R3X.Net, Inc. announced the launch of the R3X Judgmental DNA Program 'when losing is not an option'

The R3X Judgmental DNA Program is a Litigation Support Solution for board members of publicly-held companies, ERISA-regulated Pension funds, and large private companies with distributed ownership, as well as other fiduciaries under litigation for alleged violation of their fiduciary duties.

Ann Arbor, MI (PRWEB) July 10, 2004 -- Sheila Bednar, President & Chief Operating Officer of R3X.Net, Inc. announced today the launch of its "Judgmental DNA",

a Litigation Support Solution for board members of publicly-held companies, ERISA-regulated Pension funds, and large private companies with distributed ownership, as well as other fiduciaries under litigation for alleged violation of their fiduciary duties.
                         
Historically, the administration of justice in stakeholder complaints against directors and officers has been uneven and asymmetrical because of a singular anomaly ubiquitous to the corporate governance world. That anomaly is the peculiar fact that the predicate acts of fiduciary performance are almost always human judgments -- usually a sequence of judgments that concatenate and aggregate into a business decision.
 
The judgments made by directors and officers that contribute to, and are resident in, a fiduciary decision exist in a nether world not fully accessible by traditional courtroom players. In other words, the judgmental process is most often occluded from public view and inspection by virtue of its black box" character.
 
Nevertheless, R3X has developed a litigation defense methodology for use in those cases in which the predicate acts of fiduciary performance are inside the skin and resistant to examination and discovery.
 
The offering is known as R3X Judgmental DNA. By decisions (D) to the nth power (N) we mean that that there is a finite number of decision rules available for a finite of number of decision tasks. We know that a particular decision on a defined decision task can sometimes be achieved by the application of more than one decision rule. In other words, sometimes more than one decision path will lead to a given decision. The union of a decision task and a corresponding decision will point to a generic decision architecture (A) -- which includes the various decision rules (critical paths) that could have elicited the particular terminal judgment.
 
R3X Judgmental DNA is a decision science-based methodology which can elicit threshold-level doubt specific to the venue's burden of proof requirement, in the minds of judges or jurists concerning how a defendant may have plausibly arrived at a given judgment without having violated a fiduciary norm.
 
The task of plaintiffs counsel is to demonstrate that the line of thinking" adopted by the defendants was modulated by preferences that necessarily and egregiously compromise the defendants performance of their duties of care, loyalty, independence or candor. One tactic of the defense is to show that the apparently discredited decision could have been reached by pure motives and honorable behavior.
 
Since 1971 experimental psychologists have catalogued about three dozen judgmental heuristics -- intellectual shortcuts" - that people routinely use in making decisions in the face of information overload or an information database characterized by missing data, probabilistic data and corrupted or dirty data.

What is adaptive about the use of these heuristics is that they permit decision-making to proceed when it might otherwise be preempted and terminated by the quagmire of complexity and missing data. The downside to these intellectual shortcuts is that they introduce systematic distortion into the inferential process. Each judgmental heuristic delivers a characteristic distortion.
 
By reviewing the decision path that led to an alleged act of fiduciary breach -- it is sometimes possible to reconstruct the decision path so that the available evidence is compatible with the defendants utilization of a well-documented judgmental heuristic which, though innocent and lawful, may lead to unintended consequences. By empowering the defense counsel with a scientific basis for establishing the linkage between a defensible judgmental heuristic and the referenced decision, sufficient doubt can be elicited to challenge the burden of proof" standard required by the prevailing venue. When the jury or the judge has an expert-witness with a scientific explanation that eliminates malevolent or self-dealing intent as an explanation for the behavior - the incriminating decision is re-attributed to a lawful intent and justifiable performance, despite the accrual of damage to the plaintiff.
 
Most Americans and many others have been acculturated to be comfortable in complaining about the fallibility of their own memory. We launch such confessions of our own impairment with relish and abandon -- we do it often and, sometimes, loudly. In sharp contrast, however, no one ever talks about how bad her judgment is. Even under the most challenging, near-impossible conditions -- we would never suggest that we doubt the capacity of human judgment or our own deliberative powers. Despite that, we have a remarkable archive of scientific studies that attests to the very precisely measured fallibility of human judgment on various decision tasks and under different information conditions. To borrow from the computing world -- we can use the analogy that for difficult decision tasks -- the human judge functions as though his adequate software has a few viruses, his CPU is too small and there is not nearly enough RAM.
 
The scientific evidence is very clear that the human decision maker who operates on certain kinds of decision tasks - functions with a repertoire of serious impairments - no matter how intelligent, educated or accomplished the person may be.
 
R3X Judgmental DNA is deployed to facilitate the defense counsels efforts to demonstrate that honest mistakes" - that have been studied scientifically for more than fifty years in the laboratories of experimental psychologists -- could plausibly account for the target decision behavior that resulted in the alleged damage to the plaintiff.
 
The availability of chromosomal DNA has dramatically changed the impact of evidence and the durability of allegation in criminal trials. We believe that R3X Judgmental DNA can play a transformative role in how judges and juries look at the decisions of corporate fiduciaries that result in damaging outcomes.

Gross negligence, hidden agenda or forgivable sin? When the predicate acts of fiduciary performance are inside the skin -- R3X Judgmental DNA may be a powerful resource in facilitating a successful defense of your high profile client. Plausible and scientifically-supported alternative explanations for a given behavior are the stuff from which effective litigation defenses emerge.

Judgmental DNA by R3X.NET, Inc.

'when losing is not an option'

R3X.Net, Inc. is the leading developer of digital age economic technologies including the Unified Business Operating System, (UBOS), the Decision Accounting Operating System (DAOS), Competitive Advantage Bundles, CABs, the Generic Value Creation Architecture, (GVCA), Push Funding, a Management Utilities Portfolio (MUPPY), Smart Governance, Judgmental DNA, and a host of other R3X Digital Age Economic Technologies.

Smart Governance by R3X

when 'best of breed is not good enough"

R3X Smart Governance provides the only known objective measurement of the quality of corporate governance and fiduciary performance in the business world today. Recall Peter Drucker's criteria for evaluating corporate performance: If you cant measure it -- you cant manage it."

# # #