File: 2026.10.26 - Lumenwire Audio - 01 Meeting Script.md
Gary and Marcus
Lumenwire Audio requirements meeting · 26-Oct-26
Gary's meeting summary
Main points and action items
Main points
- The real problem: revenue fell from A$118.4m (FY25) to A$80.6m (FY26), and the board was surprised because nobody puts the Finance, Sales and Engineering numbers together. Nobody can show whether the business is still "growing underneath the fall"
- Marcus's story: hardware fell in an industry soft patch; software grew 38% to A$25.7m; gross margin 71% to 77%; record 1,180 design wins; Q1 FY27 about A$19m. Stated, not yet calculated
- Three objectives: revenue back to A$115m within two years; keep software growing with gross margin holding up; keep design wins turning into shipping products
- One firm target: A$115m within two years (the board's). Marcus doesn't know how it was set or the exact date. No other targets he can vouch for
- Audience: the chair and the board, monthly, one page, in the board pack and on screen; the CEO, CFO, VP Sales and Head of Platform Engineering on the same numbers
- Data: P&L trusted; forecasts not trusted; CRM trusted less (reps work to a bonus); telemetry trusted most but never used as an end-customer view; OEM stock reports patchy. History and refresh unknown
- Top 5 proposed: Total revenue, last 12 months, against the path to A$115m; New devices activated in the field; Software revenue growth; Design wins that ship; Forecast accuracy
- Confirmed by Marcus: the corrected Problem Statement, the objectives, audience and decisions, and the revenue, software and design-win KPIs. Conditional: the telemetry KPI (Head of Platform Engineering first) and forecast KPI (CFO first) stay off page one until then. Gary's proposals: every target and threshold except A$115m, and the owners and actions not stated by Marcus
Action items
| # | Action | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Write the Business Requirements v1.0, draft measures and the Project Plan | Business requirements lead (Gary) | 26-Oct-26 |
| 2 | Review and approve Gary's proposed targets, thresholds, owners and actions | Adam (acting subject matter expert) | Stage 1 gate, 27-Oct-26 |
| 3 | Say what the telemetry can and can't show, so New devices activated can go on page one | Head of Platform Engineering | 6-Nov-26 |
| 4 | Give a view on Forecast accuracy, and walk through the FY27 targets and where each came from | CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| 5 | Confirm how the A$115m was set and its date | Chair, via the CEO | 6-Nov-26 |
| 6 | Set a software revenue target | VP Sales with the CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| 7 | Confirm and test every draft measure on the data; set baselines and pace needed | KPI analyst (Kewpie) | After the Stage 1 gate |
Due dates from 6-Nov-26 onwards are Gary's proposal.
Open questions
- How was the A$115m set, and does "within two years" mean the year ending 30 June 2028?
- What are the FY27 targets for revenue, gross margin, earnings, software and design wins, and where did each come from?
- What software revenue target should we use?
- What can the telemetry show and not show about what end customers install?
- Which forecast should be measured for accuracy, and does the CFO support it?
- How far back does each system go, and how often does it refresh?
- Can OEMs be named on the board page, and can customers?
- Will the chair use a phone?
- What tools and chart preferences should we follow?
- What happens if nothing changes in the next six months?
- How long after a design win should a product be expected to ship?
About this meeting
Test case. Lumenwire Audio is a made-up company. Marcus was played by the case's stakeholder agent, answering from its Stakeholder Brief only. Gary never saw the brief. Every question and answer below is word for word from the message thread. Each of Gary's messages opened with a label ("Question 1 from Gary.", "Playback from Gary.", "Close from Gary."), left out here.
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Date | 26-Oct-26 |
| Length | 9 message exchanges (7 questions, playback, close) |
| Interviewer | Gary, KPI Creator Stage 1 (business requirements lead) |
| Stakeholder | Marcus, co-founder and CEO, Lumenwire Audio (stakeholder agent, test mode) |
| Observer | Adam (acting subject matter expert for sign-off) |
| Questions used | 7 of 7. Probes merged into the questions; no separate probes |
| Source record | Message thread between Gary and the stakeholder agent, 26-Oct-26 |
G'day Marcus, I'm Gary. I'll keep this to a handful of questions. First one: what's the business problem, and why does it matter now? And if nothing changes in the next 6 months, what happens?
G'day Gary. The problem is simple to state. Revenue went from A$118.4m in FY25 to A$80.6m in FY26, down about a third. The board says they were blindsided, and Ros wants to see the business properly, not just a quarterly P&L. It matters now because the board wants us back to A$115m within two years, and they need a view they can trust each month.
Honestly, I don't think the business is as weak as the top line says. Hardware fell because of the industry soft patch: tariffs, interest rates, venue projects getting delayed, OEMs being cautious. Software grew 38% to A$25.7m, gross margin went from 71% to 77%, and we booked a record 1,180 design wins. Q1 FY27 came in at about A$19m, so we've stopped falling. That's the story I want the board to see.
If nothing changes for six months? I'd be guessing, and I don't want to guess in front of the board. You'd have to ask Priya Anand, our CFO, for the forecast view. I can tell you what I'd fear: that we keep being surprised by a number we should have seen coming.
"Blindsided" and "the story I want the board to see" are the two phrases to hold. My job is to test the story, not decorate it. Six-month view goes to the CFO.
