File: stage-2-12-business-requirements.md
Kestrel Medical: Business Requirements
Test case, Sample data. Kestrel Medical is a test case. Sharon was played by the case's stakeholder agent. Data named here is mapped to the Sample data in 03 - Working Files/data/, which must be checked against real data before go-live.
1. Document control
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Version | 1.3 |
| Date | 24-Oct-26 |
| Status | Approved by Adam, 24-Oct-26 (v1.1 approved at the Stage 2 gate, 23-Oct-26; v1.2 approved 23-Oct-26) |
| Author | Gary, KPI Creator Stage 1 |
| Stakeholder | Sharon, sales leader (exact title to confirm) |
| Sign-off | Sharon confirmed the playback on 23-Oct-26, with three corrections (all made). Adam (acting subject matter expert, test mode) approved v1.0 at the Stage 1 gate, 23-Oct-26, v1.1 at the Stage 2 gate, 23-Oct-26, v1.2 on 23-Oct-26, and v1.3 on 24-Oct-26. At the Stage 5 walk-through, 23-Oct-26, Sharon left the target for Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) open; v1.3 removes it from the first pass Signed off by Sharon (sales leader) with conditions, 24-Oct-26: no go-live until Deb and Tom check it on real data; margin labelled "not gross margin" until cost of sales is supplied; the win-rate target stays Deb's to set. Go-live: Sharon, when Deb and Tom finish the check |
2. Problem Statement
Kestrel has lost three of its last five big tenders, each over five million dollars, and believes price is the reason but can't yet prove or disprove it. With gross margin at about 41 per cent against global's 43 per cent target for 2027, and thirty monthly reports that give different answers, the business needs one set of evidence before it asks global for more discount room.
The problem as stated
Sharon, in her words: lost three of the last five big tenders, each over five million dollars, "never happened to me in 22 years". Reps say Kestrel is being undercut 10 to 15 per cent. She wants a win-loss view and pricing against the competition, so she can take evidence to global and argue for more discount room. And she wants out of Excel: thirty monthly reports, and half of them say different things.
The problem as Gary understands it
- The ask and the target pull against each other. The ask is evidence for more discount. Global's target is more margin (about 41 to 43 per cent in 2027) and 4 per cent revenue growth, after a flat year
- The loss reasons are belief, not yet evidence. They come from reps and one procurement person. Sharon's own account of the three losses: one "was price" (Southern Metropolitan Health Network), one was "about the stretcher as much as anything" (Highlands Ambulance, a 15-year customer), and one went to a distributor that bundles several brands (Western Plains Health District, won by Allied Clinical Supply)
- The evidence exists but hasn't been used. Deb Harlow, the bid manager, keeps the tender file and the debrief letters
- Nobody agrees on the base numbers. Thirty monthly reports from ERP extracts disagree, and Sharon spends three days a month reconciling them
Gary's note: the question I'd put to Sharon is "What decision changes if this number moves?" Here, the answer is the discount case to global. If the debriefs say Kestrel lost on product fit or bundling, more discount won't win the next tender and will cost the margin target. That's my reading, not Sharon's words, and Sharon has not confirmed it.
↑ Back to top3. Objectives
| ID | Objective | Sub-objective |
|---|---|---|
| O1 | Lift gross margin to 43 per cent in 2027 (about 41 per cent now) | Know where margin is leaking, especially on big deals (O1.1) |
| O2 | Grow revenue 4 per cent in 2027 (flat last year) | Know which reps and product groups are growing and which are going backwards (O2.1) |
| O3 | Stop losing the big tenders (over five million dollars) | Know which tenders we lose, who wins them, on what price, and the real reasons from the debriefs (O3.1) |
| O4 | One agreed set of numbers instead of thirty monthly reports that disagree, automated and consistent |
Each objective helps solve the Problem Statement: margin and growth are global's tests (O1, O2), the tender losses are the trigger (O3), and one agreed set of numbers makes the evidence credible (O4).
