The evidence is scattered
A policy here, a screenshot there, one answer living in someone's inbox from eighteen months ago. Nobody can say with confidence what you have already proven and what you have not.
The offer · 21 days · one pursuit
A deal that stalls in review is not a product problem.
Most vendors can build the thing. Then an enterprise buyer sends a security questionnaire and the deal goes quiet. The evidence is scattered, nobody is sure who owns which answer, and the gaps have never been mapped. That is a delivery problem, and it is fixable in three weeks.
21Days, fixed scope, fixed outcome
1Vendor at a time. One live pursuit.
4Deliverables, all reusable after the sprint ends
0Answers to a buyer that cannot be traced to a source
01 · The situation
Where the deal actually stops.
It is rarely the demo. It is the six weeks after it, when the buyer's security and procurement people start asking questions and your engineers are the only people who know the answers.
Ownership is unclear
Every questionnaire answer needs a name against it. Without that, the answers sit in a shared document waiting for a person who thinks somebody else is handling it.
The gaps are unmapped
You find out you cannot answer a control when the buyer asks. At that point you are explaining rather than evidencing, and the momentum has already gone.
It repeats every time
Nothing from the last enterprise deal is reusable in the next one, so the same work is done from scratch, by the same two people, at the worst possible moment.
02 · What we build
Four things, and all four outlive the sprint.
The sprint is scoped to one live opportunity, because a generic readiness programme produces a generic folder that nobody opens twice.
| Deliverable | What it does for you |
|---|---|
| The evidence register | Every claim you make to a buyer, with the source that supports it, and a clear marker where no source exists yet. |
| Source linked responses | Drafted answers to the actual questions this buyer has asked, each one traceable to a document rather than to somebody's memory. |
| The ownership map | A name against every outstanding item, so the answer has an owner instead of a hope. |
| The reusable library | An approved set of answers that carries into your next enterprise pursuit, so the second one is not the first one again. |
03 · How it runs
Three weeks, one direction.
Fixed scope means you know what you are getting and when. It also means I turn down work that does not fit, which is the only reason fixed scope means anything.
- W1
Establish
We take the live opportunity, read what the buyer has actually asked, and inventory every piece of evidence that exists today. Output, a register with honest gaps marked.
- W2
Build
Responses are drafted and traced to sources. Every answer that cannot be sourced gets flagged rather than softened. Ownership is assigned item by item.
- W3
Harden
We close what can be closed, and we write down plainly what cannot, so you walk into the next review knowing your position instead of discovering it.
- Out
Handover
The register, the responses, the ownership map and the library are yours, with the process documented so your team can run it without me.
04 · How I work
The rules I hold myself to.
They are the same rules as the pipeline on the front page, because it would be strange to build one standard for clients and use another on them.
Source before summary
A claim without a document behind it is a liability in a procurement review. It gets marked as unsourced rather than written persuasively.
Evidence before outcome
The order matters. Build the evidence, then let the outcome follow. Reversing it produces confident answers that collapse at the second question.
One vendor at a time
I take a single pursuit. If I took four, the fourth would get a template, and a template is exactly what gets a deal stuck.
Bad news early
If you cannot support a control, you hear it in week one rather than in the buyer's review. That is the whole value of the register.
Who this is not for. If you have no live enterprise opportunity in review, this is the wrong engagement and I will say so. If you need somebody to write a persuasive response to a questionnaire rather than a true one, this is also the wrong engagement. The value here is knowing your real position, not presenting a better looking one.
Tell me about the pursuit that has gone quiet.
What the buyer has asked for, where it currently sits, and who is holding it. If it fits the sprint, I will tell you. If it does not, I will tell you that too.