Judgment in a Crisis

Matterhorn Health has just launched what was supposed to be a breakthrough medical device—the GlucoGauge, a home blood-glucose monitor designed to improve safety, accuracy, and patient independence. The launch was the culmination of years of research, millions in investment, and the intense pride of the product team. But days after release, troubling reports begin to surface. Inaccuracy rates appear to exceed FDA guidelines—by a lot. Customers are confused, clinicians see discrepancies, and internal teams can’t agree on whether the issue is customer misuse or device malfunction.

As a product manager at Matterhorn, you are thrust into the center of the unfolding crisis. Incoming emails, voicemails, video messages, and chat notifications force you to make rapid judgments with incomplete and sometimes conflicting information.

Some data hints at user error. Other messages suggest manufacturing defects. Still others imply deeper systemic flaws—misaligned teams, confirmation-seeking executives, and pressure to protect the company’s reputation.

Each decision you make—from how many rounds of investment to commit to communication fixes (sunk-cost trap), to whether to ship new devices, to estimating statistics amid anchoring cues—shapes the evolving narrative.

This is not just a crisis. It is a crucible—a test of your reasoning, your resilience, and your ability to see clearly when cognitive biases are working against you.