↑ Back to top4. Audience and decisions
| Who | Decisions | How often | Where |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sales leader (Sharon) | Pricing on big deals within her authority; where reps focus; headcount asks to global; how Kestrel responds to tenders | Monthly (her expectation, "don't hold me to it") | A pack for global (main use); on screen in meetings with the reps. Not phone |
| Global group | Whether to give more discount room; headcount | Unknown | Pack, format unknown |
| Reps | Where to focus | In meetings with the sales leader | Screen |
| Others | Unknown: Sharon to check with the team | Unknown | Unknown |
5. Business Requirements with Data Mapping
All measures, data mappings and filters below were drafted by Gary and confirmed or corrected by Kewpie at Stage 2 (Calculation Pack v1.0). Targets and thresholds marked "Gary's proposal" were not said by Sharon. Four KPIs are Phase 2 KPIs: see "Phase for each KPI" below. Phase 2 is a separate, new project after Stage 5 (see "Follow-on project: Phase 2"). This project ends at Stage 5 sign-off and handover.
Top 5
| Measure | Type | Objective | What do we want to know? | Why? | Action if outside threshold | Action owner | Target (SMART) | Thresholds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross margin per cent (K1) (Phase 2) | Lagging | O1 | What gross margin we earn on sales, against global's 43 per cent | Global's headline target; any discount case has to square with it | Sales leader tightens pricing on big deals within her authority; anything beyond goes to global with the discount evidence | Sales leader | 43% for the 2027 financial year (January to December). Global's target. Observed Fact | Gary's proposal: Green 43% or more year to date; Amber 42% to under 43%; Red under 42%. Applied from Phase 2 only |
| Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) | Leading | O1, O1.1 | How much discount we give off list on big deals, and where it's growing | Shows margin leaking before year end; the evidence for or against more discount room | No threshold in the first pass. If the trend keeps rising, the sales leader reviews big-deal pricing within her authority and pulls back discounts that aren't winning business | Sales leader | No target in the first pass. The tile shows the 17.03 per cent baseline (tender contract orders, January to September 2026, Observed Fact) and its trend, with no status colour and no pace needed. The target is set in Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5), once Tom Nguyen (finance) and Deb Harlow (bid manager) have checked the numbers. Sharon at the Stage 5 walk-through: "Leave open. I haven't set a discount target, and I don't want one until Tom and Deb have checked the numbers." Gary's proposed path back to about 14 per cent is in the open questions as a proposal for Sharon, not shown on the dashboard. Read with Big tender win rate (K4) as the counter-metric | None in the first pass. In Phase 2, set with the target |
| Revenue growth on the year (K3) | Lagging | O2 | Whether revenue grows 4 per cent in 2027 after a flat year | Global's growth target; drives rep focus and headcount asks | Sales leader moves rep focus to growing product groups and customers; makes a headcount ask to global if the gap is capacity | Sales leader | 4% growth in 2027. Global's target. Observed Fact. Measured against 2026 full-year actuals on ship date until finance confirms the base. Note: 2026 is tracking -6.8 per cent, so 4 per cent on 2026 still leaves 2027 about 3 per cent below 2025 | Gary's proposal: Green 4% or more; Amber 0% to under 4%; Red below 0% |
| Big tender win rate (K4) | Lagging | O3 | How many tenders over five million dollars we win | Three of the last five lost; decides how Kestrel responds to the next tenders | Bid manager reviews the debriefs and scoring of lost bids; sales leader decides how the response changes | Bid manager (response decided by the sales leader) | No target in the first pass. The tile shows the count (2 of the last 5, Observed Fact) with no status colour. The target is set in Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) by the bid manager, as a count out of the last 5 big tenders. Gary's starting proposal for Deb: at least 3 of the last 5 by Dec-27, which means winning the next 2 big tenders. Working Hypothesis | None in the first pass. In Phase 2, they follow the count Deb sets |
| Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) (Phase 2) | Leading | O4 | Whether the monthly reports agree with one agreed set of numbers | Three days a month reconciling; every other measure depends on agreed numbers | Finance report owner fixes or retires any report that doesn't match | Finance report owner | No target in the first pass. Open question, Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5): Sharon wants one agreed set of numbers with Tom checking the reports against it, and has not agreed a target. Set by the finance report owner with the sales leader, once the agreed definitions exist | None in the first pass. Set with the target in Phase 2 |
SME sign-off (all rows): Sharon (stakeholder) confirmed the playback with corrections, 23-Oct-26. Adam (acting subject matter expert, test mode) approved at the Stage 1 gate, 23-Oct-26, approved the v1.1 changes at the Stage 2 gate, 23-Oct-26, approved the v1.2 changes on 23-Oct-26, and approved the v1.3 change to Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) on 24-Oct-26.
