Opening your baseline
One moment. Fetching the answers you saved.
This page needs the private link from your email.
A saved baseline opens from a link that looks like
themodernanalytics.com/baseline/?k=…. Without the key on the end
there is nothing for me to look up, and deliberately so: there is no list to search
and no email box to guess at.
If you cannot find the email
It arrived from chinmaya@themodernanalytics.com on the day you finished, and the subject line starts with your organisation. Check the promotions tab before assuming it did not send.
Still nothing? Ask me and I will resend it to the address it was issued to. That is the only address I will ever send it to.
That link does not open anything.
Either the key is incomplete, which usually means an email client wrapped the link across two lines, or the baseline behind it has been deleted. Both are recoverable and neither is your fault.
Try copying the whole link again including everything after the equals sign. If it still does not open, tell me.
Something went wrong at my end, not yours.
The baseline is still there. Refresh in a minute, and if it keeps failing let me know and I will send you the report directly.
The Modern Analytics
Where you are starting from
The 7D Baseline
How ready your data, analytics, BI and AI work really is. Scored across seven gates, from the goal you set to the money you can actually show for it.
Early
Summary
What this looks at
The 7D method scores the whole chain from a company or business unit goal through to value booked in the accounts. Seven gates, each out of 12, taken in order because each one depends on the one before it.
This is not an AI readiness review. Most value is lost in the data and analytics layers, long before anyone reaches a model. That is why gates three and four carry as much weight as anything later.
Self scored against the 7D method. Prepared by The Modern Analytics, themodernanalytics.com
7D Baseline ·
Your programme
Data, analytics and AI readiness across seven gates
Early
How to read this. Each gate is scored out of 12. The gates run in order and depend on each other, so a low score early costs you more than a low score late. The shorter bars are where attention tends to repay soonest. Where gate order and score order disagree, gate order usually wins.
Where this sits
Four bands. A number on its own is not a position, so here is the position.
Where the chain breaks first
The gates depend on each other, so a low score early costs more than a low score late. Everything downstream of the first break inherits it, whatever it scores on its own.
Gate 01 Direction
The next ninety days
Three moves in gate order rather than score order, because a gate cannot be judged until the ones before it hold. Each says what it releases, which is the question worth asking before starting any of them.
-
Move 1
Gate 01 Direction
Agree the objective in writing with whoever owns the number, with a figure and a date, before the next funding decision.
-
Move 1
Gate 02 Decision
Build a decision register for the top three candidates: volume, cycle time, error rate and cost to serve. Interview the people who make the decision.
-
Move 1
Gate 03 Data
Name owners for your critical sources and confirm with them directly. Measure quality against a threshold before building anything on top.
-
Move 1
Gate 04 Design
Audit the licences you already hold, then obtain one genuine external quote. Compare over three years, including the people to run it.
-
Move 1
Gate 05 Deployment
Watch the work for an hour. Put the output into a screen people already open, crudely, before improving the model. Then instrument usage so drift is visible before it is terminal.
-
Move 1
Gate 06 Discipline
Run the inventory before writing policy. Classify by data touched. For anything that acts autonomously, define authority, rollback and a named owner.
-
Move 1
Gate 07 Dividend
If it has not gone live, measure the baseline now over a real period. Get a named budget holder to accept the benefit in writing.
Then run this again. Ninety days is long enough for a real change to show and short enough that you can still remember what you changed.
Gate by gate
Each gate read against your answers, with the target state and the first move. Read them in gate order rather than score order.
Direction
0 of 12 EarlyWhich company or business unit goal does this serve, and by how much?
The objective is written down, owned by the person whose number moves, and carries a figure and a date. Everything downstream can be tested against it, which is what makes the rest of this assessment meaningful.
There is an objective, but it is missing either the number, the date, or the agreement of the person who owns it. That gap is small to close now and expensive to close after funding, because by then the objective has been quietly reinterpreted three times.
No agreed objective that a finance director would recognise. Every gate after this one inherits the ambiguity, which is why work like this tends to be judged on delivery rather than on value.
- What good looks like
- One sentence, agreed in writing before any money is committed. It names the goal, the measure, the number, the date, and the person accountable for it.
- First move
- Agree the objective in writing with whoever owns the number, with a figure and a date, before the next funding decision.
- Roughly
- A week, mostly other people's diaries
Decision
0 of 12 EarlyWhich decision changes, how often is it made, and what does a bad one cost?
The decision is named, sized and owned. You will be able to prove whether it improved, which is the only durable defence of the investment.
The decision is understood but not counted. Without volume, cycle time, error rate and cost to serve, the prize is an assertion, and assertions do not survive a second budget round.
No named decision. A capability is being built and a use will be found for it afterwards. This is the most common reason technically successful work produces nothing anybody can point at.
- What good looks like
- A short register of the decisions in play. For each one: how often it is made, how long it takes, how often it goes wrong, and what a wrong one costs.
- First move
- Build a decision register for the top three candidates: volume, cycle time, error rate and cost to serve. Interview the people who make the decision.
- Roughly
- Two weeks, including watching the decision made
Data
0 of 12 EarlyDoes trustworthy ground truth exist, and does a named human own it?
Ground truth exists and a named human owns it. This is the gate that cannot be retrofitted cheaply, and you are past it.
The data is usable but ownership or quality is informal. It holds until three systems disagree, at which point there is no arbiter and the argument is settled by seniority rather than evidence.
