# OrbitWorks CRM repair — evidence-and-artifact workbook

**Case packet version:** 2026.08.31-practice-3

**Case brief record:** CB01

This fictional training case uses fabricated company and contact records. It contains no real personal or confidential data and does not provide privacy, legal, employment, or technology-vendor advice.

## How to use this workbook

Complete only what the fictional packet supports. Cite the module input ID beside each material statement. Write **not supplied** for missing operational records, approvals, dates, test results, or identities. Label anything you design as a **learner proposal**. Do not contact people, access systems, run tests, sign records, or present a proposed control as an observed fact. Each module contains a prerequisite gate, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, schema-exact supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, a completion test, blank artifact tables, and mapped criteria. Row counts are contractual: if an assignment calls for 47 requirements, 20 records, 40 evaluations, or 27 tasks, the corresponding table contains that many stable rows.

## Module 1 — Define the lifecycle

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Reconcile team meanings and map the customer lifecycle, systems, owners, and handoffs.

**Deliverable:** A lifecycle architecture map, definition decision proposal, and approval-request record; no lifecycle definition is represented as approved.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M01-I01 | case-fact | F01 | The CRM contains 8,420 companies, 11,780 contacts, and 1,360 open opportunities. | |
| M01-I02 | case-fact | F04 | Sales and customer-success teams use different evidence to define the same qualified stage. | |
| M01-I03 | case-fact | F09 | The follow-up automation has no reply, opt-out, disqualification, or opportunity stop condition. | |
| M01-I04 | case-fact | F11 | Three integrations have departed owners and one export token is nineteen months old. | |
| M01-I05 | case-fact | F12 | Leadership proposes a full overwrite to produce a clean forecast by Friday. | |
| M01-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M01-S01 | assignment-scope | F01, F04, F09, F11, F12 | Build a starter version of “A lifecycle architecture map, definition decision proposal, and approval-request record; no lifecycle definition is represented as approved.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F01, F04, F09, F11, F12, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm aggregate CRM populations, disputed qualified-stage definition, missing automation stops, departed integration owners, aged token, and provisional overwrite proposal.
- [ ] Separate lead, account, contact, opportunity, and customer objects before mapping movement.
- [ ] No lifecycle definition, integration owner reassignment, overwrite, or approval is supplied.

### Operating procedure

1. List each core CRM object and state its distinct business purpose before drawing transitions.
2. Map creation, conversion, qualification, customer, disqualification, opt-out, and closure triggers as proposed controls.
3. Attach supplied aggregate evidence to relevant nodes and mark record-level fields not supplied.
4. Expose the conflicting qualified-stage definitions rather than selecting the sales or customer-success version.
5. Map automation and integration effects, including missing stops, departed owners, and the aged export token.
6. Reject the provisional overwrite as a lifecycle control and route definition and change approval to the process owner and data steward.
7. Quality-check object purpose, entry and exit events, source systems, owners, open questions, and no implied production change.

### Field-by-field guidance — M01-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Element | Name one CRM object, lifecycle state, automation, or integration. |
| From or trigger | State the source object or observable event that begins the transition. |
| To or outcome | State the intended object or lifecycle result without claiming records were changed. |
| Evidence and source ID | Cite the exact M01-Ixx fact supporting scale, conflict, stop gap, integration, or overwrite risk. |
| Owner | Use CRM process owner and data steward, adding authorized system owner where needed. |
| Open question | Record missing definition, consent, stop condition, integration owner, token review, or change approval. |
| Status | Use Confirmed condition, Proposed lifecycle, Conflict open, Control gap, or Approval pending. |

### Completed supported example — M01-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Element | From or trigger | To or outcome | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Open question | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Qualified opportunity stage | Opportunity reaches team-defined qualification evidence; common definition not supplied. | Observable qualified stage under an authorized shared definition. | M01-I02 (F04, conflicting) | CRM process owner and data steward | Which buyer evidence, entry criteria, exit criteria, and authority define the shared stage? | Conflict open — definition approval required |

### Completed known-gap example — M01-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Element | From or trigger | To or outcome | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Open question | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Follow-up automation exit | Reply, opt-out, disqualification, or opportunity creation. | Automation stops and ownership is recorded; no operating result supplied. | M01-I03 (F09, confirmed) | CRM process owner and data steward | Stop-rule logic, consent policy, owner, test evidence, and activation approval: not supplied. | Control gap — automation use requires review |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M01-A02 · Lifecycle-definition decision proposal** — Produce a bounded, reviewable lifecycle-definition decision proposal from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 1 row from M01-I02 and address M01-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
2. **M01-A03 · Definition approval request** — Produce a bounded, reviewable definition approval request from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 1 row from M01-I04 and address M01-EC03. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

No additional completed supporting-artifact row is supplied. Use the supporting artifact instructions, scoped inputs, completion checks, and known-gap method above; keep unsupported cells marked **not supplied**.