Thanks Marcus. You used the word "blindsided", and you said your fear is being surprised by a number you should have seen coming. I'll hold onto that. So: what are the 2 or 3 outcomes the business is trying to achieve over the next two years? For each, how would you know it's happening, and do you have a number in mind?
Right, three things, as I see them.
One: get back to A$115m of revenue within two years. That's the board's number. Ros's number, I think. I don't know how it was set, you'd have to ask the board or Priya. How would we know? Monthly revenue, split hardware and software, tracking towards that figure. I'd like a number for the year-end, but I'd rather the board saw the trend than a single point.
Two: keep software growing. It's the future, and it's the story I want the board to see. How would we know? Software revenue growth each year, and gross margin holding up. I don't have a target for software in dollars. Sales and Finance should give you that.
Three: keep design wins turning into shipping products. Design wins are our leading indicator. An OEM commits to building with us, and those turn into revenue. I believe most of them do, eighty percent or so, but I've never measured it. How would we know? Design wins per quarter, and how many of them go on to ship. I don't have that conversion number. You'd have to ask Tomasz on the engineering side, or Gemma in Sales.
Honestly, I'd like the board to see all three on one page. That's the bit I can't prove yet.
"I believe... but I've never measured it" is the most important sentence so far. The record design wins only matter if they ship. Conversion goes above the count.
Clear, thanks. Who will use this, and what decisions will they make with it? Board, Ros, you, Priya, Sales? And how often, and where: on a screen, a phone, or in a board pack?
The main user is Ros and the board. She wants to look at it monthly, one page. I'd want it in the board pack, and I'd want Ros able to pull it up on a screen between meetings. I haven't thought about phones, you'd have to ask her.
I'd use it too, obviously. I'd want my exec team looking at it as well, Priya on the finance side, and Gemma in Sales. I'd expect Sales to look at it, but I'd want them using the same numbers as Finance, which is really the point. They shouldn't be arguing about forecasts any more.
The decisions it should support are three. Whether we're still growing underneath the revenue fall. Where to put sales and engineering effort. And whether to keep pushing software. That last one I'd want the board to think about hard, and I'd want the numbers to show why.
"Growing underneath the revenue fall" is the real question. That's the decision that changes if a number moves.
You said "growing underneath the revenue fall". That's the phrase I'll test hardest, because it's where the board will push. For each of your three outcomes (revenue back to A$115m, software growing, design wins turning into shipping products): what do you want to know, and what would you actually do if it went off track? And who would act on it, by role?
Fair challenge. Let me take them one at a time.
Revenue back to A$115m. What I want to know is whether the fall is still macro, or whether something in our own pipeline is behind it. If the hardware line stays flat while the industry recovers, I'd be worried, and I'd want to know why. If it went off track, I'd ask Priya to take the forecast apart, OEM by OEM, so we stop arguing about whose number is right. I would act on the sales plan and the allocation of effort, but the board sets the target, so they'd need to hear it from me early.
Software growing. I want to know whether the growth is real and repeatable, and how much of it comes from one big licence. I don't want to say more than that until the numbers are in front of me, but if software slowed, I'd want to know whether it was the product or the sales effort. Product decisions sit with me and Tomasz. Sales effort sits with Gemma.
Design wins turning into shipping products. I want to know how many of our design wins actually ship, and how long it takes. If that conversion number is weak, I'd want Gemma's team to stop chasing design wins for their bonus and start chasing the ones that will ship. Gemma would act on the sales side, and Tomasz on whether our engineering support is holding OEMs back.
So, by role: me for the overall call, Priya for the numbers, Gemma for the sales behaviour, Tomasz for product and engineering. I'd want the board told which of those we're acting on each month.
Actions and owners for all three. "Stop chasing design wins for their bonus" tells me the count can be gamed. "Take the forecast apart, OEM by OEM" is a forecast-accuracy action.
That's the most useful answer so far, thanks. Now targets and dates. You've given me A$115m within two years. What other targets and dates are you working to, for FY27 or beyond: revenue for this year, gross margin, earnings, software, design wins? And where does each one come from: board, plan, history? While I'm at it, for the record, what are your title and Ros's, and the titles for Priya, Gemma and Tomasz?
On targets, I'm only sure of the one I've given you. The board wants us back to A$115m within two years. I don't know how that was set. I'd guess it's Ros's number, but you'd have to check with the board.
Beyond that, I don't have dates or figures to hand for FY27 revenue, gross margin, earnings, software or design wins. The FY27 budget will be with Priya, and I'd want her to walk you through where each one came from, whether that's the board, the plan or last year's run rate. Don't take my word for those numbers.
For the record, I'm co-founder and CEO of Lumenwire Audio. Ros is our chair. Priya Anand is our CFO. Gemma Lowe is our VP Sales. Tomasz Wierzbicki is our Head of Platform Engineering.
One firm target. Everything else is my proposal or the CFO's to give. I won't guess.
Understood, I won't take your word for them; I'll log them for Priya. Now data. What data exists today, and what do you trust or not trust about it? Think finance ledger and invoices, sales orders, the CRM where design wins are logged, device or telemetry data, software licences, OEM stock reports, forecasts. How far back does it go, and how often does it refresh?