Measures for the Top 5 (confirmed or corrected by Kewpie)
| Measure | How measured | Data source and fields | Filters and conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross margin per cent (K1) (Phase 2) | (Net sales minus cost of sales) divided by net sales. (SUM(net_value_aud) - SUM(cost_of_sales)) / SUM(net_value_aud) | SAP sales orders: sales_order_lines.net_value_aud, sales_order_lines.actual_ship_date. Cost of sales: no field in the Sample data. Phase 2: cost of sales per shipped order line from SAP product costing and billing documents, joined on order and line number, sourced by the data engineer with the finance report owner | Shipped lines only; financial year January to December; must reconcile to finance's 41 per cent before use. Phase 2 KPI: until the cost of sales feed reconciles, the tile is a placeholder showing 'Phase 2: waiting for data. Waiting for cost of sales from finance'. Finance's stated 41 per cent may appear only as a text note on the placeholder, 'Finance's stated figure, not calculated', Working Hypothesis, with no status colour, never in the headline slot and never on the stand-in |
| Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) | 1 minus net value over list value, value-weighted. 1 - SUM(net_value_aud) / SUM(list_price * qty) | SAP sales orders: sales_order_lines.list_price, .qty, .net_value_aud, .discount_pct (cross-check), .order_id, .contract_id, .material_group, .order_type | Big deal = order total at or above a size Sharon sets (open); placeholder: tender contract orders (order_type tender_contract). The earlier placeholder, orders linked to a contract, picked up service contracts and is replaced (Kewpie's correction C4). Exclude lines with no list price. Period by order date |
| Revenue growth on the year (K3) | Net sales year to date over the same period last year, minus 1. SUM(net_value_aud, YTD 2027) / SUM(net_value_aud, same period 2026) - 1 | SAP sales orders: sales_order_lines.net_value_aud, .actual_ship_date, .order_type | Year to date vs year to date; ship date until finance confirms its revenue rule; Kewpie to check order types for credits and returns |
| Big tender win rate (K4) | Tenders won out of the last 5 decided tenders with a contract value of $5m or more (rolling five-tender window), shown as a count (for example '2 of 5'), with the calendar-year count alongside | Bid manager's tender spreadsheet: tender_register.outcome, .estimated_value, .contract_length, .close_date, .tender_reference. Chosen over the CRM, which Sharon doesn't trust for win-loss | $5m or more (values stored as text like "$2.21m"; values marked "pa" are annual amounts, multiplied by the contract length in years, Kewpie's correction C7); dates as dd/mm/yyyy text; exclude undecided; show the count (for example 2 of 5) next to the rate, as numbers are small |
| Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) (Phase 2) | Phase 2 KPI. Reports that carry a sales number and whose net sales for the month check against the governed sales table (within a tolerance finance sets), divided by all reports that carry a sales number. Run automatically each month by the data engineer's check, reviewed by the finance report owner. Reports that carry no sales number are listed but not counted. First pass: placeholder tile, with the stand-in Reports on the draft agreed set | Phase 2: the monthly check results (report, month, report net sales, governed net sales, pass or fail), built by the data engineer from the 30 workbooks and the governed sales table. First pass stand-in only: monthly reports index: monthly_reports_index.workbook, .owner, .sales_definition, .customer_grouping, .last_refreshed | Agreed definition and match tolerance set by finance (open); reports marked "n/a" reviewed one by one to see whether they carry a sales number |
Sub-KPIs (Must Have, explain a Top 5 measure)
| Sub-KPI | Under | Objective | What it explains | How measured | Data | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gross margin by product group (K1.1) (Phase 2) | Gross margin per cent (K1) | O1.1 | Where the margin leaks | Gross margin split by product group | sales_order_lines.material_group, .net_value_aud, cost of sales (Phase 2: same feed as Gross margin per cent (K1)) | Sales leader |
| Revenue growth by product group (K3.1) | Revenue growth on the year (K3) | O2.1 | Which product groups grow or go backwards | Revenue growth by material_group | sales_order_lines.material_group, .net_value_aud | Sales leader |
| Revenue growth by rep (K3.2) | Revenue growth on the year (K3) | O2.1 | Which reps grow or go backwards | As Revenue growth on the year (K3). Rep credited from the order line (rep_id). How reps should be credited for account ownership is an open question for Sharon (Kewpie's correction C11) | sales_order_lines.rep_id, .net_value_aud | Sales leader |