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop lifecycle deployment or overwrite when object purpose, observable stage evidence, stop rules, ownership, or rollback is unresolved. |
| **Go** | Go to bounded design review when transitions, source evidence, open questions, and authorized owners are visible. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate shared lifecycle definitions and production changes to the CRM process owner, data steward, and system owner. |

### Completion test

- [ ] Lead, account, contact, opportunity, and customer purposes are distinct.
- [ ] Conflicting stage meaning and missing automation stops remain visible.
- [ ] Integrations, ownership, exports, and overwrite risk appear without implying production action.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M01-A01 | M01-EC01 | M01-I01 (F01) | The CRM contains 8,420 companies, 11,780 contacts, and 1,360 open opportunities. | Anchor one element of the map to the supplied condition and label any inferred transition as a learner proposal. Cite M01-I01 (F01) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed lifecycle architecture map or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M01-A01 | M01-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the lifecycle architecture map. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M01-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M01-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M01-I05:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M01-I05, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M01-A01 · Lifecycle architecture map

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable lifecycle architecture map from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M01-I01, M01-I03, M01-I05

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M01-EC01:** Separates lead, account, contact, opportunity, and customer purposes
- **M01-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Element | From or trigger | To or outcome | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Open question | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 01A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 01A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M01-I01, M01-I03, M01-I05).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M01-EC01, M01-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M01-A02 · Lifecycle-definition decision proposal

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable lifecycle-definition decision proposal from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M01-I02

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M01-EC02:** Documents disputed stage meanings and decision owner

| Decision | Evidence for | Evidence against | Options and tradeoffs | Decision owner | Required approval | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 01A02R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M01-I02).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M01-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M01-A03 · Definition approval request

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable definition approval request from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M01-I04

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M01-EC03:** Shows which systems and integrations create, change, or export records

| Section | Supported statement | Source input ID | Assumption or gap | Decision requested | Reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 01A03R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M01-I04).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M01-EC03) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M01-A01 · Lifecycle architecture map | 2 | M01-EC01, M01-EC04 | M01-I01, M01-I03, M01-I05 |
| M01-A02 · Lifecycle-definition decision proposal | 1 | M01-EC02 | M01-I02 |
| M01-A03 · Definition approval request | 1 | M01-EC03 | M01-I04 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M01-EC01:** Separates lead, account, contact, opportunity, and customer purposes
- [ ] **M01-EC02:** Documents disputed stage meanings and decision owner
- [ ] **M01-EC03:** Shows which systems and integrations create, change, or export records
- [ ] **M01-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Module 2 — Set data standards

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Create a data dictionary and remediation rules without inventing missing values.

**Deliverable:** A field dictionary, quality scorecard, and exception queue design.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M02-I01 | case-fact | F02 | Twenty-three percent of sampled open opportunities lack a dated next step. | |
| M02-I02 | case-fact | F03 | Eighteen percent lack a decision-role contact and eleven percent have former-employee owners. | |
| M02-I03 | case-fact | F05 | The pending import contains 2,100 contacts and approximately 430 likely duplicates. | |
| M02-I04 | case-fact | F06 | Two hundred eighty import records lack documented marketing basis. | |
| M02-I05 | case-fact | F07 | Seventeen source rows contain personal notes in an unrestricted free-text field. | |
| M02-I06 | case-fact | F08 | Country values use nine inconsistent formats. | |
| M02-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M02-S01 | assignment-scope | F02, F03, F05, F06, F07, F08 | Build a starter version of “A field dictionary, quality scorecard, and exception queue design.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F02, F03, F05, F06, F07, F08, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm missing next steps, decision-role contacts, departed owners, duplicate estimates, marketing-basis gaps, personal notes, and country-format inconsistency.
- [ ] Define field standards before evaluating data quality.
- [ ] Do not inspect or invent individual import rows; only aggregate facts are supplied.

### Operating procedure

1. List each required CRM field and define its business purpose, timing, source, allowed values, owner, and privacy basis.
2. Create standards for dated next step, decision-role contact, current owner, marketing basis, notes, and country.
3. Use unknown when evidence is absent and prohibit guessed values or unrestricted personal notes.
4. Translate aggregate quality facts into scorecard measures without claiming individual records were reviewed.
5. Route likely duplicates and missing values to a quarantine or exception queue before import.
6. Require privacy and marketing-basis review for the 280 records and removal or restriction of unnecessary personal notes.
7. Quality-check every dictionary field for definition, allowed values, evidence source, owner, change trigger, and pending approval.

### Field-by-field guidance — M02-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Term or field | Name one CRM field, such as Next-step date, Decision role, Owner, Marketing basis, Country, or Notes. |
| Definition | Describe the exact business meaning and when the field applies. |
| Allowed values or rule | State format, timing, unknown value, privacy limit, or controlled value list as a learner proposal. |
| Evidence source | Cite the M02-Ixx aggregate fact creating the standard or gap. |
| Owner | Use CRM process owner and data steward; add privacy reviewer where required. |
| Change trigger | State what evidence or process change requires dictionary review. |
| Status | Use Proposed standard, Evidence gap, Privacy review, Data cleanup pending, or Approval pending. |

### Completed supported example — M02-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Next-step date | Date and time zone for the next agreed buyer-facing or owner action on an open opportunity. | Valid date plus time zone, or Unknown with exception owner; record-level dates are not supplied and must not be guessed. | M02-I01 (F02, confirmed: 23% of sampled open opportunities lack a dated next step) | CRM process owner and data steward | Lifecycle-definition change or repeated missing-date exception. | Learner-proposed standard — approval pending |

### Completed known-gap example — M02-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Marketing basis | Documented basis controlling whether a contact may enter a marketing workflow. | Approved controlled values not supplied; use Unknown and quarantine until review. | M02-I04 (F06, confirmed: 280 import records lack documented marketing basis) | Data steward and qualified privacy or marketing-compliance reviewer | Policy, jurisdiction, purpose, or source change. | Gap open — import activation blocked |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M02-A02 · Data-quality scorecard** — Produce a bounded, reviewable data-quality scorecard from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M02-I02, M02-I03 and address M02-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
2. **M02-A03 · Data-exception queue** — Produce a bounded, reviewable data-exception queue from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M02-I03 and address M02-EC03. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

No additional completed supporting-artifact row is supplied. Use the supporting artifact instructions, scoped inputs, completion checks, and known-gap method above; keep unsupported cells marked **not supplied**.