I'll be honest, I only know our data at a high level. The detail is with the people who run each system.
Finance has the P&L and the board pack, from the ERP. Priya would know how far back it goes and how often it closes. I trust the P&L for what it shows, but I don't trust the forecasts that come out of finance. They're built off last year's run rate.
Sales has the CRM. Design wins are logged there. I'd trust it less than the P&L, because reps are working to a bonus. Gemma can tell you more.
Engineering has telemetry in Grafana. Every device with our firmware phones home when it first joins a network. Engineering uses it to track firmware bugs, and I trust it more than anything else we have. It covers basically everything out there. Tomasz would be the one to ask about history and refresh.
OEM stock reports come from Sales. They're a bit patchy. I've never really looked at them.
Software licences sit with Finance, I'd say. Priya would have those.
On how far back it goes and how often it refreshes, I don't know. You'd have to ask Priya, Gemma or Tomasz.
The telemetry is the find of the day. Devices joining a network are end-customer installs, not OEM orders. Put that next to the OEM stock reports and you can tell destocking from lost demand. That's "growing underneath" made measurable.
That telemetry point is a big one: if every device phones home when it joins a network, that tells us what end customers are actually installing, not just what OEMs are buying from us. I'll come back to it in the playback. Last question: anything I must or mustn't do? Privacy (for example naming OEMs or customers on a board page), tools, chart likes and dislikes, and anything you've seen in past dashboards or board packs that didn't work?
On telemetry, I like where you're going. Engineering's data has always been undervalued, and I'd be happy to see it used for something beyond firmware bugs. I haven't thought of it as an end-customer view, so I'd want Tomasz to tell you what it can and can't show before we put it on a board page.
On rules, I don't have a privacy policy in front of me. Naming OEMs on a board page is a call for Priya and our legal people, not me. I'd want the board to see OEMs by name, but I'd be careful about naming customers. You'd have to check with them.
On tools and chart preferences, I'm not the person to ask about tooling. I dislike "accountant metrics", so keep the page to things people in the business can act on. Beyond that, I'd have to ask Gemma or Priya.
On past dashboards that didn't work, I don't have one to point to. The problem I know is that nobody puts the reports together. Finance, Sales and Engineering each have their own view, and that's what I want fixed.
"Nobody puts the reports together" belongs in the Problem Statement. EBITDA fails the Must Have test: no action, and he dislikes accountant metrics.
That's my seven questions. Here's what I've heard. Please tell me "Is this right?" and correct anything that isn't.
In one line: "Revenue fell by about a third in a year, from A$118.4m to A$80.6m, and the board was caught by surprise because Finance, Sales and Engineering each keep their own view. Nobody can yet show, from one set of numbers everyone trusts, whether the business is still growing underneath the fall or whether more bad news is coming."
In more detail: you want to (1) get revenue back to A$115m within two years, which I've read as the year ending June 2028 (to confirm with the board); (2) keep software growing, with gross margin holding up; and (3) keep design wins turning into shipping products. Ros and the board will use this monthly, one page, in the board pack and on screen between meetings; you, Priya, Gemma and Tomasz use the same numbers. The decisions: are we still growing underneath the revenue fall, where to put sales and engineering effort, and whether to keep pushing software. My proposal, not your words: I've added "see revenue coming before it lands" under the first outcome, because of your word "blindsided".
The five KPIs I'd put on the page (owners are roles; targets other than A$115m are my proposals, to be agreed with Priya):
- Total revenue, last 12 months, against the path to A$115m. Lagging. If below the path, the CFO takes the forecast apart OEM by OEM and you brief the board early. Owner: CEO.
- New devices activated in the field, last 12 months versus the year before (from engineering telemetry). Leading. It shows what end customers are installing, so it tests "growing underneath". If it falls, the VP Sales moves effort to where installs are growing. Owner: VP Sales. Only goes on the board page once Tomasz confirms what it can and can't show.
- Software revenue growth, last 12 months versus the year before. Lagging. If it slows, you and Tomasz check the product and Gemma checks the sales effort. Owner: CEO. Underneath it: share of software revenue from the largest licences (your "one big licence" worry) and gross margin %.
- Design wins that go on to ship, as a % of design wins old enough to have shipped. Leading. If weak, the VP Sales refocuses the team on wins that will ship. Owner: VP Sales. Underneath it: months from design win to first shipment, and design wins per quarter (kept underneath, not on top, because it's bonus-linked).
- Forecast accuracy: actual quarterly revenue against the forecast made at the start of the quarter. Leading. If it misses by more than the agreed band, the CFO rebuilds the forecast OEM by OEM, one number for Finance and Sales. Owner: CFO.
Parked as Nice to Haves: earnings (EBITDA) on page one, as it's the "accountant metric" with no action you named; and raw design-win counts as a headline.
Still open, for Priya, Gemma, Tomasz and the board: how the A$115m was set and its exact date; FY27 targets for revenue, margin, earnings, software and design wins; data history and refresh for each system; what telemetry can and can't show; whether OEMs can be named on the board page; tools and chart preferences; phone use for Ros; and what happens if nothing changes in six months.
Is this right?
Mostly right, with some corrections.
The one-liner. Close, but I'd put the surprise down to nobody putting Finance, Sales and Engineering together, rather than each keeping its own view. The rest is fine.