| Our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1) (Phase 2) | Big tender win rate (K4) | O3.1 | "On what price" we lost: proves or disproves the price story | Phase 2 KPI. our_submitted_price / winning_price - 1, lost tenders, values as total contract value (annual amounts multiplied by the contract length). Gary's proposed thresholds, applied from Phase 2 only: Green within 2%; Amber 2% to 5% above; Red more than 5% above. Show the count of tenders with a known winning price beside the result. First pass: placeholder tile, with the stand-in Price score gap on lost tenders | tender_register.our_submitted_price, .winning_price, .outcome, .contract_length. Phase 2: winning price back-filled from the debrief letters and made a required number field | Bid manager |
| Why we lost, from the debriefs (K4.2) | Big tender win rate (K4) | O3.1 | Price, product fit, service or something else | For each lost tender, the scoring area with the biggest gap to the preferred supplier, compared in weighted points out of 100 across the three scoring layouts (Kewpie's correction C9); losses counted by area | tender_register.scoring_table, .debrief_notes, .debrief_received | Bid manager |
| Who is winning the tenders we lose (K4.3) | Big tender win rate (K4) | O3.1 | One competitor's product, or bundled distributor bids | Count and value of lost tenders by winning supplier | tender_register.winning_supplier, .estimated_value | Bid manager |
Phase for each KPI
This first pass builds every Top 5 KPI and sub-KPI that the data supports today. Four can't be built yet because the data doesn't exist or isn't complete. They stay Must Have, keep their name, target and owner, and show as placeholder tiles until Phase 2, a separate project after Stage 5, when Kewpie works with a data engineer to source the data. Every other KPI is marked 'First pass: built': Average discount off list price on big deals (K2), Revenue growth on the year (K3), Revenue growth by product group (K3.1), Revenue growth by rep (K3.2), Big tender win rate (K4), Why we lost, from the debriefs (K4.2) and Who is winning the tenders we lose (K4.3).
| KPI | Phase marking |
|---|---|
| Gross margin per cent (K1) | First pass: placeholder tile plus the stand-in Net price realisation. Phase 2: Kewpie with a data engineer sources cost of sales per shipped order line (standard or actual), with the same order and line numbers as the sales data. System: SAP (product costing and billing documents). Owner: finance report owner (Tom Nguyen), with the sales leader as the customer of the number. Data engineer: locates the cost source with finance; extracts cost per order line and joins on order and line number; handles returns, rebates, freight and warranty lines; loads it with the sales data; adds a daily refresh and a reconciliation check. Switch-on test: the calculated figure reconciles to finance's reported 41 per cent, within a tolerance finance sets |
| Gross margin by product group (K1.1) | First pass: placeholder tile plus the stand-in Net price realisation by product group. Phase 2: the same cost of sales feed as Gross margin per cent (K1), mapped to the product group codes (material_group). System: SAP. Owner: finance report owner (Tom Nguyen); sales leader uses it. Switch-on test: switches on with Gross margin per cent (K1), and the groups add up to the total |
| Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) | First pass: placeholder tile plus the stand-in Reports on the draft agreed set. Phase 2: Kewpie with a data engineer builds one governed sales table to finance's agreed sales date rule and customer grouping, then pulls each report's monthly net sales and checks it against that table. System: the 30 Excel workbooks on the shared drive, and the governed table in the new data store. Owner: finance report owner (Tom Nguyen) sets the agreed definitions and owns the report list. Data engineer: builds the governed table and customer parent mapping; runs the monthly number check with a tolerance; records each result so there is history and a run rate; replaces the self-reported index. Switch-on test: finance has agreed the definitions and the tolerance, and one full month's check has run |
| Our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1) | First pass: placeholder tile plus the stand-in Price score gap on lost tenders. Phase 2: Kewpie with a data engineer sources the winning price and our price for each lost tender, as numbers in total contract value (not annual amounts). System: the bid manager's tender register, or the CRM if tenders move there. Owner: bid manager (Deb Harlow). Data engineer: with the bid manager, back-fills the 20 missing winning prices from the debrief letters, big losses first (Western Plains first); makes winning price and our price required number fields with a total-contract-value rule; cleans customer name variants; adds a completeness check. Switch-on test: winning price recorded on all three big losses and on enough lost tenders for the count to be shown beside the result |
Stand-ins for the first pass (not KPIs)
A stand-in is a small, separate panel beside a placeholder tile. It carries its own plain name and the labels 'Stand-in, not the KPI' and 'Sample data' (until real data is loaded). It never takes the KPI's name, target, thresholds, pace needed, status colour or finance's stated 41 per cent. It has no target and no status colour of its own. It is removed, or moved to a context note, when its KPI switches on in Phase 2.