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop import or automation for records lacking required consent basis, safe notes, controlled values, ownership, or duplicate disposition. |
| **Go** | Go to bounded cleansing when field rules, exception handling, and review owners are explicit. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate privacy, marketing basis, retention, and production data-change decisions to qualified owners. |

### Completion test

- [ ] Required fields define purpose, timing, source, allowed values, owner, and privacy basis.
- [ ] Unknown replaces guessing and personal notes are removed or restricted through an approved process.
- [ ] Aggregate defects inform controls without implying record-level review.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M02-A01 | M02-EC01 | M02-I01 (F02) | Twenty-three percent of sampled open opportunities lack a dated next step. | Use the supplied term or condition to draft one definition while marking allowed values and approval status provisional. Cite M02-I01 (F02) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed crm field dictionary or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M02-A01 | M02-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the crm field dictionary. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M02-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M02-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M02-I03:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M02-I03, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M02-A01 · CRM field dictionary

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable crm field dictionary from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M02-I01, M02-I04, M02-I05, M02-I06

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M02-EC01:** Defines timing, source, allowed value, owner, and privacy purpose for required fields
- **M02-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 02A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 02A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M02-I01, M02-I04, M02-I05, M02-I06).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M02-EC01, M02-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M02-A02 · Data-quality scorecard

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable data-quality scorecard from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M02-I02, M02-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M02-EC02:** Removes unnecessary personal notes from the import workflow

| Metric | Definition | Evidence source | Provisional threshold | Owner | Review cadence | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 02A02R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 02A02R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M02-I02, M02-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M02-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M02-A03 · Data-exception queue

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable data-exception queue from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M02-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M02-EC03:** Uses unknown, not guessed, when evidence is missing

| Entry ID | Issue or event | Evidence and source ID | Risk or impact | Owner | Bounded next step | Review point | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 02A03R-01 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 02A03R-02 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M02-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M02-EC03) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M02-A01 · CRM field dictionary | 2 | M02-EC01, M02-EC04 | M02-I01, M02-I04, M02-I05, M02-I06 |
| M02-A02 · Data-quality scorecard | 2 | M02-EC02 | M02-I02, M02-I03 |
| M02-A03 · Data-exception queue | 2 | M02-EC03 | M02-I03 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M02-EC01:** Defines timing, source, allowed value, owner, and privacy purpose for required fields
- [ ] **M02-EC02:** Removes unnecessary personal notes from the import workflow
- [ ] **M02-EC03:** Uses unknown, not guessed, when evidence is missing
- [ ] **M02-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Module 3 — Control follow-up

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Redesign the sequence so work stops or changes when the record state changes.

**Deliverable:** An automation specification with triggers, stop rules, owners, and test cases.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M03-I01 | case-fact | F09 | The follow-up automation has no reply, opt-out, disqualification, or opportunity stop condition. | |
| M03-I02 | case-fact | F11 | Three integrations have departed owners and one export token is nineteen months old. | |
| M03-I03 | case-fact | F12 | Leadership proposes a full overwrite to produce a clean forecast by Friday. | |
| M03-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M03-S01 | assignment-scope | F09, F11, F12 | Build a starter version of “An automation specification with triggers, stop rules, owners, and test cases.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F09, F11, F12, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm the missing reply, opt-out, disqualification, and opportunity stops plus integration-owner and token issues.
- [ ] Treat the full-overwrite request as provisional and outside the automation test itself.
- [ ] No task due dates, test execution, consent result, suppression result, or production activation is supplied.

### Operating procedure

1. Define the automation entry event, eligible population, owner, purpose, and data prerequisites.
2. List reply, opt-out, disqualification, opportunity creation, error, and owner-loss as mandatory stop or exception conditions.
3. Specify task creation, due-date logic, monitoring queue, and fallback for every stop condition.
4. Create negative-path tests for consent, suppression, reply, opt-out, wrong owner, integration failure, and duplicate execution.
5. Keep all test results not supplied and block production activation until authorized evidence exists.
6. Route departed integration ownership and aged token review to the authorized system owner.
7. Quality-check trigger, source, owner, threshold, stop behavior, evidence capture, rollback, and no implied activation.

### Field-by-field guidance — M03-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Step or milestone | Name one automation event or control, including entry, action, stop, exception, or review. |
| Trigger or date | State the observable trigger; mark due-date calculation not supplied when absent. |
| Evidence and source ID | Cite M03-I01 for missing stops or another scoped input for ownership/change risk. |
| Owner | Use CRM process owner, data steward, or authorized system owner. |
| Gate or threshold | Define the condition that stops, routes, retries, or blocks production. |
| Dependency or gap | Record missing policy, consent, suppression, due date, test evidence, owner, or token review. |
| Status | Use Proposed control, Missing stop, Test pending, Security review, or Production blocked. |

### Completed supported example — M03-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Stop sequence on recipient reply | Any recorded reply event; event schema and timing not supplied. | M03-I01 (F09, confirmed: no reply stop condition) | CRM process owner and data steward | Sequence must stop before another automated outreach action and create an owner review task. | Reply event mapping, task due rule, test result, monitoring, and activation approval: not supplied. | Learner-proposed control — production blocked |

### Completed known-gap example — M03-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Integration-owner-loss exception | Integration owner departs or credential exceeds approved age. | M03-I02 (F11, confirmed) | Authorized system owner | Automation pauses or routes safely until ownership and credential review are complete. | Integration identities, owner assignments, credential policy, token rotation, and test evidence: not supplied. | Security and ownership gap open |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M03-A02 · Automation stop-rule register** — Produce a bounded, reviewable automation stop-rule register from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M03-I02 and address M03-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
2. **M03-A03 · Automation test-case plan** — Produce a bounded, reviewable automation test-case plan from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M03-I03 and address M03-EC03. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

No additional completed supporting-artifact row is supplied. Use the supporting artifact instructions, scoped inputs, completion checks, and known-gap method above; keep unsupported cells marked **not supplied**.