Outcome one. Drop "see revenue coming before it lands". That isn't my phrase. I said I want to know whether we're still growing underneath the fall. On the date, I've said two years. I don't know if that means June 2028, so please confirm it with the board.
Outcomes two and three are right.
Decisions and users are right. I'd want Ros on a screen, not only in the board pack, but I haven't thought about phones.
The five KPIs. I'd agree with the revenue one, the software one and the design wins one. On the forecast one, I'd want Priya's view first, because I don't trust the forecasts as they stand. On the telemetry one, I'm keen, but only once Tomasz has said what it can and can't show. I wouldn't want it on page one until then.
On earnings, I'm not sure it's a nice to have. But I dislike accountant metrics, and you've given me no action for it, so I'm fine parking it for now.
Your open list is right. I'd add that I don't know the FY27 targets, and I don't know how the A$115m was set.
Fair correction on my added sub-objective: I put words in his mouth. His own phrase goes in instead. Two KPIs are conditional, not rejected.
Thanks Marcus, all taken. Here are the changes, so you can give me a final yes or no.
- One-liner, Before: "...the board was caught by surprise because Finance, Sales and Engineering each keep their own view." After: "Revenue fell by about a third in a year, from A$118.4m to A$80.6m, and the board was caught by surprise because nobody puts the Finance, Sales and Engineering numbers together. Nobody can yet show, from one set of numbers everyone trusts, whether the business is still growing underneath the fall."
- Outcome one: "see revenue coming before it lands" is gone. In its place, in your words: "know whether we're still growing underneath the fall". The A$115m date stays "within two years", to be confirmed with the board.
- Revenue, software growth and design wins that ship: agreed by you.
- New devices activated (telemetry) and forecast accuracy stay in the five, but marked "pending sign-off" and kept off page one until Tomasz (telemetry) and Priya (forecast) have given their view.
- Earnings parked for now, as you said.
- Open list: added that you don't know the FY27 targets or how the A$115m was set.
Is this right now?
Yes, that's right now. Items one to six all match what I meant. Go ahead.
Checklist at close
| Area | Status | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Who | ✅ | Chair and board monthly, one page, board pack and screen; exec team on the same numbers. ⚠️ Phone use |
| What | ✅ | Problem as an outcome; three objectives; one sub-objective in Marcus's words |
| Where | ⚠️ | Sources and trust known. History, refresh and telemetry limits open |
| When | ⚠️ | A$115m within two years. Exact date, FY27 targets and review rhythm beyond monthly open |
| Why | ✅ | Why now, why each KPI, action and owner for each outcome |
Change log
| Version | Date | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 26-Oct-26 | Written after the playback and close, from the message thread |
File: 2026.10.26 - Lumenwire Audio - 01 Business Requirements.md
Lumenwire Audio: Business Requirements
Test case. Lumenwire Audio is a made-up company. Marcus was played by the case's stakeholder agent. Data is Sample data.
1. Document control
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Version | 1.0 |
| Date | 26-Oct-26 |
| Status | Draft for the Stage 1 gate |
| Author | Gary, business requirements lead (KPI Creator, Stage 1) |
| Stakeholder | Marcus, co-founder and CEO, Lumenwire Audio |
| Sign-off | Marcus confirmed the playback with corrections, 26-Oct-26. Pending: Adam (acting subject matter expert, test mode) at the Stage 1 gate; the Head of Platform Engineering for the telemetry KPI; the CFO for the forecast KPI |
| Source record | 2026.10.26 - Lumenwire Audio - 01 Meeting Script.md |
2. Problem Statement
Revenue fell by about a third in a year, from A$118.4m to A$80.6m, and the board was caught by surprise because nobody puts the Finance, Sales and Engineering numbers together. Nobody can yet show, from one set of numbers everyone trusts, whether the business is still growing underneath the fall.
As stated by Marcus: Revenue went from A$118.4m in FY25 to A$80.6m in FY26, down about a third. The board says they were blindsided, and Ros (chair) wants to see the business properly, not just a quarterly P&L. The board wants revenue back to A$115m within two years and a view it can trust each month. Marcus believes hardware fell because of an industry soft patch (tariffs, interest rates, delayed venue projects, cautious OEMs), while software grew 38% to A$25.7m, gross margin rose from 71% to 77%, and there was a record 1,180 design wins. Q1 FY27 came in at about A$19m.
As Gary understands it: The fall itself is known. What's missing is one joined-up view that tells the board whether the business underneath is healthy or whether more falls are coming. Marcus has a story he wants the board to see, but by his own account: design-win conversion has never been measured, the CRM is bonus-driven, the forecasts aren't trusted, and the telemetry has never been used as an end-customer view. The dashboard has to test that story, not just tell it. The word to come back to is Marcus's own: "growing underneath the fall".