Adam chose, at the Stage 2 gate on 23-Oct-26, to show the Net price realisation stand-in beside the Gross margin per cent (K1) placeholder, with its labels, rather than the placeholder alone.
| Stand-in for | Stand-in |
|---|---|
| Gross margin per cent (K1) | Name: Net price realisation. What it shows: how much of list price Kestrel keeps after discounting, on shipped lines: net value over list value. Baseline 87.36 per cent, January to September 2026, against 87.67 per cent in the same months of 2025 (Sample data). Evidence label: Observed Fact for the calculation; Working Hypothesis that it moves with gross margin, because there's no cost data to test the link. On the panel: 'Price side only. This is not gross margin and can't be compared with the 43 per cent target.' Never shows the KPI's name, target or status colour |
| Gross margin by product group (K1.1) | Name: Net price realisation by product group, with each group's share of net sales. What it shows: which product groups carry the deepest discounts (equipment groups keep about 83 to 84 per cent of list; Sample data). Evidence label: Observed Fact for the calculation; Working Hypothesis that group margin follows group realisation. On the panel: 'Service and Parts show 100 per cent because they aren't discounted. That says nothing about their margin.' Groups not ranked as best or worst. Never shows the KPI's name, target or status colour |
| Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) | Name: Reports on the draft agreed set, with the number of different combinations in use. What it shows: how many reports say they use the draft rule (ship date, customers grouped by parent where known): 3 of 30, with 17 different combinations in use (index at 30-Sep-26, Sample data). Evidence label: Working Hypothesis (the agreed set is open and the index is self-reported). On the panel: 'Against a draft set. Shows what reports say they use, not whether their numbers agree.' Never shows the KPI's name, target or status colour |
| Our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1) | Name: Price score gap on lost tenders. What it shows: for each lost tender with a buyer's scoring table, the preferred supplier's price score minus ours, in weighted points out of 30 (positive means we were behind on price). Behind on price in 11 of 20 scored losses; big losses: Southern Metropolitan Health Network +0.60, Western Plains Health District +1.20, Highlands Ambulance -0.90 (Sample data). Evidence label: Strong Inference (scores parsed from debrief text; only 3 tenders to cross-check against real prices). On the panel: 'Price score, not price. The buyer's view of price, not our price against the winner's.' Never shows the KPI's name, target or status colour |
Placeholder tiles
A placeholder tile uses the KPI's exact name from these Business Requirements, its owner's role, and the text 'Phase 2: waiting for data', with one line on what's missing (for example 'Waiting for cost of sales from finance'). The headline slot shows no number, no status colour, no sparkline, no gap and no pace needed. The target may be shown as text ('Target: 43 per cent for 2027') so the reader knows what's coming. A placeholder tile sits in the same place the real tile will take, so the layout doesn't change at switch-on.