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop production activation if any consent, suppression, reply, opt-out, disqualification, opportunity, error, or owner-loss path lacks a passing test. |
| **Go** | Go to sandbox testing when trigger, stop logic, task, owner, evidence capture, and rollback are defined. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate consent, privacy, integration ownership, credential, and production activation to authorized owners. |

### Completion test

- [ ] All required stop and exception conditions appear in the specification.
- [ ] Task timing, monitoring, and negative-path evidence requirements are explicit.
- [ ] No test, suppression, consent, or production result is fabricated.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M03-A01 | M03-EC01 | M03-I01 (F09) | The follow-up automation has no reply, opt-out, disqualification, or opportunity stop condition. | Use the supplied condition to define one bounded step and a review gate; leave dates and execution results pending unless supplied. Cite M03-I01 (F09) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed automation specification or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M03-A01 | M03-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the automation specification. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M03-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M03-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M03-I03:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M03-I03, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M03-A01 · Automation specification

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable automation specification from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M03-I01

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M03-EC01:** Includes reply, opt-out, disqualification, opportunity, error, and owner-loss conditions
- **M03-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 03A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 03A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M03-I01).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M03-EC01, M03-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M03-A02 · Automation stop-rule register

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable automation stop-rule register from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M03-I02

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M03-EC02:** Defines task due dates and exception monitoring

| Entry ID | Issue or event | Evidence and source ID | Risk or impact | Owner | Bounded next step | Review point | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 03A02R-01 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 03A02R-02 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M03-I02).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M03-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M03-A03 · Automation test-case plan

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable automation test-case plan from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M03-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M03-EC03:** Tests consent and suppression before production activation

| Row ID | Subject | Supported observation | Source input ID | Analysis or learner proposal | Not-supplied gap | Reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 03A03R-01 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 03A03R-02 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M03-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M03-EC03) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M03-A01 · Automation specification | 2 | M03-EC01, M03-EC04 | M03-I01 |
| M03-A02 · Automation stop-rule register | 2 | M03-EC02 | M03-I02 |
| M03-A03 · Automation test-case plan | 2 | M03-EC03 | M03-I03 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M03-EC01:** Includes reply, opt-out, disqualification, opportunity, error, and owner-loss conditions
- [ ] **M03-EC02:** Defines task due dates and exception monitoring
- [ ] **M03-EC03:** Tests consent and suppression before production activation
- [ ] **M03-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Module 4 — Make stages observable

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Propose stage entry and exit evidence that both teams can apply consistently.

**Deliverable:** A stage dictionary, aggregate reclassification examples based on F02 through F04, and a blank twenty-row reclassification worksheet clearly marked for later record-level evidence.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M04-I01 | case-fact | F02 | Twenty-three percent of sampled open opportunities lack a dated next step. | |
| M04-I02 | case-fact | F03 | Eighteen percent lack a decision-role contact and eleven percent have former-employee owners. | |
| M04-I03 | case-fact | F04 | Sales and customer-success teams use different evidence to define the same qualified stage. | |
| M04-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M04-S01 | assignment-scope | F02, F03, F04 | Build a starter version of “A stage dictionary, aggregate reclassification examples based on F02 through F04, and a blank twenty-row reclassification worksheet clearly marked for later record-level evidence.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F02, F03, F04, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm missing dated next steps, missing decision-role contacts, former-employee owners, and conflicting qualified-stage definitions.
- [ ] Distinguish buyer evidence from seller activity, confidence, or forecast preference.
- [ ] No individual opportunity records were supplied or reviewed; RC rows are controlled training examples or gaps.

### Operating procedure

1. Define each pipeline stage using observable buyer evidence, entry rule, exit rule, exclusions, owner, and change trigger.
2. Record the sales and customer-success definitions as conflicting and route a shared-definition decision to the process owner.
3. Preserve original stage values before proposing any reclassification.
4. For every RC row, record observed buyer evidence and required exit criterion; use Unknown at record level when individual evidence is absent.
5. Do not reclassify based only on seller activity, missing next-step cleanup, or a desire to improve the forecast.
6. Route conflicting definitions and record-level exceptions to the CRM process owner and data steward before production change.
7. Quality-check all 20 RC identifiers, exact columns, source IDs, confidence, original-value preservation, and pending status.

### Field-by-field guidance — M04-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Term or field | Name one pipeline stage or stage-governance field. |
| Definition | Describe the buyer state in observable terms, not salesperson confidence. |
| Allowed values or rule | State entry, exit, prohibited proxy, and unknown handling as a learner proposal. |
| Evidence source | Cite M04-I03 for the definition conflict or the exact authorized source when later supplied. |
| Owner | Use CRM process owner and data steward. |
| Change trigger | State what buyer evidence, governance decision, or audit result requires definition review. |
| Status | Use Conflict open, Proposed definition, Record-level evidence missing, or Approval pending. |

### Completed supported example — M04-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Qualified opportunity | Shared buyer-evidence definition is not supplied because sales and customer-success use conflicting criteria. | Learner proposal: require an authorized definition with observable buyer evidence and explicit exit criteria before reclassification. | M04-I03 (F04, conflicting) | CRM process owner and data steward | Authorized resolution of the cross-team definition conflict. | Conflict open — stage use requires review |

