How to use BEAR

Take the Pune offer at 30% more, or stay in Nashik for a promotion the manager has hinted at for next year. The goal is long-term growth without losing touch with family. Rent in Pune is about double. The offer letter wants an answer in ten days.

Known: the Pune offer is in writing, with the figure and the joining date. Assumed: the promotion will happen. The manager only said “probably”. Uncertain: how often you would get back to Nashik once the new job gets busy. Missing: what you would actually save each month in Pune after rent, travel and food. Contradictory: HR says the Nashik raise cycle is in April, the manager says January.

Pune: bigger clients, more pay and a name that opens doors later, but higher costs and a three-hour bus ride from home. Nashik: familiar, close to family and cheaper, but the raise isn’t promised and it is the same work for another year. A third option, asking the Nashik manager to put the promotion in writing now, costs nothing. The real trade-off is certain growth now against a possible raise later.

Leaning Pune, on one condition. A simple monthly budget has to show that you save at least what you save today. Do that budget before you sign, and ask the Nashik manager the direct question in the same week. If the budget doesn’t add up then the answer changes.

A small firm is hiring one operations lead. Two finalists: Asha, eight years at a large company, and Ravi, three years at a start-up. The goal is someone who can run things alone within three months. The budget covers one salary. The decision is due in two weeks.

Known: both interviewed well. Asha’s salary ask is 15% over budget. Both sat TIGER Core, and both readings sit in the range the role needs, with Ravi a little stronger on Execution and Asha on Trust. Assumed: Ravi “can handle chaos”. Nobody has called his references. Uncertain: whether Asha would accept less. Missing: how either has run things with no team behind them. Contradictory: Ravi’s CV says he “led operations”, his interview answers describe a team of one.

Asha: depth and process, but over budget and used to having support staff. Ravi: in budget and used to doing everything himself, but the key claim about him is an assumption. The deciding question, who can run things alone, is exactly the one the evidence doesn’t answer. TIGER tells you how each person tends to work. It can’t tell you who has done the job alone before.

Not yet. Before deciding, call Ravi’s references about working alone, and ask Asha directly whether the budget works for her. Both calls fit in this week, and the deadline allows it. A confident pick today would be a guess with a nice label on it.

A manufacturing unit in Nashik gets a quote from a new packaging supplier at 12% below the current one, with 45 days’ credit instead of 30. The goal is a lower cost per unit without a single stock-out during Diwali orders. Diwali dispatches start in eight weeks. The current supplier has never missed a delivery in four years.

Known: the new quote is in writing. The sample batch passed the production team’s checks. Assumed: the new supplier can hold 5,000 units a week in peak season. They said “no problem”, which is not a fact. Uncertain: their lead time in October, when everyone is busy. Missing: one phone call to a customer who used them last Diwali. Contradictory: their brochure says “in-house printing”, the factory visit showed printing sent out to a third party.

Switch now: 12% saved on every unit and better credit, but an untested supplier in the one season you can’t afford a miss. Stay: safe and known, but the saving is gone for a year. Trial order: 20% of volume from the new supplier for the next four weeks, the rest from the old one. It costs a little admin time and buys the one fact you are missing.

Leaning switch, through the trial order. The saving is real and the quality check passed, but “they can hold volume” is an assumption, and the season is the wrong time to test it in full. Place the trial order this week and call the reference customer. Decide the full switch in four weeks, with delivery dates in hand.

A couple renting in Nashik is deciding whether to buy a 2BHK now, or rent for two more years and buy later. The goal is to own a home within five years without the EMI eating every month’s savings. Hard limit: the parents’ medical fund stays untouched. One partner’s company had a round of layoffs last quarter.

Known: the asking price and the rent are both in writing. The down payment is in the bank today. Assumed: prices will keep rising, so waiting costs money. Everyone says this. Uncertain: whether the job survives the next round. Missing: the actual EMI after the bank’s rate and processing fee, and a real six-month expense sheet. Contradictory: the builder says possession in 12 months, the RERA page says 20.

Buy now: the home is yours and rent stops, but the EMI could be more than half of take-home, and a job loss turns it into a crisis. Rent two more years: nothing changes, savings grow, and the price risk is real but smaller than the income risk. A smaller 1BHK for less: meets the five-year goal with a lighter EMI, but the family may outgrow it.

Not yet. The two things that decide this, the real EMI and the job, are both unknown today. Get the bank’s sanction letter with the exact EMI, and write out six months of actual spending. Look at it again in a month. “Prices are rising” is not a reason to sign a 20-year loan on an assumption.