08 — Assumptions & open questions
What we do not know yet, stated plainly — and what each answer would change.
Standing assumptions behind this document
ExecutiveIf any of these is wrong, the corresponding sections change rather than merely losing detail.
Assumption — technology environment
Assumption — organisational readiness
Hypothesis — where the effort actually sits
Hypothesis — highest early return
Access and environments
These determine when work can start, not how it is designed. They have the longest lead time.
Path to a non-production environment with representative data — and realistic timeline.
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Every design decision below can be made on paper; none can be validated without it.
Changes: Sets the start date of the first slice and whether early work is real or preparatory.
Can queries run under a delegated end-user identity, not only a service principal?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Permission inheritance is a hard requirement for any conversational analytics surface.
Changes: If only service identities are possible, the capability must be redesigned or deferred.
Which source systems are API-reachable, export-only, or neither?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Determines integration effort and whether a temporary bridge is needed.
Changes: Directly changes effort estimates and the operational risk profile.
Constraints on data processing location and retention of prompts/traces/outputs.
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Trace design and model routing depend on it; retrofitting is expensive.
Changes: Affects architecture at the orchestration and logging layers.
Data and semantic layer
The quality ceiling of every AI surface is set here.
How many measures are certified today, with owner/description/lineage complete?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: This is the effective answerable-question surface on day one.
Changes: Determines whether the first slice is a build or a certification exercise.
Where do two authoritative metric definitions coexist, and who adjudicates?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Contested definitions stall dependent features indefinitely without a tie-break authority.
Changes: Drives governance work needed in parallel with engineering.
What data-quality controls exist today, and their current pass rate?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Establishes whether promotion gates are new work or an extension of existing work.
Changes: Affects foundation-stream scope.
Refresh latency of the reporting layer, and what as-of semantics an answer should state.
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Users comparing an answer to a report at a different point in time is a common trust failure.
Changes: Affects answer presentation and caching design.
Legacy logic and documents
The two places where discovery findings most often change the plan.
Can historical calculation runs be reproduced from their recorded inputs?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: If overrides were applied outside the model, the golden-master approach needs redesigning.
Changes: Changes the parity strategy and effort for the calculation vertical.
Who can adjudicate an unexplained legacy rule?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Rule adjudication is on the critical path and needs a decision-maker, not a forum.
Changes: Determines whether parity testing can complete.
How heterogeneous is the document estate (template, vintage, language, quality)?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Extraction accuracy varies far more by heterogeneity than by model choice.
Changes: Drives extraction effort, validation-queue sizing, accuracy expectations.
Volume and time budget available for human validation of extracted fields.
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Reviewer throughput is a real system constraint; thresholds must be set against it.
Changes: Determines confidence thresholds and rollout pace.
Platform capability
Native capability moves quickly — verify against the tenant, not documentation or prior experience.
What can native agent / semantic-model querying do in this tenant and licence tier today?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Sets the configure-versus-build line — the largest single swing factor in effort.
Changes: Could remove or add substantial build scope in the conversational vertical.
Which model providers/versions are approved, and who approves a change?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Model pinning, fallback strategy and evaluation cadence all depend on it.
Changes: Affects orchestration design and operational process.
Existing automation estate: how many flows, owned by whom, failure history?
assumption▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Hardening critical existing automations frequently returns more value than new builds.
Changes: Determines the first workflow-automation backlog.
Current knowledge-management practice, and who owns content today?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: A knowledge system without named owners degrades within months regardless of architecture.
Changes: Determines whether the knowledge vertical is viable near-term.
Ways of working and expectations
Organisational answers that shape delivery as much as any technical one.
Which engagement scenario fits: embedded, build-and-handover, platform-first, or hybrid?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: Determines team shape, governance and how handover is engineered from commit one.
Changes: Shapes the whole delivery plan.
Named business and technical owners per capability — have they accepted?
blocker if false▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: An unaccepted owner is not an owner, and the definition of done depends on one existing.
Changes: Gates release for every capability.
Is there a fixed external date anything must land against?
to confirm▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: A real deadline changes sequencing legitimately; an assumed one degrades quality for no reason.
Changes: Determines whether scope or evidence flexes under pressure.
Appetite for a capability that refuses questions it cannot answer safely.
assumption▸Why it matters / what it changes
Why: This is the central trade-off of the whole programme and should be agreed explicitly, in advance.
Changes: Sets refusal thresholds, launch scope and how success is judged.