### Completed known-gap example — M04-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Record-level reclassification evidence | Original stage, dated buyer evidence, decision-role contact, owner, and proposed stage for one opportunity. | Use Unknown and Pending when an individual record is not supplied; never infer from aggregate percentages. | M04-I01, M04-I02 (aggregate facts only) | CRM process owner and data steward | Individual source record and approved stage definition become available. | Gap open — no production reclassification |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M04-A02 · Aggregate reclassification examples** — Produce a bounded, reviewable aggregate reclassification examples from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 3 rows from M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03 and address M04-EC01, M04-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
2. **M04-A03 · Twenty-row reclassification worksheet** — Produce a bounded, reviewable twenty-row reclassification worksheet from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 20 rows from M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03 and address M04-EC02, M04-EC03, M04-EC04. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

#### M04-A03 · Twenty-row reclassification worksheet

**Reference-only completed row.** Use it to understand the evidence boundary; do not present it as your own completed work.

**Criterion demonstrated:** M04-EC02, M04-EC03, M04-EC04

**Why this row is included:** This completed training row demonstrates the declared criterion route for Twenty-row reclassification worksheet without claiming live execution or approval.

| Record ID | Original stage | Observed buyer evidence | Proposed stage | Exit criterion | Confidence | Source ID | Owner/reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| RC-01 | Not supplied at record level | Not supplied; aggregate data report missing dated next steps and decision-role contacts. | Pending — no record-level reclassification proposed | Authorized shared stage definition plus dated next step and decision-role contact evidence for this record. | Unknown at record level; aggregate conditions are confirmed and stage definition is conflicting. | M04-I01 (F02), M04-I02 (F03), M04-I03 (F04) | CRM process owner and data steward | Completed training example — source record not supplied; no production change |

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop reclassification when the shared stage definition, original value, dated buyer evidence, decision-role contact, owner, or reviewer is missing. |
| **Go** | Go to bounded reviewer analysis when the complete record-level evidence and authorized stage rule are present. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate definition conflicts and production reclassification to the CRM process owner and data steward. |

### Completion test

- [ ] Stage definitions use observable buyer evidence and preserve the cross-team conflict until authorized resolution.
- [ ] All 20 RC rows retain original-value and evidence fields, with missing records marked not supplied.
- [ ] No aggregate percentage is converted into an individual reclassification result.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M04-A01 | M04-EC01 | M04-I03 (F04) | Sales and customer-success teams use different evidence to define the same qualified stage. | Use the supplied term or condition to draft one definition while marking allowed values and approval status provisional. Cite M04-I03 (F04) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed pipeline stage dictionary or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M04-A01 | M04-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the pipeline stage dictionary. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M04-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M04-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M04-I03:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M04-I03, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M04-A01 · Pipeline stage dictionary

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable pipeline stage dictionary from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M04-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M04-EC01:** Ties each proposed stage to buyer evidence rather than seller confidence

| Term or field | Definition | Allowed values or rule | Evidence source | Owner | Change trigger | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 04A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 04A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M04-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M04-EC01) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M04-A02 · Aggregate reclassification examples

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable aggregate reclassification examples from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M04-EC01:** Ties each proposed stage to buyer evidence rather than seller confidence
- **M04-EC02:** Shows how original values and reclassification reasons would be preserved, without claiming that twenty individual records were supplied or reviewed

| Item ID | Supported evidence | Source input ID | Criterion or required state | Gap or learner proposal | Owner or reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| EXAMPLE-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| EXAMPLE-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| EXAMPLE-03 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M04-EC01, M04-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M04-A03 · Twenty-row reclassification worksheet

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable twenty-row reclassification worksheet from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M04-EC02:** Shows how original values and reclassification reasons would be preserved, without claiming that twenty individual records were supplied or reviewed
- **M04-EC03:** Identifies which classifications require the missing record-level fields before a decision can be made
- **M04-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Record ID | Original stage | Observed buyer evidence | Proposed stage | Exit criterion | Confidence | Source ID | Owner/reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| RC-01 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-02 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-03 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-04 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-05 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-06 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-07 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-08 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-09 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-10 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-11 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-12 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-14 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-15 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-16 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-18 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-19 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| RC-20 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M04-EC02, M04-EC03, M04-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M04-A01 · Pipeline stage dictionary | 2 | M04-EC01 | M04-I03 |
| M04-A02 · Aggregate reclassification examples | 3 | M04-EC01, M04-EC02 | M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03 |
| M04-A03 · Twenty-row reclassification worksheet | 20 | M04-EC02, M04-EC03, M04-EC04 | M04-I01, M04-I02, M04-I03 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M04-EC01:** Ties each proposed stage to buyer evidence rather than seller confidence
- [ ] **M04-EC02:** Shows how original values and reclassification reasons would be preserved, without claiming that twenty individual records were supplied or reviewed
- [ ] **M04-EC03:** Identifies which classifications require the missing record-level fields before a decision can be made
- [ ] **M04-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Module 5 — Repair reporting

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Recalculate decision metrics using transparent populations, periods, and exclusions.

**Deliverable:** A dashboard specification and exception-report mockup.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M05-I01 | case-fact | F01 | The CRM contains 8,420 companies, 11,780 contacts, and 1,360 open opportunities. | |
| M05-I02 | case-fact | F02 | Twenty-three percent of sampled open opportunities lack a dated next step. | |
| M05-I03 | case-fact | F03 | Eighteen percent lack a decision-role contact and eleven percent have former-employee owners. | |
| M05-I04 | case-fact | F10 | The reported 72 percent win rate excludes older closed-lost opportunities. | |
| M05-I05 | case-fact | F11 | Three integrations have departed owners and one export token is nineteen months old. | |
| M05-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M05-S01 | assignment-scope | F01, F02, F03, F10, F11 | Build a starter version of “A dashboard specification and exception-report mockup.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F01, F02, F03, F10, F11, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm CRM populations, missing next steps, missing decision roles, former-employee owners, biased win-rate denominator, and integration-owner/token issues.
- [ ] Define metric numerator, denominator, period, source, refresh, owner, threshold, and action before displaying a result.
- [ ] No refreshed dashboard, corrected win rate, queue contents, or approvals are supplied.

