific signal], re-run Go/No-Go ## Experiment plan (if WAIT) - Hypothesis to test: [specific testable hypothesis] - Method: [how we'll test it] - Deadline: [date] - Re-decision date: [date] - Decision criteria: [what result triggers GO vs NO-GO] ## Postmortem (if NO-GO) - What we learned: [3 bullets] - What we'd do differently: [2 bullets] - What this rules out for related ideas: [1 bullet] ## Acknowledgments [ ] [Attendee 1] acknowledged: [date] [ ] [Attendee 2] acknowledged: [date] ...

Block 4: Follow-up tracker

Decisions without follow-up become inertia. This block captures what to revisit and when.

# FOLLOW-UP TRACKER — [Initiative name] ## Kill triggers (signals to re-run Go/No-Go) - [ ] [Specific metric] falls below [threshold] for [duration] - [ ] [Specific event] happens (e.g., key competitor enters, regulation changes) - [ ] [Date]: scheduled re-decision regardless of state ## Open questions to resolve - [ ] [Question] — owner: [name], by: [date] - [ ] [Question] — owner: [name], by: [date] ## Lessons captured [Updated as the initiative progresses — what we got right, what we got wrong, what changed our mind.] ## Re-decision history - [Date]: GO (initial) - [Date]: WAIT (reason) - [Date]: GO (reason) - ...

Run a Go/No-Go session in a 15-minute talk

The template is the easy part. The hard part is honest scoring under pressure. We built GoNoGo to give you a structured first-pass — voice intake, market sizing, scored output — so the real meeting takes 30 minutes instead of 3 hours.

Run a free Go/No-Go session →

15 min · up to 20 reports · Decision packet ready for the real meeting

Frequently asked questions

Can I copy this template into Notion / Google Docs / Excel?+

Yes. The blocks below are designed as plain text — paste into any tool. The scoring rubric works as a Google Sheet (criteria as rows, attendees as columns, formulas auto-average). The meeting agenda works as a Notion doc. The decision record works as a Confluence/Notion page.

Do I need to use all 7 criteria?+

For full Go/No-Go decisions (new product, market entry, big hire), yes — skipping criteria is how teams talk themselves into things. For smaller decisions ("should we ship this feature?"), you can use a subset (problem real / unit econ / risk) but be explicit about which you're skipping and why.

How do you decide the scoring threshold?+

Set it before the meeting, not after. The defaults: GO = average ≥ 4.0 AND every critical criterion at 4 or better. WAIT = anything in between, including a strong average held back by one critical at 3, and it comes with a named experiment to close that gap. NO-GO = average below 3.0, or any critical criterion at 1–2. Critical criteria are deliberately not compensated for by strength elsewhere — that is what the word is doing. Adjust based on appetite for risk, but lock the threshold before you see any scores.