Response matrix
Decide what can be stated to the client.
Home / Method and evidence
Method and evidence
Deliverable examples
Show the depth of the analysis without using real client data.
Question addressed
Show the substance of a report before asking the prospect to trust the method.
A firm with no publishable international references has two honest currencies: its method and its deliverables. This section shows the latter — questionnaire matrices, finding trails, evidence indexes, remediation plans — built on explicit demonstration data, never on real case files.
Each example shows the same end-to-end rigour: the client's original wording, the commitment it creates, the 4P comparison, the evidence, the gap, the commercial impact and the action. If the depth suits you here, it will suit you on a mission: it is the same discipline.
Collection of outputs
Each output serves a different decision and retains its own reading limitations.
Finding trail
Steer a remediation through to a substantiated closure.
Evidence index
Re-establish scope, freshness and restrictions.
Remediation plan
Assign actions, dependencies and exit criteria.
Decision enabledYou judge the depth of the work before buying — on evidence, not on promises.
Reading a conclusion
Choose the format according to the decision to be reached
A matrix serves to validate a response, a finding log to steer a closure, an index to locate evidence, and a plan to assign remediation. No deliverable is presented as a certification or a universal conclusion.
The content shown consists of demonstration files; they make the level of detail visible without claiming to originate from a real engagement.
Starting questionShow the substance of a report before asking the prospect to trust the method.
- 01Questionnaire matrix
- 02Finding trail
- 03Evidence index
Implementation
Choose the output according to the decision expected.
- Questionnaire matrix
- Finding trail
- Evidence index
- Remediation plan
01
Questionnaire matrix
Each row: the client's question, the implicit commitment, the response position, the evidence cited, any reservation. The "reservation" column is what prevents findings from surfacing a year later.
02
Finding trail
From the raw finding to the decision: basis, 4P divergence, impact, assigned action, closure evidence, residual risk. One page per finding, readable by a non-technical audience.
03
Evidence index
The list of evidence for a file, with source, scope, date, owner, restriction and verification level — the backbone of any defensible response.
04
Remediation plan
Actions prioritised by client impact, with genuine dependencies, named owners and verifiable closure criteria. No 'raise team awareness' without expected evidence.
Terms of use
The criteria for choosing the deliverable that will genuinely help decision-making.
Support depends on the recipient, the level of detail that is useful, and the action that must be actionable on reading it.
Are the actual deliverables just as detailed?
Note: the examples are deliberately compact. An engagement deliverable covers the full agreed scope, with the corresponding technical annexes.
In which language are the deliverables produced?
In the language their recipient will read: French or English, including for exchanges with your client's European client.
Can we see an example based on our own case?
That is the purpose of the initial scoping session: a narrow scope on a real document, to judge depth on your own data rather than on a demonstration.
Continue reading
Choose an example according to the decision the output should enable.
The detailed matrix allows a submission to be reviewed line by line before presenting an actual document.