### Operating procedure

1. List the management decisions the dashboard must support before choosing metrics or charts.
2. Define win-rate numerator, complete denominator, period, inclusion, exclusion, and refresh rules.
3. Create separate exception views for missing next steps, decision roles, departed owners, stalled work, and automation or integration failures.
4. Use aggregate supplied percentages only and do not infer record identities or a corrected win rate.
5. Assign metric and queue owners plus provisional thresholds and required actions.
6. Route denominator policy, privacy, integration, and production-report changes to authorized owners.
7. Quality-check every dashboard field for source, refresh, definition, owner, action, limitation, and no misleading percentage.

### Field-by-field guidance — M05-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Section or field | Name one dashboard metric, exception queue, limitation, or refresh field. |
| Purpose | State the management decision or control the field supports. |
| Supported entry | Record the supplied aggregate fact without inventing recalculated results. |
| Source input ID | Cite the exact M05-Ixx evidence. |
| Gap or learner proposal | State missing numerator, denominator, period, refresh, owner, threshold, action, or record detail. |
| Owner or reviewer | Use CRM process owner and data steward, adding system owner where needed. |
| Status | Use Fact supplied, Metric invalid, Definition proposed, Queue design pending, or Approval pending. |

### Completed supported example — M05-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Section or field | Purpose | Supported entry | Source input ID | Gap or learner proposal | Owner or reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Win rate | Support funnel and forecast review using a complete closed-opportunity population. | Reported win rate is 72%, but older closed-lost opportunities are excluded. | M05-I04 (F10, confirmed) | Complete numerator, denominator, period, inclusion rules, corrected result, refresh time, and approval: not supplied. | CRM process owner and data steward | Metric invalid for decision use |

### Completed known-gap example — M05-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Section or field | Purpose | Supported entry | Source input ID | Gap or learner proposal | Owner or reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ownerless integration exception queue | Surface integrations requiring ownership and credential review. | Three integrations have departed owners and one export token is nineteen months old. | M05-I05 (F11, confirmed) | Integration identities, new owners, credential policy, token action, review time, and result: not supplied. | Authorized system owner and data steward | Exception queue required — review pending |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M05-A02 · Exception-report mockup** — Produce a bounded, reviewable exception-report mockup from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M05-I02, M05-I05 and address M05-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

No additional completed supporting-artifact row is supplied. Use the supporting artifact instructions, scoped inputs, completion checks, and known-gap method above; keep unsupported cells marked **not supplied**.

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop using a dashboard measure when numerator, denominator, period, inclusion, source, refresh, owner, threshold, or action is absent or biased. |
| **Go** | Go to management review only with defined measures and visible exception queues. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate production metric definitions, integration ownership, credentials, privacy, and forecast use to authorized owners. |

### Completion test

- [ ] Every metric defines numerator, denominator, period, inclusion, source, refresh, owner, threshold, and action.
- [ ] Ownerless, incomplete, stalled, and automation or integration exceptions remain visible.
- [ ] The 72% figure is not presented as valid or silently recalculated.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M05-A01 | M05-EC01 | M05-I01 (F01) | The CRM contains 8,420 companies, 11,780 contacts, and 1,360 open opportunities. | Populate one example field from the supplied condition and mark all unavailable operational fields “not supplied.” Cite M05-I01 (F01) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed dashboard specification or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M05-A01 | M05-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the dashboard specification. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M05-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M05-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M05-I05:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M05-I05, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M05-A01 · Dashboard specification

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable dashboard specification from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M05-I01, M05-I03, M05-I04

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M05-EC01:** Defines win-rate numerator, denominator, period, and inclusion rules
- **M05-EC03:** Names source, refresh time, owner, threshold, and action for each measure
- **M05-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Section or field | Purpose | Supported entry | Source input ID | Gap or learner proposal | Owner or reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 05A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 05A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M05-I01, M05-I03, M05-I04).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M05-EC01, M05-EC03, M05-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M05-A02 · Exception-report mockup

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable exception-report mockup from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M05-I02, M05-I05

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M05-EC02:** Surfaces ownerless, stalled, incomplete, and automation-failure queues

| Entry ID | Issue or event | Evidence and source ID | Risk or impact | Owner | Bounded next step | Review point | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 05A02R-01 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 05A02R-02 |  |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M05-I02, M05-I05).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M05-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M05-A01 · Dashboard specification | 2 | M05-EC01, M05-EC03, M05-EC04 | M05-I01, M05-I03, M05-I04 |
| M05-A02 · Exception-report mockup | 2 | M05-EC02 | M05-I02, M05-I05 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M05-EC01:** Defines win-rate numerator, denominator, period, and inclusion rules
- [ ] **M05-EC02:** Surfaces ownerless, stalled, incomplete, and automation-failure queues
- [ ] **M05-EC03:** Names source, refresh time, owner, threshold, and action for each measure
- [ ] **M05-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Module 6 — Stage the production change

