No comparable project
Expected behaviour
The sheet is produced without project evidence and the match level is marked weak. No external action is recommended.
Opportunity owner
Build plan
Describe precisely what could be built, without presenting it as already deployed.
The build plan describes a potential Build. It does not correspond to a production integration yet.
Overview
The loop, step by step
Eight steps, from the CRM trigger through to measurement. Select a step to see its input, processing, output and risk.
Detail of step New opportunity
- Step
- New opportunity
- Input
- An opportunity is created or updated in the CRM.
- Processing
- Check that the opportunity is sufficiently qualified and that an owner is identified.
- Output
- Context request triggered.
- Source
- CRM
- Validation
- None — automatic trigger step.
- Risk
- An opportunity created without an owner cannot go through the loop.
- Step 1
- New opportunity
- Input
- An opportunity is created or updated in the CRM.
- Processing
- Check that the opportunity is sufficiently qualified and that an owner is identified.
- Output
- Context request triggered.
- Source
- CRM
- Validation
- None — automatic trigger step.
- Risk
- An opportunity created without an owner cannot go through the loop.
- Step 2
- Account context recovered
- Input
- Account and opportunity identifiers.
- Processing
- Gather the sales history, the contacts and the exchanges attached to the account.
- Output
- The “context recovered” block of the action sheet.
- Source
- CRM
- Validation
- Reviewed by the owner at validation time.
- Risk
- History incomplete on accounts predating 2021.
- Step 3
- Comparable projects identified
- Input
- Sector, engagement type, client, estimated amount.
- Processing
- Match against the project archive by client, then by type and sector.
- Output
- A list of comparable projects with the reason for the match.
- Source
- Project archive
- Validation
- The owner can discard an irrelevant project.
- Risk
- Type missing on part of the projects: degraded matching.
- Step 4
- Evidence linked
- Input
- Comparable projects retained.
- Processing
- Select the reusable documents and attach them to their source.
- Output
- A list of readable evidence, each linked to its source document.
- Source
- Project archive
- Validation
- The owner consults the evidence before validating.
- Risk
- Unresolved duplicate versions in some years.
- Step 5
- Missing information flagged
- Input
- Qualification grid and available data.
- Processing
- Compare the information required to decide against what is actually present.
- Output
- An explicit list of items to confirm with the client.
- Source
- CRM + project archive
- Validation
- The owner completes or corrects the list.
- Risk
- An unwritten qualification grid makes the list incomplete.
- Step 6
- Human decision
- Input
- The complete action sheet with its justification.
- Processing
- The owner validates, edits, or requests an additional check.
- Output
- A documented, timestamped, attributed decision.
- Source
- Business owner
- Validation
- This is the validation step: nothing bypasses it.
- Risk
- With no designated owner, the loop stops here.
- Step 7
- CRM task created
- Input
- Validated decision and the next action retained.
- Processing
- Write a task attached to the opportunity in the CRM.
- Output
- An assigned task with a due date.
- Source
- CRM
- Validation
- Only after explicit human validation.
- Risk
- No write must ever happen before validation.
- Step 8
- Measurement
- Input
- Timestamps of the opportunity appearing and of the decision.
- Processing
- Compute the delay and the secondary indicators.
- Output
- A weekly measurement view.
- Source
- CRM
- Validation
- Weekly review with the business owner.
- Risk
- Without a baseline measurement, no progress can be demonstrated.
Design sheet
Detailed design
What the loop consumes, produces and guarantees.
Trigger
- An opportunity created or updated in the CRM
- Minimum qualification reached
- An owner identified
Sources
- CRM
- Project archive
- No third source in the initial scope
Input data
- Account and contacts
- Sales history
- Engagement type and sector
- Estimated amount and sales stage
- Historical projects and attached documents
Processing
- Recover the account context
- Match comparable projects
- Identify reusable evidence
- Flag the missing information
- Prepare an explainable recommendation
Output
- Contextualised action sheet
- Source projects and documents cited
- Recommendation and confidence level
- Next action and owner
- Proposed CRM task
Human validation
- No automatic external action
- Validation or edit by the owner
- Option to request an additional check
Source of truth
- The client's CRM remains the source of truth
- No parallel second CRM is created
Measurement
How we will know it works
Without a baseline, no progress can be demonstrated. The headline metric is fixed at framing.