↑ Back to top3. Objectives
| ID | Objective | How it helps solve the Problem Statement |
|---|---|---|
| O1 | Get revenue back to A$115m within two years (date to confirm with the board) | The board's headline measure of recovery |
| O1.1 | Know whether we're still growing underneath the fall (Marcus's words) | The question nobody can answer today |
| O2 | Keep software growing, with gross margin holding up | Shows whether the part Marcus calls "the future" is real |
| O3 | Keep design wins turning into shipping products | Tests the leading indicator Marcus relies on but has never measured |
4. Audience and decisions
| Audience | Decisions | How often | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chair (Ros) and the board | Are we still growing underneath the revenue fall? Do we keep pushing software? | Monthly | One page in the board pack, and on screen between meetings. Phone: unknown |
| CEO (Marcus) and exec team: CFO (Priya Anand), VP Sales (Gemma Lowe), Head of Platform Engineering (Tomasz Wierzbicki) | Where to put sales and engineering effort; whether to keep pushing software; which actions the board hears about each month | Monthly (to confirm) | Screen (to confirm) |
| Sales team | Where to focus, using the same numbers as Finance | Unknown | Unknown |
5. Business Requirements with Data Mapping
Owners are roles. Targets and thresholds are Gary's proposals unless marked "Marcus". Every measure is marked Draft: Kewpie to confirm.
5.1 Top 5 KPIs (what and why)
| KPI | Objective | Type | What do we want to know? | Why? | Action if outside threshold | Action owner | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total revenue, last 12 months, against the path to A$115m (K1) | Revenue back to A$115m (O1) | Lagging | Is revenue tracking towards A$115m, split hardware and software, as a trend | The board's headline target; the board hears from the CEO first | CFO takes the forecast apart OEM by OEM; CEO changes the sales plan and effort and briefs the board early (Marcus) | CEO | Must Have |
| New devices activated in the field, last 12 months against the year before (K2) | Growing underneath the fall (O1.1) | Leading | Are end customers still installing our devices, whatever OEMs are buying now | If installs hold while hardware revenue falls, OEMs are running down stock; if installs fall too, it's demand | VP Sales moves effort to regions and OEMs where installs grow; CEO tells the board whether it's demand or stock (Gary's proposal) | VP Sales | Must Have, pending Head of Platform Engineering; off page one until then |
| Software revenue growth, last 12 months against the year before (K3) | Software growing (O2) | Lagging | Is software growth real and repeatable | Decides whether to keep pushing software | CEO and Head of Platform Engineering check the product; VP Sales checks the sales effort (Marcus) | CEO | Must Have |
| Design wins that ship, as a % of design wins old enough to have shipped (K4) | Design wins to shipping (O3) | Leading | How many design wins actually ship | Never measured; record design wins only matter if they ship | VP Sales refocuses on wins that will ship, not ones that earn a bonus; Head of Platform Engineering checks engineering support (Marcus) | VP Sales | Must Have |
| Forecast accuracy: actual quarterly revenue against the forecast at the start of the quarter (K5) | Revenue back to A$115m (O1) | Leading | Can we trust the forecast, so the board isn't blindsided again | Forecasts aren't trusted; Sales and Finance argue | CFO rebuilds the forecast OEM by OEM, one number for Finance and Sales (Marcus) | CFO | Must Have, pending CFO; off page one until then |
5.2 Targets, thresholds and sign-off
| KPI | Target (SMART) | Evidence | Green | Amber | Red | SME sign-off |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total revenue, last 12 months (K1) | A$115m by 30 Jun 2028 (the board's "within two years"; date to confirm, Q-1) | Observed Fact (value, Marcus); Strong Inference (date) | On or above straight-line path from A$80.6m (FY26) to A$115m | Up to 5% below path | More than 5% below | CEO, 26-Oct-26 |
| New devices activated (K2) | At least 5% growth year on year by 30 Jun 2027 | Working Hypothesis | 5% or more | 0% to under 5% | Falling | Pending Head of Platform Engineering |
| Software revenue growth (K3) | To be agreed by VP Sales and CFO (Q-3). Starting proposal: at least 20% a year by 30 Jun 2027 (FY26 was 38%, Marcus) | Working Hypothesis | 20% or more | 0% to under 20% | Falling | CEO, 26-Oct-26 |
| Design wins that ship (K4) | 80% by 30 Jun 2027 (Marcus's belief, never measured; reset after Kewpie's baseline) | Working Hypothesis | 80% or more | 60% to under 80% | Under 60% | CEO, 26-Oct-26 |
| Forecast accuracy (K5) | Within 5% of actual each quarter by Q4 FY27 (30 Jun 2027) | Working Hypothesis | Within 5% | 5% to 10% out | More than 10% out | Pending CFO |
5.3 How measured (Draft: Kewpie to confirm)