**Task mode:** bounded-case-starter

**Prompt:** Plan deduplication, import, permissions, integration ownership, rollback, and approval.

**Deliverable:** A change plan with test sample, permission matrix, backup, rollback, and acceptance record.

### Supplied-input register

| Input ID | Kind | Source record(s) | What the packet supplies | Where I used it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M06-I01 | case-fact | F05 | The pending import contains 2,100 contacts and approximately 430 likely duplicates. | |
| M06-I02 | case-fact | F06 | Two hundred eighty import records lack documented marketing basis. | |
| M06-I03 | case-fact | F07 | Seventeen source rows contain personal notes in an unrestricted free-text field. | |
| M06-I04 | case-fact | F08 | Country values use nine inconsistent formats. | |
| M06-I05 | case-fact | F09 | The follow-up automation has no reply, opt-out, disqualification, or opportunity stop condition. | |
| M06-I06 | case-fact | F11 | Three integrations have departed owners and one export token is nineteen months old. | |
| M06-I07 | case-fact | F12 | Leadership proposes a full overwrite to produce a clean forecast by Friday. | |
| M06-B01 | case-brief | CB01 | Use CB01, the full versioned case brief printed once at the start of this packet, as a citable narrative source for details not normalized into F01–F12. Preserve its uncertainty language and do not treat narrative detail as approval, complete operational records, or professional judgment. | |
| M06-S01 | assignment-scope | F05, F06, F07, F08, F09, F11, F12 | Build a starter version of “A change plan with test sample, permission matrix, backup, rollback, and acceptance record.” from the listed case facts. Treat requested structures, controls, questions, calculations, and templates as learner-designed proposals. Where an operational record or result is absent, add a gap entry naming the missing evidence and authorized owner instead of fabricating it. | |

### Completion boundary

Complete a bounded starter and gap analysis using only CB01, F05, F06, F07, F08, F09, F11, F12, and the assignment-scope record below. Populate supported fields, label every unavailable field “not supplied,” and cite the input ID for each material statement. You may design a proposed template, control, question, or decision rule, but must label it as a learner proposal rather than observed case evidence. Do not contact people, access live systems, run tests, sign records, claim approval, or invent names, dates, quotations, transactions, results, or source documents.

### Prerequisite check

- [ ] Confirm import size, duplicate estimate, marketing-basis gaps, unrestricted notes, country formats, missing automation stops, departed owners, aged token, and provisional overwrite proposal.
- [ ] Define a bounded sandbox sample and rollback evidence before any production change.
- [ ] No backup, sandbox run, import, deletion, token rotation, overwrite, rollback test, or acceptance is supplied.

### Operating procedure

1. Define the change objective, in-scope records, excluded records, authoritative sources, owners, and approval boundary.
2. Capture a prechange backup and rollback design as required future evidence, not a completed record.
3. Quarantine likely duplicates, missing marketing basis, and personal notes before any bounded test.
4. Normalize country values and test automation stops only in a sandbox or approved bounded sample.
5. Reassign integration ownership and review the aged export token under least privilege before dependency use.
6. Reject uncontrolled overwrite and preserve original values, audit history, change log, and reversible mapping.
7. Define acceptance evidence and authorized disposition, then quality-check scope, security, privacy, counts, rollback, and no implied production execution.

### Field-by-field guidance — M06-A01

| Field | What high-quality completion requires |
|---|---|
| Step or milestone | Name one controlled change stage, such as backup design, quarantine, sandbox test, review, rollout, or rollback. |
| Trigger or date | State the entry evidence or mark schedule not supplied. |
| Evidence and source ID | Cite the supplied condition that creates the control. |
| Owner | Use CRM process owner, data steward, system owner, or privacy reviewer as appropriate. |
| Gate or threshold | Define observable evidence required to advance or roll back. |
| Dependency or gap | Record missing source, policy, mapping, backup, test, approval, or credential evidence. |
| Status | Use Proposed, Quarantine required, Sandbox pending, Production blocked, or Rollback evidence pending. |

### Completed supported example — M06-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates supported evidence and truthful status; it is not a learner submission or proof of live work.

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Quarantine likely duplicate contacts before sandbox import | Before any import; date not supplied. | M06-I01 (F05, confirmed: 2,100 contacts and approximately 430 likely duplicates) | CRM process owner and data steward | No likely duplicate enters the test set until match evidence, survivor rule, and reviewer disposition are documented. | Record-level candidates, matching rule, threshold, survivor policy, test results, and approval: not supplied. | Quarantine design — no import performed |

### Completed known-gap example — M06-A01

**Reference only.** This row demonstrates how to preserve missing evidence without inventing a result.

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Backup and rollback readiness | Before sandbox or production data change. | M06-I07 (F12, provisional overwrite proposal) | Authorized system owner and data steward | Verified backup, restoration test, field mapping, audit-history preservation, and rollback approval required. | Backup, restore test, rollback timing, owner, and acceptance evidence: not supplied. | Gap open — overwrite prohibited |

### Supporting artifact build sequence

1. **M06-A02 · Permission matrix** — Produce a bounded, reviewable permission matrix from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M06-I02 and address M06-EC02. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
2. **M06-A03 · Backup and rollback plan** — Produce a bounded, reviewable backup and rollback plan from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 2 rows from M06-I03, M06-I07 and address M06-EC03. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”
3. **M06-A04 · Change acceptance record** — Produce a bounded, reviewable change acceptance record from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals. Build 1 row from M06-I02, M06-I04 and address M06-EC04. Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

### Completed supporting-artifact examples

No additional completed supporting-artifact row is supplied. Use the supporting artifact instructions, scoped inputs, completion checks, and known-gap method above; keep unsupported cells marked **not supplied**.