Headline metric
Time from an opportunity appearing to a documented decision with a next action.
Secondary metrics
- Share of opportunities with relevant evidence linked
- Share of recommendations validated by a human
- Median search time per opportunity
- Share of tasks actually created in the CRM
- Average number of missing items per opportunity
Acceptance
Acceptance criteria
What will have to be true for the Build to count as delivered — and what stays explicitly out of scope.
| Criterion | Scope |
|---|---|
| The selection rules produce understandable results. | Required |
| Every recommendation carries a justification. | Required |
| Every piece of evidence links to a source. | Required |
| Missing information is visible. | Required |
| The user can edit the recommendation. | Required |
| No external action goes out without human validation. | Required |
| The task is created in the CRM after validation. | Required |
| Blocking duplicates are handled. | To confirm |
| Blocking errors are reported to an owner. | To confirm |
| The team can use the workflow after training. | To confirm |
| The CRM remains the source of truth. | Required |
| Exhaustive indexing of every company document. | Out of scope |
| Automatic sending of messages to end clients. | Out of scope |
Scope
What the Build would cover
Indicative Build: €14,000 over 90 days.
Included in the potential Build
- One business loop
- Two to three sources
- One CRM integration
- One action sheet workflow
- One human validation step
- One task write-back to the CRM
- One primary metric
- Team training
- Documentation
Not included in this first loop
- Automated campaign
- Sending without validation
- Exhaustive CRM clean-up
- Full indexing of every document
- CRM replacement
- A complete client portal
- A second business loop
Indicative price
Build: €14,000 over 90 days
This figure only becomes a commitment after the readout decision and once the conditions listed on the decision page are addressed.
Entry criteria for the loop
- The opportunity exists in the CRM and carries a named owner.
- The account is identifiable by a stable identifier.
- Estimated amount and sales stage are filled in.
- Sector or mission type allows a search for comparables.
What takes an opportunity out of the loop
- No owner can be designated.
- Both sources are inaccessible for the period concerned.
- The opportunity is closed or cancelled before the sheet is produced.
- The owner explicitly asks for processing to stop.
The eight exceptions to handle
A loop that only describes its happy path is not a build plan. Each exception carries the expected behaviour, not an intention.
Conflicting evidence
Expected behaviour
Both pieces of evidence are shown side by side, with no automatic arbitration. The conflict is flagged as such.
Lead project manager
Document unreachable
Expected behaviour
The reference stays visible, marked “document not accessible”. Its content is never guessed or reconstructed.
Data owner
Account not linked to a project
Expected behaviour
The match is left empty rather than filled by name proximity. The account joins the list of links to rebuild.
Sales management
Duplicate
Expected behaviour
Records are grouped for display and reported to the CRM. None is deleted by the system.
Data owner
Required field missing
Expected behaviour
The missing item is listed explicitly on the sheet. The loop does not produce a recommendation from an assumed value.
Opportunity owner
No owner
Expected behaviour
The loop stops before its output: without an owner, no action follows. The sheet stays readable, with no next action.
Sales management
Validation rejected
Expected behaviour
The rejection is recorded with its reason. No external action goes out, and the case feeds the qualification rules.
Opportunity owner
What is proven, what would be built
The costliest reading of this document would be to assume a described integration is already in place.
Demonstrated in the prototype
- Matching an opportunity with comparable projects
- Linking evidence back to its source document
- Producing an action sheet with its missing information
- Explicit abstention when context is insufficient
To be built
- Continuous reading of the CRM
- Normalising the six project description fields
- Writing the task into the CRM after validation
- Measuring time from opportunity to documented decision
Not verified at this stage
- Write capability of Norevia's CRM — the API has not been tested
- Real volumes beyond the analysed sample
- Access rights applicable in production
- Behaviour on projects predating 2019
Out of scope
- Automatic sending of any external message
- Replacing or migrating the CRM
- Exhaustive indexing of the 420 documents
- A second business priority