| KPI | How measured | Data source and fields | Filters and conditions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total revenue, last 12 months (K1) | Sum of revenue over the last 12 months, each month, against a straight line from A$80.6m (Jun-26) to A$115m (Jun-28). R12M = -1 × SUM(gl_monthly.amount_aud) for revenue accounts; path(m) = 80.6m + 34.4m × months since Jun-26 / 24 | gl_monthly.amount_aud, period, account_code and gl_accounts.pl_group: the P&L Marcus trusts, same as the board pack. erp_invoice_lines.product_family as a cross-check | Revenue accounts 4000, 4050, 4100, 4110, 4200, 4210; flip the sign (credits). Rebates (4050) reduce revenue. Hardware = 4000, 4050, 4200; software = 4100, 4110. Reconcile to the stated A$118.4m and A$80.6m. Latest complete month |
| New devices activated (K2) | Devices joining a network for the first time in the last 12 months, against the 12 months before. COUNT(DISTINCT device_serial) by first_seen_ts | device_activations.device_serial, first_seen_ts; oem_id, country_from_ip, module_sku for splits. Engineering telemetry, the source Marcus trusts most | One row per device. Sample data is 1 in 10 devices: counts × 10 (growth % unaffected). Exclude test or beta-firmware devices if the Head of Platform Engineering says so (Q-4). Sample data from Jan-21 |
| Software revenue growth (K3) | Software revenue last 12 months ÷ the 12 months before, minus 1 | gl_monthly accounts 4100 (perpetual licences) and 4110 (subscriptions); software_licences.contract_value_aud as a cross-check | Sign flipped; latest complete month; July to June year |
| Design wins that ship (K4) | Of opportunities that reached design win at least 18 months ago, the share that have reached shipping | crm_opportunities.stage_entered_design_win, stage_entered_shipping, stage, stage_entered_lost; owner, region, oem_id for splits. erp_invoice_lines.oem_id, sku to confirm shipping, since the CRM is bonus-driven | 18-month window (Gary's proposal, Q-11). Exclude rows with no design-win date and report how many. Lost after design win counts as not shipped |
| Forecast accuracy (K5) | Each quarter: ABS(actual - forecast) / actual, for each forecast source | forecast_snapshots.forecast_amount, amount_unit, source, forecast_quarter, snapshot_date, product_family; actuals from gl_monthly revenue accounts | Convert AUD thousands to AUD. Use the snapshot on or before the quarter start (CFO to confirm, Q-5). Match product family to revenue accounts. From FY24 Q1 |
5.4 Sub-KPIs (they explain a Top 5 KPI)
| Sub-KPI | Parent | What it explains | Action and owner | Draft measure and source (Kewpie to confirm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEM stock on hand, top 40 OEMs (K2.1) | New devices activated (K2) | Whether OEMs are running down stock, which explains installs holding while invoices fall | VP Sales tells the CEO a hardware recovery is likely and plans for it (Gary's proposal). Targets after baseline. Pending with K2 | SUM(oem_inventory_reports.units_on_hand) by calendar quarter; match oem_name to oem_master; compare OEMs reporting in both quarters |
| Share of software revenue from the largest licences (K3.1) | Software revenue growth (K3) | Marcus's "how much of it comes from one big licence" | VP Sales shows growth without the biggest licence and plans the renewal (Gary's proposal). Green under 10%, Amber 10% to 20%, Red over 20% | Largest (and top 5) software_licences.contract_value_aud ÷ total, licences starting in the last 12 months. No customer names on the board page |
| Gross margin %, last 12 months (K3.2) | Software revenue growth (K3) | Marcus's "gross margin holding up" | CFO explains mix, cost or price (Gary's proposal; Marcus gave no action). Green 77% or more, Amber 75% to under 77%, Red under 75% | (revenue - cost of sales) / revenue from gl_monthly by gl_accounts.pl_group |
| Months from design win to first shipment (K4.1) | Design wins that ship (K4) | Marcus's "how long it takes" | Head of Platform Engineering checks engineering support. Thresholds after baseline | Median months between stage_entered_design_win and stage_entered_shipping |
| Design wins per quarter (K4.2) | Design wins that ship (K4) | The count Marcus watches, read against conversion | VP Sales reviews how design wins are logged if the count rises while conversion falls (Gary's proposal) | Count of stage_entered_design_win by financial quarter |
6. Backlog (Nice to Haves)
| Item | Reason |
|---|---|
| Underlying earnings (EBITDA) | No action named; Marcus dislikes "accountant metrics". He isn't sure it's a Nice to Have but agreed to park it. Revisit once the CFO gives the FY27 targets |
| Design wins per quarter as a page-one headline | Reps are paid per design win with no clawback, so it can be inflated. Kept as a sub-KPI under Design wins that ship (K4) |
| Paid software features switched on in the field (telemetry) | Gary's idea; not raised by Marcus, no owner or action. Revisit after the Head of Platform Engineering explains the telemetry |
7. Data inventory
History and refresh for every system are unknown to Marcus (Q-6). Sample data ranges shown for reference only.
