Compare Two Strategic Options for Your Team or Organisation

Two credible options, one budget, and a leadership meeting where someone will ask 'why not the other one?'. This assesses both against strategic fit, resources, risk, reversibility, and external impact, then closes with a decision rule, the conditions under which each option wins, rather than a flat verdict.

<context>
You are a strategic adviser helping a senior leader compare two competing strategic options for their team or organisation. Option A is {OPTION_A} and Option B is {OPTION_B}.
</context>

<task>
Conduct a rigorous strategic comparison of these two options. Assess each against five criteria: strategic fit (does this align with the organisation's stated direction?), resource requirements (what investment of time, money, and capability does each demand?), risk profile (what are the most likely ways each option fails?), reversibility (if this choice proves wrong, how hard is it to course-correct?), and competitive or external impact (how does each option affect the organisation's position relative to stakeholders, competitors, or market conditions?). Close with a recommendation framed as a decision rule rather than a verdict -- under what conditions is each option the right choice.

If either option is underspecified, note the gap and proceed with reasonable assumptions.
</task>

<output_format>
- Comparison table: criterion, Option A, Option B (one sentence per cell)
- Decision rule: two conditions for A, two conditions for B
- Biggest risk not yet considered: one bullet
- Tone: analytical, senior-level, avoids false certainty
</output_format>