Methodology
The Decision Framework
The five-component methodology for identifying, sequencing and sustaining decisions on criteria the client defines herself.
Reference
Standards
Definitions for the Decision Framework, its components and offers.
About this standard
This section defines the terms used in Sofía Silva Berenguer’s work: the Decision Framework, its five components, the two offers that apply it, and six ordinary words or phrases that carry a specific meaning here. Each defined term has its own page, set out in nine numbered parts: term, definition, purpose, scope, components, outputs, relationships, authorship and version control.
It is written as a reference, in the third person. The rest of this site speaks in Sofía’s own voice.
The Decision Framework
The methodology and its five components, in the order they are applied.
Component 1 of 5
Decision Clarity
Naming what a decision includes, what it excludes and who owns it.
Component 2 of 5
Strategic Sequencing
Ordering initiatives by energy and life, not a project plan.
Component 3 of 5
Initiative Pruning
Deciding what to keep, park or let go, as deliberate design rather than failure.
Component 4 of 5
Sustainable Momentum
The review rhythms that hold a decision in place over time.
Component 5 of 5
Decision Architecture
The integrated system the first four components build, owned by the client.
Offers
The two offers through which the framework is applied.
One-to-one
The Choose Forward Intensive
Two one-to-one sessions, fourteen days apart, that produce one real decision on criteria the client defines herself.
Small group · waitlist
The Room to Decide Circle
A small online group, two sessions fourteen days apart, in which each woman builds her own criteria and sorts her own list.
Reframed terms
Common words given a specific meaning in this work. Each has a short entry here rather than a page of its own.
Institutional-to-independent transition
DefinitionThe move out of a structure that set one’s priorities (most often an institutional role in a not-for-profit, corporate, government, professional services or academic setting, but also a family business or years of externally directed work) into an independent service business, and the loss of external decision-filtering that comes with it.
PurposeNames the root cause of the overwhelm felt in the first years of independent practice, rather than treating it as a generic productivity problem.
RelationshipConstrains which decision criteria are available until she builds her own.
Go and flow
DefinitionThe philosophy that sustainable success requires both drive (go) and a sustainable pace, trust in one’s own judgement and the willingness to stop and choose (flow), held as a strategic practice, not a lifestyle choice.
PurposeThe philosophical foundation the Decision Framework puts into practice.
RelationshipThe Decision Framework is the practical expression of go and flow; the two are inseparable.
The courage to stop
DefinitionPausing to reflect and choose, named as a strategic decision rather than a surrender.
PurposeCounters the belief that stopping means losing or failing.
RelationshipPrecondition for Initiative Pruning and Decision Clarity.
Own criteria
DefinitionDecision-making standards the client has defined herself, replacing the external structure (an institution, a manager, a family business, a quarterly strategy) that used to do this filtering.
PurposeThe central distinction in Sofía Silva Berenguer’s work: decisions made on criteria of her own, not borrowed ones.
RelationshipProduced by the Choose Forward Intensive and the Room to Decide Circle. The object Decision Clarity works on.
Facilitation
DefinitionA neutral-process working relationship in which the practitioner creates the conditions for a decision rather than imposing an external framework or giving directive advice.
PurposeDistinguishes the work from coaching (directive, framed as personal development) and from consulting (imposing a framework).
RelationshipOperationalises the Decision Framework as a working relationship: the practitioner creates the conditions, and the client owns the outcome.
Keep / park / let go
DefinitionA three-way sort applied to every current initiative: keep (it stays on the list), park (it is paused, with clear conditions for revisiting it), or let go (it is removed deliberately, as a design choice rather than a failure).
PurposeMakes stopping explicit, so that nothing stays on the list by default.
RelationshipPart of Initiative Pruning. Produced in the Choose Forward Intensive and the Room to Decide Circle.
Relationship vocabulary
The relationships named on each term page. The same names are used in each page’s structured data, under the prefix sofia:, which resolves to this section.
| Relationship | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Part of | The term is one component of the target. |
| Components | The target is one component of the term. |
| Produces | Applying the term yields the target as an output. |
| Produced by | The term is an output of the target. |
| Constrains | The term limits or conditions how the target can be applied. |
| Constrained by | The target limits or conditions how the term can be applied. |
| Resolves into | Applying the term ends in the target as its settled outcome. |
| Formed from | The term is the settled outcome of the targets acting together. |
| Operationalises | The term puts the target into practice in a specific format. |
| Operationalised by | The target puts the term into practice in a specific format. |
| Applies | The term uses the target in a specific setting. |
| Applied in | The target uses the term in a specific setting. |
| Requires | The target is a precondition for the term. |
| Precondition for | The term is a precondition for the target. |
| Enrolment status | Whether an offer can be booked now; "waitlist" means it cannot. |
Version control
Version 1, 7 October 2026. Each term page states its own version and last review date.
How the framework works in practice: The Approach.