No trustworthy ground truth with an owner. Anything built on this will be correct in demonstration and disputed in production, usually around month four.
- What good looks like
- A named person owning every source that matters. Not a team, a person. Quality measured against a standard you agreed, rather than one you inherited.
- First move
- Name owners for your critical sources and confirm with them directly. Measure quality against a threshold before building anything on top.
- Roughly
- Three to four weeks, longer if ownership is contested
Design
0 of 12 EarlyBuy, configure or build, with the third option honestly priced?
Buy, configure and build were compared honestly, including the people cost of running it. That comparison usually saves more than any single delivery decision.
The option was chosen before it was tested. Often the answer is still right, but nobody can show the working, which makes it hard to defend when the bill arrives.
Building by default, or buying by default. Either way the third option was never honestly priced, and the licence you already hold may well do the job.
- What good looks like
- Buy, configure and build priced side by side over three years. Include the people needed to run it. Get at least one real quote from outside.
- First move
- Audit the licences you already hold, then obtain one genuine external quote. Compare over three years, including the people to run it.
- Roughly
- Two weeks, one of them waiting on a quote
Deployment
0 of 12 EarlyDoes it land in the workflow people already use, and are they still using it in month six?
It reaches the workflow people already use, and they are still using it. This is the most commonly skipped gate and the hardest to fake.
It reached the workflow, but usage is not instrumented. You will find out it stopped being used some months after it stopped being used, which is the expensive way to find out.
It has not landed in the workflow, or it landed and people went back to the spreadsheet once attention moved on. Adoption is the gate a supplier has least incentive to test, because the invoice clears at go live.
- What good looks like
- The output lands in a screen people already open. Usage is measured from the first release, so you can see it slipping while there is still time.
- First move
- Watch the work for an hour. Put the output into a screen people already open, crudely, before improving the model. Then instrument usage so drift is visible before it is terminal.
- Roughly
- A fortnight to instrument, a quarter to know
Discipline
0 of 12 EarlyWho governs it, and can you evidence that to a customer or a regulator?
Governance is documented, classified and evidenced. You could answer a regulator or a large customer today rather than assembling something over a weekend.
Policy exists but the inventory behind it does not, or the boundaries for anything that acts autonomously are undefined. This holds until the first review that asks for evidence rather than intent.
Nothing classified, nothing documented, no authority boundaries. This is where go live gets blocked in week ten, after the money is spent and the date has been promised.
- What good looks like
- A list of what is running and how risky each item is. Anything that acts on its own has a defined limit, a way to stop it, and a named owner.
- First move
- Run the inventory before writing policy. Classify by data touched. For anything that acts autonomously, define authority, rollback and a named owner.
- Roughly
- Two weeks for the inventory, then proportionate
Dividend
0 of 12 EarlyIs the value booked against a named budget holder, with a baseline?
The value is booked against a named budget holder with a baseline behind it. Almost nobody can do this, and it is the single best protection against a year two cut.
There is an intention to measure but no captured baseline. A baseline cannot be recovered after go live by anybody, at any price, which makes this a deadline rather than a task.
No baseline and no named budget holder. Whatever this delivers will be real and unprovable, and unprovable benefits are the first thing cut when budgets tighten.
- What good looks like
- A baseline measured before go live. A budget holder who has accepted the benefit in writing. A review in the diary for ninety days out.
- First move
- If it has not gone live, measure the baseline now over a real period. Get a named budget holder to accept the benefit in writing.
- Roughly
- Days, and it has to be before go live
Where attention would repay first
- Gate 01 DirectionAgree the objective in writing with whoever owns the number, with a figure and a date, before the next funding decision.
- Gate 02 DecisionBuild a decision register for the top three candidates: volume, cycle time, error rate and cost to serve. Interview the people who make the decision.
- Gate 03 DataName owners for your critical sources and confirm with them directly. Measure quality against a threshold before building anything on top.
- Gate 04 DesignAudit the licences you already hold, then obtain one genuine external quote. Compare over three years, including the people to run it.
- Gate 05 DeploymentWatch the work for an hour. Put the output into a screen people already open, crudely, before improving the model. Then instrument usage so drift is visible before it is terminal.
- Gate 06 DisciplineRun the inventory before writing policy. Classify by data touched. For anything that acts autonomously, define authority, rollback and a named owner.
- Gate 07 DividendIf it has not gone live, measure the baseline now over a real period. Get a named budget holder to accept the benefit in writing.
What is already working well
- Gate 01 DirectionYou know what this is for and who owns the outcome. That is rarer than it sounds and it protects everything downstream.
- Gate 02 DecisionThe decision is named and sized. You will be able to prove whether it improved.
- Gate 03 DataYour foundation holds. Ownership and quality are the two things that cannot be retrofitted cheaply.
- Gate 04 DesignThe build or buy call was made honestly. That usually saves more money than any single delivery decision.
- Gate 05 DeploymentIt reaches the workflow and people are still using it. This is the most commonly skipped gate and the hardest to fake.
- Gate 06 DisciplineYou could answer a regulator or a large customer. Most organisations discover they cannot at the worst possible moment.
- Gate 07 DividendYou can prove what it was worth. Almost nobody can, which is why budgets get cut in year two.
Want this gone? Reply to the email that brought you here, or ask. It is deleted the same week, no reason needed.