Raukawa
Consistent, values-based review of documents - using the simplest Mindstake configuration.
The challenge
Raukawa reviews a high volume of documents against its own environmental, cultural, and community values. The documents come from different sources and vary in format, length, and level of detail. Assessing them consistently - across multiple reviewers, under time pressure - requires a shared framework that the documents themselves do not provide.
Raukawa wanted a structured approach that would give reviewers a common reference point, make reasoning easy to document, and build a clear record of assessments over time.
The configuration
Raukawa's Mindstake configuration is deliberately simple - demonstrating that the platform does not require AI or complex data pipelines to deliver value.
Criteria are defined by the iwi to reflect their environmental, cultural, and community values. Each criterion captures what matters to the organisation when assessing a document.
The rubric provides clear descriptions of strong, moderate, and weak performance for each criterion, so different reviewers score documents in the same way using the same language.
Scoring is manual - reviewers read each document and score it directly against the rubric. No AI middleware is used. This is the simplest Mindstake configuration: criteria, rubric, human scoring, structured output.
The outcome
Each review produces a clear, documented position on the document - a scorecard that can be shared, checked, and archived. The shared rubric keeps assessment consistent across reviewers.
Over time, the rubric has improved as the team has learned what works and what needs refinement. The structured record also supports the organisation when revisiting past assessments or explaining its position to external parties.
The structure means we can explain why we reached our position - not just that we did.
- Raukawa
The broader lesson
Raukawa demonstrates that structured decision-making does not require sophisticated technology. The simplest configuration - criteria, rubric, human scoring - is enough to bring consistency and defensibility to a high-volume review process.
If your team can use a survey tool, you can use Mindstake. The value comes from the structure, not the technology.
Same engine, different decisions
Every Mindstake configuration starts with the same question: what does your organisation value, and how well are your options delivering?
Raukawa
Consistent, values-based review of documents - using the simplest Mindstake configuration.
Ngāi Tahu
Seeing whether each investment is delivering what it set out to achieve, beyond the financial.
Tapuwae Roa
Measuring alignment between organisational values and outcomes across five pou, using multi-modal data processing.
Getting started
Most teams are up and running within a few weeks. We work alongside you to set up your first decision process - criteria, rubrics, and scoring - then hand it over so you can run it yourself.
An initial conversation to understand your decision context
We help you define criteria and build your rubric
Your team runs the process on your own Mindstake instance