| Source (owner) | Tables in the Sample data | Grain | Marcus on trust | Quality notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Finance ERP and ledger: P&L and board pack (CFO) | gl_monthly, gl_accounts, erp_invoice_lines, sales_orders, oem_master | Month by account; invoice line | Trusts the P&L for what it shows | Ledger credits are negative. Sample data Jul-19 to Sep-26 |
| Forecasts (CFO and VP Sales) | forecast_snapshots | Snapshot by source, quarter, product family | Doesn't trust Finance forecasts: built off last year's run rate | Mixed units (AUD and AUD thousands) |
| Sales CRM (VP Sales) | crm_opportunities | Opportunity | Trusted less than the P&L: reps work to a bonus | Some rows have a stage but no stage dates |
| Engineering telemetry, Grafana (Head of Platform Engineering) | device_activations, device_heartbeat_monthly | Device at first join; device by month | Trusts it most; "covers basically everything out there" | Never used as an end-customer view. Sample data is 1 in 10 (activations) and 1 in 200 (heartbeat) |
| OEM stock reports (VP Sales) | oem_inventory_reports | OEM, quarter, SKU | "A bit patchy"; never looked at them | Top 40 OEMs, free-text names, calendar quarters |
| Software licences (CFO, Marcus thinks) | software_licences | Licence contract | Not stated | Not stated |
| Board targets and FY27 budget (CFO) | board_targets, board_plan_fy27, board_budget_fy27 | Target; month by product group or P&L line | Marcus doesn't know the FY27 targets | Not adopted until the CFO walks through them (Q-2) |
| Account manager bonus plan (People team) | sales_incentive_plans | Plan year, role | Context for "reps are working to a bonus" | Reference only |
8. Constraints and chart preferences
- One page, monthly, for the chair and the board; on screen as well as in the board pack
- Things people in the business can act on. No "accountant metrics" (Marcus)
- Sales and Finance use the same numbers
- New devices activated (K2) and Forecast accuracy (K5) stay off page one until the Head of Platform Engineering and the CFO have given their view
- Naming OEMs on the board page: CFO and legal to decide. Be careful naming customers
- Show the trend towards A$115m, not a single point. All three outcomes on one page
- Tools and other chart preferences: ask the VP Sales or CFO
9. Assumptions
| Assumption | Evidence |
|---|---|
| FY25 revenue A$118.4m, FY26 A$80.6m; software A$25.7m (up 38%); gross margin 71% to 77%; 1,180 design wins; Q1 FY27 about A$19m. Stated by Marcus, not yet calculated | Working Hypothesis |
| Financial year runs July to June | Observed Fact |
"Within two years" means the year ending 30 Jun 2028. The Sample data's board_targets lists A$115m for FY28, set by the Board on 26-Aug-26. Marcus asked that the date be confirmed with the board | Strong Inference |
| About 80% of design wins ship (Marcus's belief, never measured) | Working Hypothesis |
| Device activations show what end customers install, not what OEMs buy (Gary's proposal) | Working Hypothesis |
Since FY25, account managers are paid A$400 per opportunity moved to design win, no clawback if later lost (sales_incentive_plans) | Observed Fact |
| All owners, actions, targets and thresholds not marked "Marcus" are Gary's proposals | Observed Fact |
10. Open questions
| ID | Question | Owner | Due |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q-1 | How was the A$115m set, and does "within two years" mean the year ending 30 June 2028? | Chair, via the CEO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-2 | What are the FY27 targets for revenue, gross margin, earnings, software and design wins, and where did each come from? | CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-3 | What target should Software revenue growth (K3) carry? Starting proposal: at least 20% a year | VP Sales with the CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-4 | What can the telemetry show and not show as an end-customer view: coverage, history, refresh, test devices, link to OEMs? | Head of Platform Engineering | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-5 | Which forecast should Forecast accuracy (K5) measure, which snapshot is "the start of the quarter", and does the CFO support the measure? | CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-6 | How far back does each system go, and how often does each refresh? | CFO, VP Sales, Head of Platform Engineering | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-7 | Can OEMs be named on the board page, and can customers? | CFO with legal | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-8 | Will the chair look at the page on a phone? | Chair, via the CEO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-9 | What tools and chart preferences should we follow? | VP Sales or CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-10 | What happens if nothing changes in the next six months: what's the forecast view? | CFO | 6-Nov-26 |
| Q-11 | How long after a design win should a product be expected to ship (the window for Design wins that ship, K4)? Starting proposal: 18 months | VP Sales with the Head of Platform Engineering | 6-Nov-26 |
Due dates are Gary's proposal.
↑ Back to top11. Change log
| Version | Date | Change | Reason | Approved by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 26-Oct-26 | First version from the Stage 1 interview (7 questions). Playback corrected by Marcus: Problem Statement now says "nobody puts the Finance, Sales and Engineering numbers together"; "see revenue coming before it lands" replaced with his words "know whether we're still growing underneath the fall"; A$115m date left to the board; New devices activated (K2) and Forecast accuracy (K5) kept off page one until the Head of Platform Engineering and CFO give their view; earnings parked | Stage 1 interview | Pending (Adam at the Stage 1 gate) |
File: 2026.10.26 - Lumenwire Audio - 01 Project Plan.md
Lumenwire Audio: Project Plan
Test case. Made-up company, Sample data. Dates, effort and owners are Gary's proposals unless marked "Marcus".
1. Goal and scope
- Goal: one monthly page for the chair and the board that shows, from one set of numbers everyone trusts, whether Lumenwire is getting back to A$115m and whether it's still growing underneath the fall
- Based on:
2026.10.26 - Lumenwire Audio - 01 Business Requirements.md, version 1.0 - In scope: the Top 5 KPIs and 5 sub-KPIs in the Business Requirements; board page plus exec screen view
- Out of scope this time: underlying earnings (EBITDA), design wins as a page-one headline, paid features switched on in the field (all in the backlog)
2. Phases and sprints
Sprints are 2 weeks. Phase 2 is set at 2 sprints because two KPIs depend on people outside the interview (telemetry, forecasts) and the data has known gaps. Assumes a break from 21-Dec-26 to 8-Jan-27.
