The language of weak evidence
“We should be able to do it.” “The customer will probably provide that.” “Product says it is on the roadmap.” “Delivery has handled something similar before.”
None of those statements is necessarily wrong. But they are different from evidence.
Why the distinction matters
A commitment becomes fragile when assumptions are treated as facts. The problem is not uncertainty itself. Enterprises make decisions under uncertainty every day.
The problem is hidden uncertainty—when the decision record does not show what is known, what is inferred, and what is still dependent on someone else.
A better standard
For material commitments, important assumptions should have an evidence source, an owner and a confidence level that is explicit rather than implied.
If the evidence is missing but the business still wants to proceed, that can be a valid executive judgment. It should simply be visible as judgment rather than mistaken for fact.