Customer stories
What the method looks like in a real deal
We publish client stories here once clients have approved them. Until then, the worked example below follows one opportunity through all six steps, with the numbers, the judges and the verdicts. The companies are fictional; the method is exactly what we teach.
Companies we have worked with
ProfitMetrics 
Musqet 
Overdrive Digital 
Tiaa 
Reece.ai
MessageExpress meets Ashby Row
MessageExpress, a CRM and messaging platform, is prospecting Ashby Row: a UK online fashion and homeware retailer selling in 40 countries and growing fastest in Japan, Singapore and South Korea. Discovery turns up three problems nobody at Ashby Row has raised yet: no social messaging channels for Asian markets, no view of the journey from message to site to order, and no clear discounting strategy.
The judges and their advisers
Six steps over twelve weeks
- Weeks 1–4 · Evidence
Four people, one chain of pain
Discovery with Mei, Christine, Raj and Dan shows the problems are connected: no social messaging in Asia, so no view of the journey, so discounting blind.
- Weeks 5–6 · Socialise
Finance corrects the model
Fred's analyst cuts discount leakage from 20% to 15%. The £1.24m model is now theirs.
- Weeks 6–7 · Judges
Three judges, three advisers
Fred, Oliver and Teresa are confirmed as the people who decide, leaning on Louise, Christine and Sam.
- Weeks 7–8 · Criteria
The bar is set
Each judge names their must-haves and an evidence bar. All three are played back and confirmed in writing.
- Weeks 9–10 · Experiments
Three tests in one fortnight
A sandbox API and dataflow test, a live LINE test in Japan against a holdout, and randomised discount levels.
- Weeks 11–12 · Verdict
Evidence returned as asked
Three approvals, one with a condition. The inconclusive Singapore result is reported as exactly that.
Step 1–2 · The cost of inaction, agreed by Finance
| Consequence | Calculation | Annual cost | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower basket recovery in Asia-Pacific | 180,000 baskets × £72 × 4-pt gap | £518,400 | Mei; ecommerce platform report |
| Unattributed messaging spend | £1.2m × 15% ineffective | £180,000 | Raj; Christine's estimate |
| Discount leakage | £3.0m × 15% given unnecessarily | £450,000 | Dan; Finance ledger. Revised from 20% by Fred's analyst |
| Agency message handling | 2 FTE × £45,000 | £90,000 | Christine; agency contract |
| Total cost of inaction | £1,238,400 | Agreed by Finance, week 6 | |
Cost-of-inaction statement: “Every month we wait costs about £103k, because Asian customers can't message us and we discount blind.”
Steps 3–4 · Each judge sets the must-haves and the bar
Step 5 · Evidence of the solution, against the bar
| Measure | Bar | Result | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sam's API and dataflow script | All tests pass | 42 of 42; one field mapping fixed on day 3 | Met |
| Order sync time | Under 5 min | 2 minutes on average | Met |
| Data residency | In-region | Japanese customer data held in-region | Met |
| Recovery uplift, Japan (LINE) | 3 pts | +3.7 pts: 9.1% vs 5.4% in the holdout | Met |
| Orders attributed, message to order | 90% | 93% | Met |
| Journey built by CRM team | No developers | Built by Christine's team in one day | Met |
| Singapore (WhatsApp) | Directional | +2.1 pts on a small sample; too early to call | Open |
| Discount levels | Margin by level | 5% recovered as many baskets as 10%; 0% was 1.8 pts lower | Insight |
Step 6 · Three verdicts, returned in each judge's format
Sam re-runs his test script at go-live as standard.
Japan goes live now. Singapore gets a two-week read after launch.
Business case accepted on test actuals. Louise signs the data processing agreement.
24-month cost: licences, implementation, messaging fees, internal time, procurement and legal
24-month benefit: basket recovery £780k, discount policy £600k, attribution £200k, agency £180k
Payback, inside Fred's 12-month bar, built in Finance's own template
What the example shows
The cost of inaction was revised downwards by Finance, and was more persuasive as a result. Nobody had to be talked into the judges' criteria, because the judges wrote them. And the Singapore result was reported as open rather than dressed up as a win, which is a large part of why the other results were believed.
Have a deal that needs this?
Bring one live opportunity to a first conversation and we will work through it with you.