| Phase | Dates | Deliverables | Owner (role) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Discover | 26-Oct-26 to 6-Nov-26 | Business Requirements v1.0 approved; open questions Q-1 to Q-11 answered; sign-off on New devices activated (K2) and Forecast accuracy (K5) | Business requirements lead; CEO; CFO; VP Sales; Head of Platform Engineering |
| 2. Build KPIs | 9-Nov-26 to 4-Dec-26 (2 sprints) | Measures confirmed on the data, baselines, pace needed, counter-metrics, challenge notes | KPI analyst (Kewpie), with the CFO and Head of Platform Engineering |
| 3. Visualise | 7-Dec-26 to 18-Dec-26 (1 sprint) | Story, Standard dashboard, Experimental options | Data visualisation lead (Viktor) |
| 4. Harden | 11-Jan-27 to 22-Jan-27 (1 sprint) | Standards check, validation against the Business Requirements, stakeholder review, fixes | Standards lead (Jennifer) |
| 5. Embed | 25-Jan-27 to 5-Feb-27 | Handover, owner briefings, monthly review rhythm agreed | CEO with the KPI owners |
First board-ready dashboard: the first board pack after 5-Feb-27 (about 14 weeks from today).
↑ Back to top3. MoSCoW
| Priority | Items |
|---|---|
| Must | Total revenue, last 12 months, against the path to A$115m (K1); New devices activated in the field (K2); Software revenue growth (K3); Design wins that ship (K4); Forecast accuracy (K5). K2 and K5 go on page one only after their sign-offs |
| Should | OEM stock on hand (K2.1); Share of software revenue from the largest licences (K3.1); Gross margin % (K3.2); Months from design win to first shipment (K4.1); Design wins per quarter (K4.2) |
| Could | Experimental dashboard views |
| Won't (this time) | Underlying earnings (EBITDA); design wins as a headline; paid features switched on in the field |
4. Effort estimate (person-days)
| Phase | Person-days | Assumptions |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Discover | 4 | Includes three follow-up conversations (CFO, VP Sales, Head of Platform Engineering) |
| 2. Build KPIs | 14 | Ledger sign rules, telemetry scaling and de-duplication, CRM stage-date gaps, forecast unit conversion, OEM name matching |
| 3. Visualise | 6 | One page, five KPIs, sub-KPI drill views |
| 4. Harden | 5 | One round of fixes after stakeholder review |
| 5. Embed | 3 | Briefings for four owners |
| Total | 32 | Data access granted by 9-Nov-26 |
5. RAID log
| ID | Type | Description | Impact | Owner (role) | Action | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | Risk | The telemetry can't be used as an end-customer view (coverage, test devices, OEM link), so New devices activated (K2) can't go on the page | H | Head of Platform Engineering | Answer Q-4 by 6-Nov-26; if it fails, Gary proposes a replacement for the CEO to approve | Open |
| R2 | Risk | The CFO doesn't support Forecast accuracy (K5) as specified | M | CFO | Answer Q-5 by 6-Nov-26 | Open |
| R3 | Risk | Design-win counts are inflated by the bonus (paid per design win, no clawback), so the "record 1,180" overstates the pipeline | H | VP Sales | Conversion rate (K4) leads; counts kept underneath; Kewpie checks against invoices | Open |
| R4 | Risk | The dashboard is used to tell the CEO's story rather than test it | M | Business requirements lead | Every KPI traced to the Business Requirements; thresholds agreed before the data is seen | Open |
| A1 | Assumption | The A$115m date is 30 Jun 2028 | M | Chair, via the CEO | Confirm (Q-1) | Open |
| A2 | Assumption | Sample data reflects the shape of the real data | M | KPI analyst | Check during Build KPIs | Open |
| I1 | Issue | No targets exist for software, design wins, forecasts or FY27 lines that Marcus can vouch for | H | CFO | Answer Q-2 and Q-3 by 6-Nov-26 | Open |
| I2 | Issue | History and refresh are unknown for every system | M | CFO, VP Sales, Head of Platform Engineering | Answer Q-6 by 6-Nov-26 | Open |
| D1 | Dependency | Access to the ledger, CRM, telemetry, licences, forecasts and OEM stock reports | H | CFO, VP Sales, Head of Platform Engineering | Grant by 9-Nov-26 | Open |
| D2 | Dependency | CFO and legal decision on naming OEMs and customers | M | CFO with legal | Answer Q-7 before Visualise starts (7-Dec-26) | Open |
6. Milestones and approval gates
| Gate | Milestone | Approver | Target date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 1 | Business Requirements and Project Plan approved | Adam (Head of the Data Team) | 27-Oct-26 |
| Stage 2 | KPI calculations, baselines and challenges approved | Adam | 4-Dec-26 |
| Stage 3 | Story and dashboard versions approved | Adam | 18-Dec-26 |
| Stage 4 | Standards and validation passed; final approval | Adam | 22-Jan-27 |
| Stage 5 | Stakeholder sign-off and go-live | Marcus (CEO), then Adam | 5-Feb-27 |
7. Review rhythm after go-live
- Monthly: board page in the board pack; the CEO tells the board which actions are being taken (Marcus)
- Monthly: exec team reviews every KPI out of threshold with its owner before the board pack closes (Gary's proposal)
- Quarterly: Forecast accuracy (K5) and OEM stock on hand (K2.1) updated; targets and thresholds reviewed with the CFO (Gary's proposal)