How validation treats Phase 2 KPIs
For Jennifer's validation checklist in this first pass:
- A Phase 2 KPI counts as 'on the dashboard, calculated as documented' when its placeholder tile and stand-in are shown exactly as these Business Requirements document them, and is recorded as 'Phase 2 placeholder, as documented', not a fail
- For Lift gross margin (O1), progress shows Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) with its actual and trend and 'Target set in Phase 2', with no status colour, gap or pace needed, and the margin target as text with 'Phase 2: waiting for data'. For One agreed set of numbers (O4), progress shows 'Phase 2: waiting for data'. Neither is a fail
- Each Phase 2 owner can see 'Phase 2: waiting for data' at a glance, which counts as their status
- A KPI whose target is open is built without a target in the first pass: Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) shows the 17.03 per cent baseline and its trend, and Big tender win rate (K4) shows the count (2 of the last 5), each with no status colour, gap or pace needed, and Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) is a placeholder. An open target is recorded as 'Phase 2, as documented', not a fail. For Stop losing the big tenders (O3), progress shows the count with 'Target set in Phase 2'
It is a fail if a placeholder shows a number, a status colour, a sparkline or a pace needed, if a KPI with an open target shows a status colour, or if a stand-in takes the KPI's name, target, status colour or the stated 41 per cent. Kewpie's Stage 2 check, 'documented calculation that runs on the data', is met for these four by a documented calculation plus a named Phase 2 data source. Gary's proposal, approved by Adam; the process file itself is unchanged, which is Adam's call.
Follow-on project: Phase 2
Adam's instruction, 23-Oct-26: "Continue through all stages, leave all open questions to Phase 2 which will take place after Stage 5 and a completely new project."
- This project runs Stages 3 to 5 on the first pass and ends at Stage 5 sign-off and handover. No stage waits on an open question
- Phase 2 is a separate, new project after Stage 5, planned and approved as its own project
- Phase 2 scope: (1) the four placeholder KPIs: Gross margin per cent (K1), Gross margin by product group (K1.1), Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) and Our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1), with the data, systems and owners in "Phase for each KPI"; (2) every open question in section 10, including the targets for Average discount off list price on big deals (K2), Big tender win rate (K4) and Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5); (3) a data engineer working with Kewpie to source the data
- Indicative effort: about 26 person-days over 3 two-week sprints (see the Project Plan). To be re-estimated when the project is planned
- Dependencies: a data engineer named and booked; the finance report owner names the cost of sales source and agrees the sales definition, customer grouping and tolerances; the bid manager back-fills winning prices and sets the win-rate target; the finance report owner and bid manager check the discount figures (17 per cent now, about 14 per cent in 2023) before the sales leader sets the discount target; Stage 5 sign-off of this project
6. Backlog (Nice to Have)
| Item | Reason parked |
|---|---|
| CRM opportunity win rate | Sharon doesn't trust the CRM for win-loss: only some reps use it properly |
| Reps' reported competitor price cuts (10 to 15 per cent) | Anecdote, not evidence. Replaced by our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1) |
| Service and field measures (work orders, contracts, parts) | The field service system was named, but no objective or action was raised for it. The debrief analysis shows service and support was the biggest scoring gap on all three big losses: ask Sharon whether to add a service measure under Big tender win rate (K4) in the next release |
7. Data inventory (as named in the interview)
| Source | Holds | Mapped Sample data | Grain | History | Refresh | Quality notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAP ERP | Sales orders, customers | sales_order_lines, sales_order_change_log, customers | Order line | Unknown | Unknown | Monthly reports come from ERP extracts. Cost of sales field not yet named. Phase 2: data engineer to source cost per order line from SAP product costing with the finance report owner |
| Tender spreadsheet (bid manager) | Bids, outcomes, debriefs | tender_register | Tender | Unknown | Manual | Debrief letters held by Deb Harlow. Values and dates stored as text. Winning price recorded on 5 of 25 lost tenders. Phase 2: back-fill from debrief letters and make it a required number field |
| CRM | Opportunities | crm_opportunities | Opportunity | Unknown | Unknown | Not trusted for win-loss. Not used in the Top 5 |
| Monthly Excel reports | Thirty reports | monthly_reports_index | Report | Monthly | Monthly | Half disagree. Owned by Tom Nguyen (finance). Cause unknown |
| Field service system | Technician work | work_orders, asset_register, site_customer_map, service_contracts | Work order, asset | Unknown | Unknown | No measure in this release |
Sharon said she isn't the one to ask about the data itself. Tom Nguyen (finance) and Deb Harlow (bid manager) hold the detail.
