CPC Kick-off and Methodology-Validation Record
| Field | Record |
|---|---|
| Project | CPC-26-0016 - Where the Story Holds: AI Commercial Positioning for Cardano |
| Session | Intersect Cardano Product Committee official session |
| Date | 19 August 2026 |
| Scheduled time | 15:30–17:00 CEST / 13:30–15:00 UTC |
| Format | Remote committee session |
| Project segment | Approximately 15 minutes within the session |
| Presenter | Zakaryae Boudi, project lead |
| Purpose | CPC-facing kick-off, presentation of the Milestone 1 research design and confirmation of the working method and follow-up |
Attendance record
The session record lists the following participants. The first five named below spoke during the project-specific segment; the remaining participants were recorded as present in the wider committee session.
| Participation in project segment | Attendees |
|---|---|
| Presented or contributed to discussion | Zakaryae Boudi; Lorenzo Bruno; James Meidinger; Samuel Leathers; Yoram Ben-Zvi |
| Recorded in the wider session | Abdulbasit Adigun Abdulrahman; Jess Fields; Juan Sierra; Samir Idris; Seun Gbiri; Simo Simovic; Thyme Studio |
An automated presentation-device entry was excluded because it was not a separate attendee.
Agenda and material presented
The project-specific segment covered:
- the study purpose and core-scope boundary;
- the five research questions on buyer demand, Cardano technical properties, ecosystem activity, alternatives and positioning;
- the mixed-method approach combining desk research, structured interviews and claim verification;
- the credibility-ledger approach and separation of documented fact, respondent evidence, inference and vendor judgment;
- the stakeholder groups and neutral, problem-first interview approach; and
- committee challenge, target-list review and coordination for the next phase.
Presentation summary
The project lead explained that the work would assess whether Cardano has a credible commercial position in AI rather than validate a predetermined narrative. The presentation identified five lines of enquiry:
- buyer problems, use cases and demand;
- the relevance and evidence for Cardano technical properties;
- current Cardano AI activity and capability;
- comparison with specialised AI networks, protocols and non-chain alternatives; and
- synthesis into a supported positioning and adoption pathway, if warranted.
The project lead described a mixed-method design using desk research, source gathering, structured interviews or written responses and a credibility ledger. The stakeholder universe presented included institutional buyers and adopters, AI-agent builders and platforms, delivery and infrastructure partners, Cardano ecosystem participants, independent or non-Cardano experts and the commissioning committee.
Discussion, confirmations and decisions
| Topic | Record of discussion and confirmation |
|---|---|
| Commercial focus | The committee emphasised product-market fit, adoption and actionable commercial output. The project lead confirmed that commercial interest and adoption evidence would remain central to the study. |
| Neutral interview design | The project lead confirmed that interviews would begin with respondents' problems, requirements and current alternatives rather than foregrounding Cardano. Relevant platform characteristics would be tested after the need was established. |
| Stakeholder coverage | The committee asked to review the target universe for missing ecosystem or buyer perspectives. James Meidinger agreed to take point on this review, with support from Yoram Ben-Zvi. |
| Coordination | Direct follow-up between the project team, James Meidinger and Yoram Ben-Zvi was agreed; Lorenzo Bruno would support the contact exchange. |
| Research status | The project lead confirmed that desk research and evidence-ledger organisation had begun. No final research finding or preferred positioning was asserted at the session. |
| Scope control | The presentation and discussion concerned the core research engagement. Optional proposal add-ons were not activated. |
Research plan and workspace confirmed
The working arrangement following the session is:
- Public milestone workspace: this GitHub directory and pull request contain the Markdown evidence used for milestone review.
- Research plan: the method, sequence, initial hypotheses and scoring rubric are recorded in the Milestone 1 Inception Report.
- Secondary-evidence workspace: the Milestone 1 Source Register is the named baseline for desk research.
- Primary-research workspace: the Prospective Interview Target Universe provides the organisation-level recruitment baseline.
- Evidence-control workspace: the credibility-ledger structure records claims, sources, evidence status, validation, independence, confidence and limitations.
- Confidential records: personal contact details, consent, attribution preferences, raw notes and outreach status are kept in controlled project files. Only consented or appropriately anonymised evidence will enter public milestone outputs.
These elements constitute the confirmed research plan and delivery workspace for acceptance-criterion purposes. Any later methodological refinement will remain within the core scope and be recorded transparently.
Action record
| Owner | Action | Status reflected in this PR |
|---|---|---|
| IEI / TKNFRA | Publish the research method and all Milestone 1 review evidence as Markdown. | Complete. |
| IEI / TKNFRA | Publish a specific source baseline. | Complete: 50 named public sources. |
| IEI / TKNFRA | Publish an actionable organisation-level target universe without personal data. | Complete: 50 prospective organisations. |
| James Meidinger and Yoram Ben-Zvi | Review or advise on stakeholder gaps through direct project coordination. | Agreed follow-up; not relied on as evidence of respondent participation. |
| CPC reviewers | Review the Milestone 1 materials and raise any required changes. | In progress through this pull request. |
Record provenance
This self-contained Markdown record was prepared from the contemporaneous session record and the material presented during the project segment. It reproduces the date, attendance, agenda, substantive discussion, confirmations and actions needed to evidence the kick-off. No external email, private document, recording or presentation file is required to assess the acceptance criterion.