Norevia — Action sheet — MecaFlux Industrie

Back to opportunities

Action sheet · OPP-26-052

MecaFlux Industrie

Energy audit of an industrial site

Partial matchDiscovery

Estimated amount: €95,000
Owner: Sophie Lambert
Last activity: 5 days ago
Evidence linked: 1
To confirm: 4 items
Trigger source: Norevia CRM

What we recommend

Internal checkNeeds review

Qualify the scope before committing expert time: the risk of overlap with the 2024 audit is real.

Next action

Check with the contact whether the request covers the utilities already flagged in 2024, before any estimate.

To be done by Sophie Lambert — after human validation.

Traceability · PROT-OPP-02

What we recovered

Client already served in 2024 on its production site
Utilities scope identified as untreated at the time
Previous project lead still with the firm

What is still missing

Which site the new request covers
Budget envisaged
Whether a regulatory obligation is the trigger
Final decision-maker on the client side

These items are shown deliberately: missing information must be visible, never guessed.

Evidence

What the recommendation rests on

Every piece of evidence links back to its source document. Without a cited source, a recommendation is not usable.

Final report — MecaFlux site energy audit

Engagement report · 2024 · Project archive · 2024 folder / MecaFlux

A recent engagement for the same account: the scope already audited must be excluded from the new offer.

Human validation

No external action goes out without human validation.

Awaiting validation

The CRM task can only be created once the recommendation is validated — that is the rule of the loop.

Simulated decision — no real action was sent. No email, no message, no CRM write.

Comparable projects identified
Reference	Project	Client	Year	Lead	Relevance	Why
PRJ-2024-021	Energy audit — industrial site	MecaFlux	2024	Inès Rahmani	High	Same client and same engagement type: a direct basis for requalifying the current opportunity.

The reasoning

A recent engagement exists for the same account.
The 2024 report already recommended a second audit on the utilities.
The site targeted by the request is not identified.

Confidence level

Confidence level by element
Element	Level	Comment
Account match	High	Single account, no homonym in the CRM.
Relevance of the historical project	High	Same client, same engagement type, two years ago.
Scope of the request	Low	The site concerned is not recorded on the opportunity.
Decision to bid	Human validation required	Owner validation required.

Diagnostic questions related to this sheet

Q-02— What makes a project comparable?Q-11— When to commit expert time?Q-03— Who decides, and on what criteria?Q-14— Who validates the action?

The CRM remains the source of truth. This sheet prepares a decision and proposes a task; it replaces neither the CRM nor the judgement of the opportunity owner.