↑ Back to top8. Constraints and chart preferences
- Must speak to how Kestrel's market actually works, not global's standard view
- Reports automated and consistent
- A pack for global first, then a screen in meetings with the reps. Not designed for phone
- Privacy and customer confidentiality: unknown, Sharon to check
- Chart likes and dislikes: none given. Sharon will react to a draft
9. Assumptions
| Assumption | Evidence label |
|---|---|
| The financial year is January to December, set by global; 2027 is both calendar and financial year | Observed Fact |
| Kestrel won 2 of its last 5 big tenders | Observed Fact |
| Revenue counts on ship date in the draft measures, until finance confirms its rule | Working Hypothesis |
| The tender file and debrief letters are a better source of loss reasons than the CRM or rep reports | Strong Inference |
| The Sample data reflects the shape of the real systems | Working Hypothesis |
| The four stand-ins point the same way as the KPIs they sit beside, but can't be used to judge them against target | Working Hypothesis |
10. Open questions
Every open question goes to Phase 2, the separate project after Stage 5 (Adam, 23-Oct-26). No stage of this project waits on them. Where a question asks Sharon to confirm one of Gary's proposals, the proposal is used as is for the first pass, except the discount path, which Sharon left open at the Stage 5 walk-through and which is not shown on the dashboard.
| Question | For | When |
|---|---|---|
| What count out of the last 5 big tenders is a realistic target for Big tender win rate (K4)? Gary's starting proposal: at least 3 of the last 5 by Dec-27 | Bid manager (Deb Harlow) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Can you back-fill winning prices from the debrief letters, starting with Western Plains, and should they move into the CRM or stay in the tender file? | Bid manager (Deb Harlow) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Is the 4 per cent revenue growth for 2027 measured against 2026 actuals? | Sales leader, with finance | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5); also asked at the Stage 5 walk-through |
| Where does cost of sales come from for gross margin, how does finance get to 41 per cent, and what tolerance counts as reconciled? | Finance report owner (Tom Nguyen) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Why do the thirty monthly reports disagree (how sales is counted, how customers are grouped, or both), and which is right? What is the agreed sales definition and customer grouping, which reports carry a sales number, and what tolerance counts as a match? | Finance report owner (Tom Nguyen) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Who is the data engineer for Phase 2, and when can they start? | Adam | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Outside tenders, what order size counts as a big deal? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| What target, if any, should Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) have, once Tom and Deb have checked the numbers? Gary's proposal for Sharon (Working Hypothesis, not on the dashboard): a straight-line path from 17.0 per cent (Sep-26) back to about 14 per cent, the 2023 level, by Dec-27; Green at or below the path, Amber up to 1 point above, Red more than 1 point above. Sharon left it open at the Stage 5 walk-through, 23-Oct-26 | Sales leader (Sharon), after the finance report owner (Tom Nguyen) and bid manager (Deb Harlow) check the numbers | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| How should reps be credited for Revenue growth by rep (K3.2): the rep on the order line, or account ownership? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| The debriefs point to service and support. Do you want a service measure under Big tender win rate (K4) in the next release? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| When does evidence next go to global, and in what pack format? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| What privacy or customer confidentiality rules apply, for example showing competitor prices or customer names in a pack for global? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| Who else will open the dashboard, and how often? | Sales leader (Sharon) | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| What target should the monthly reports match against, and how will Tom check them in practice? Target for Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) | Finance report owner, with the sales leader | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
| How far back does each system go, and how often does each refresh? | Finance report owner and bid manager | Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5) |
11. Change log