### Stop / Go / Escalate

| Decision | Rule |
|---|---|
| **Stop** | Stop production change when backup, rollback, privacy, consent, duplicate, ownership, stop-rule, or acceptance evidence is missing. |
| **Go** | Go to a bounded sandbox sample when scope, quarantine, source mapping, controls, evidence capture, and rollback are defined. |
| **Escalate** | Escalate production rollout, deletion, credential, privacy, integration, and acceptance decisions to authorized owners. |

### Completion test

- [ ] The change plan begins with bounded scope and preserves history and rollback.
- [ ] Duplicates, marketing-basis gaps, personal notes, country formats, stops, owners, and credentials receive explicit controls.
- [ ] No production change, overwrite, backup, test, or acceptance result is fabricated.

### Secondary evidence-trace crosswalk

The authored procedure and schema-exact examples above are the main teaching method. This compact crosswalk links the legacy starter and gap controls to the original packet.

#### Legacy worked-starter trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Input | Supported value | How to use it | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M06-A01 | M06-EC01 | M06-I01 (F05) | The pending import contains 2,100 contacts and approximately 430 likely duplicates. | Use the supplied condition to define one bounded step and a review gate; leave dates and execution results pending unless supplied. Cite M06-I01 (F05) in the row. | This is one evidence-backed starter entry, not a completed crm change plan or an operational result. |

#### Legacy known-gap trace

| Artifact | Criterion | Missing evidence | Why it matters | Authorized owner or reviewer | Bounded next step | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M06-A01 | M06-EC01 | The packet does not supply the complete live records, approvals, or execution results needed to finish the crm change plan. | Without that evidence, the learner cannot truthfully satisfy M06-EC01 or represent this artifact as complete. | CRM process owner and data steward | Record the missing evidence in M06-A01, name the authorized reviewer, and leave the outcome pending; do not obtain or simulate the live record in this exercise. | Open — not supplied |

### Decision prompt

**M06-I01:** What bounded decision can the CRM process owner and data steward make from M06-I01, and what must remain pending until the missing evidence or approval is supplied?

### Artifact-build tables

### M06-A01 · CRM change plan

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable crm change plan from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M06-I01, M06-I05, M06-I06

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M06-EC01:** Uses a sandbox or bounded sample before production

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 06A01R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 06A01R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M06-I01, M06-I05, M06-I06).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M06-EC01) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M06-A02 · Permission matrix

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable permission matrix from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M06-I02

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M06-EC02:** Applies least privilege and reassigns integration ownership

| Item ID | Supported evidence | Source input ID | Criterion or required state | Gap or learner proposal | Owner or reviewer | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 06A02R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 06A02R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M06-I02).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M06-EC02) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M06-A03 · Backup and rollback plan

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable backup and rollback plan from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M06-I03, M06-I07

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M06-EC03:** Preserves audit history and rejects uncontrolled overwrite

| Step or milestone | Trigger or date | Evidence and source ID | Owner | Gate or threshold | Dependency or gap | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 06A03R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |
| 06A03R-02 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M06-I03, M06-I07).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M06-EC03) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### M06-A04 · Change acceptance record

**Purpose:** Produce a bounded, reviewable change acceptance record from cited packet evidence while exposing unsupported fields and required approvals.

**Scoped case-fact inputs:** M06-I02, M06-I04

**Instructions:** Use only the scoped case-fact inputs below. Cite an input ID for each supported statement; label proposed structures “learner proposal” and unavailable evidence “not supplied.”

**Mapped evidence criteria**

- **M06-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

| Decision | Evidence for | Evidence against | Options and tradeoffs | Decision owner | Required approval | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 06A04R-01 |  |  |  |  |  | Not started |

**Completion checks**

- [ ] Every supported entry identifies and cites at least one applicable scoped case-fact input (M06-I02, M06-I04).
- [ ] Every mapped rubric criterion (M06-EC04) is addressed in the artifact or a named evidence gap.
- [ ] Unsupported fields remain “not supplied” or are explicitly labeled as a learner proposal.
- [ ] The CRM process owner and data steward is named for decisions or review; no approval or execution is implied.

### Artifact coverage map

| Artifact | Expected rows | Mapped criteria | Scoped case-fact inputs |
|---|---:|---|---|
| M06-A01 · CRM change plan | 2 | M06-EC01 | M06-I01, M06-I05, M06-I06 |
| M06-A02 · Permission matrix | 2 | M06-EC02 | M06-I02 |
| M06-A03 · Backup and rollback plan | 2 | M06-EC03 | M06-I03, M06-I07 |
| M06-A04 · Change acceptance record | 1 | M06-EC04 | M06-I02, M06-I04 |

### Decision and revision record

| Decision or question | Supported observations with input IDs | Contradictory evidence | Learner proposal | Alternative | Evidence that would change the recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | |

### Evidence-criteria checklist

- [ ] **M06-EC01:** Uses a sandbox or bounded sample before production
- [ ] **M06-EC02:** Applies least privilege and reassigns integration ownership
- [ ] **M06-EC03:** Preserves audit history and rejects uncontrolled overwrite
- [ ] **M06-EC04:** Cites the supplied input IDs for material statements and marks omitted operational records or results “not supplied” rather than fabricating them

### Self-review note

- What did I initially assume?
- Which input contradicted or weakened that assumption?
- What remains outside my role or authority?
- What will I revise before asking for human feedback?

## Final packet review

- [ ] Every material statement cites an input ID.
- [ ] Every omitted record is marked **not supplied**.
- [ ] Every designed control or template is marked **learner proposal**.
- [ ] Every mapped criterion is addressed in its artifact or a named gap.
- [ ] Contracted row counts and row IDs remain intact.
- [ ] Specialist and decision-owner handoffs are explicit.
- [ ] No simulated work is represented as a completed real-world action, approval, test, signature, or professional opinion.