| Version | Date | Change | Reason | Approved by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 23-Oct-26 | First version. Playback corrections made: (1) Before "discount and tender decisions are being made blind", After "believes price is the reason but can't yet prove or disprove it"; (2) Before "my proposed target is better than half in 2027", After "target left for the bid manager"; (3) Before "Target all of them", After "one agreed set of numbers, with Tom checking the reports against it; target open" | Stage 1 interview and playback | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.0 | 23-Oct-26 | Stage 1 approved. Gary's proposed thresholds, big-deal discount target, owners and due dates accepted. Targets for Big tender win rate (K4) and Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5) logged as open questions, needed before Kewpie finishes Stage 2 | Sharon asked that both targets be set later by the bid manager and the finance report owner | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.1 | 23-Oct-26 | Four KPIs marked Phase 2 with placeholder tiles and labelled stand-ins: Gross margin per cent (K1), Gross margin by product group (K1.1), Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5), Our price against the winning price on lost tenders (K4.1). Placeholder display rule and validation rule added. Net price realisation stand-in shown beside the margin placeholder with its labels (Adam's choice). Data source notes and open questions updated | Data for these four can't be sourced in the first pass (Kewpie's Stage 2 findings); Adam asked for placeholders, 23-Oct-26 | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.1 | 23-Oct-26 | Stage 2 challenge responses applied: Big tender win rate (K4) measured as a count out of the last 5 big tenders, with Gary's starting target proposal for Deb; Average discount off list price on big deals (K2) target and thresholds changed to a path back towards about 14 per cent (for Sharon to confirm); Revenue growth on the year (K3) target measured against 2026 full-year actuals; service measure question added to the backlog; Revenue growth by rep (K3.2) credited from the order line. Kewpie's corrections C4 (tender contract orders as the big-deal placeholder), C7 (annual tender values multiplied by contract length), C9 (weighted points out of 100) and C11 (rep on the order line) accepted. The deadline for the Big tender win rate (K4) target moves from "before Kewpie finishes Stage 2" to "before Stage 4 is approved", as recommended at the Stage 2 gate | Kewpie's challenge notes in Calculation Pack v1.0 and Gary's response | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.1 | 23-Oct-26 | Stage 2 approved | Stage 2 gate | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.2 | 23-Oct-26 | All open questions marked "Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5)" and stage deadlines removed. Big tender win rate (K4): Before "To be set by the bid manager as a count out of the last 5 big tenders ... Open question, needed before Stage 4 is approved.", After "No target in the first pass. The tile shows the count (2 of the last 5) with no status colour. The target is set in Phase 2". Monthly reports that match the agreed set of numbers (K5): Before "Open question, needed before the Phase 2 switch-on", After "No target in the first pass. Open question, Phase 2 (separate project after Stage 5)". Validation: an open Phase 2 target is "Phase 2, as documented", not a fail. Gary's proposals awaiting Sharon (for example the Average discount path to 14 per cent) used as is; her confirmation asked at the Stage 5 walk-through. Phase 2 taken out of this project and recorded as a follow-on project with scope, indicative effort and dependencies | Adam's words: "Continue through all stages, leave all open questions to Phase 2 which will take place after Stage 5 and a completely new project." | Adam, 23-Oct-26 |
| 1.3 | 24-Oct-26 | Average discount off list price on big deals (K2), after the Stage 5 walk-through. Target: Before "Back down from 17.0 per cent towards the 2023 level of about 14 per cent on tender contract orders by Dec-27. Gary's proposal, used as is for the first pass; Sharon's confirmation asked at the Stage 5 walk-through", After "No target in the first pass. The tile shows the 17.03 per cent baseline and its trend, with no status colour and no pace needed. Target set in Phase 2 once Tom and Deb have checked the numbers". Thresholds: Before "Green at or below a straight-line path from 17.0 per cent (Sep-26) to 14 per cent (Dec-27); Amber up to 1 point above the path; Red more than 1 point above. Gary's proposal", After "None in the first pass. In Phase 2, set with the target". Gary's 14 per cent path moved to the open questions as a proposal for Sharon. Action wording, Lift gross margin (O1) progress and validation rule examples, Phase 2 scope and dependencies, and the sign-off note updated to match | Sharon at the Stage 5 walk-through: "Leave open. I haven't set a discount target, and I don't want one until Tom and Deb have checked the numbers." Adam: "Yes, re-run Gary, Viktor and Jennifer so Average discount on big deals shows no target or status colour, as Sharon asked." | Adam, 24-Oct-26 |
| 1.3 | 24-Oct-26 | Stakeholder sign-off recorded: Sharon signed off with conditions ("Yes, with conditions. It doesn't go live until Deb and Tom have checked it on real data. The margin stays labelled "not gross margin" until Tom gives you cost of sales. And the win-rate target stays as Deb's to set."). Go-live owner Sharon, "when Deb and Tom finish the check". Raj Pillai (National Service Manager) to join Phase 2 for the service side | Stage 5 second walk-through | Sharon (stakeholder), 24-Oct-26 |