Decisions register.

D101

ContextWS1 needs baseline locked to drive Phase 2 KPI calibration

Options(a) Lock at Steerco #1 (b) Defer one cycle for further test data

PMO recommendationLock at Steerco #1 — baseline can be re-baselined if first 8-week data warrants

D102

ContextWS4 cannot advance to Built without counsel engagement; longest lead-time of any Phase 1 milestone

Options(a) Approve shortlist as presented (b) Add additional candidates (c) Defer one cycle

PMO recommendationApprove as presented; engage by Steerco #3

D103

ContextWS6 BDM shortlist needs partner sector locked to brief candidates correctly

Options(a) Lock primary vertical per Vol 2 Ch 5 sequencing (b) Open to two-sector pilot

PMO recommendationLock primary vertical; two-sector pilot deferred to Phase 2

D108

ContextVerbatim Steerco #1 feedback: "access to the PMO was needed [as] a top nav menu UI entry point rather than navigated from proposals, masterframework then live PMO". The live PMO board (/engagement/pmo) is Mathew’s daily-driver surface during Phase 1, yet it was reachable only via Proposals → Master Framework → Live PMO (three clicks deep). This was an IA mismatch with how the surface is actually used.

Options(a) Add “PMO” to PRIMARY_NAV between “See It Work” and “Proposals”, linking direct to /engagement/pmo, and set siteNav active key on all PMO-family pages (board, steerco papers, workstream drill-downs, ws-status reports, hardening backlog) (b) Add a secondary “Quick links” strip just under the primary nav (c) Defer until after G4 cutover

PMO recommendation(a) — single edit to PRIMARY_NAV in src/components/site-chrome.ts plus active-key updates on the nine PMO-family siteNav calls in src/routes/engagement.tsx. Zero new pages, zero new dependencies, zero risk to existing routes. Reflects how Phase 1 actually runs.

D110

ContextVerbatim from Carla 21 Jun 2026: "claude, as workstream lead of workstream TECHNOLOGY i am responsible for the design building and implementation cutover to hypercare, growth and exit of the crm and commission engine, with consult on user requirements from matt and corrina". This formalises the RACI for the platform's two most business-critical surfaces: the commission engine that moves money, and the CRM that holds the federated telephone books. Matt and Corrina are explicitly consulted stakeholders on user requirements only — they do not own technical architecture, sequencing, data model, or compliance scaffolding.

Options(a) Accept Carla as single accountable WS Lead end-to-end (design → build → cutover → hypercare → growth → exit) (b) Split into multiple accountable owners across phases (c) Hire external CTO/Head of Engineering

PMO recommendation(a) — single accountable WS Lead with end-to-end ownership through to liquidity event is the IPO-grade governance pattern. Same RACI that Air BnB, Afterpay, Uber, Airtasker ran during their build-out years. Matt + Corrina consulted on what the CRM needs to do; Carla accountable for how it is designed, built, and operated.

D111

ContextCarla's verbatim instruction Mon 22 Jun 2026: "claude make an entry to the live PMO, backlog item entry — Build CRM — prepare a high level scoping document with a RACI, CORRINA AND MATT for consult on what this CRM needs to do, carla responsible for elicitation of user requirements mapping to functional spec and UAT. TIME 5 DAYS STARTS TODAY MONDAY 22/06/26 END FRIDAY 26/06/26. HIGHEST PRIORITY SPRINT THIS WEEK". This is the scoping artefact sprint — not the build itself. The build sequencing decision lands at Steerco #2 (29 Jun 2026) on the strength of this artefact.

Options(a) Approve the 5-day scoping sprint as WS2's highest priority this week, with build sequencing decision at SC#2 (b) Begin build immediately without scoping (c) Defer scoping to SC#2 prep window

PMO recommendation(a) — published as backlog item WS2-B007, sprint item WS2-S003, with full scoping document live at /engagement/pmo/scoping/crm. RACI inside the doc has Matt + Corrina consulted on requirements; Carla responsible+accountable for elicitation, functional spec mapping, UAT plan. Eight sections: business problem (with verbatim Matt + Corrina quotes), RACI matrix, 15 functional requirements register, APP-by-APP privacy compliance, data model proposal, UAT plan with 12 scenarios, risk + dependency register, and three sequencing options for the SC#2 decision.

D116

ContextCorrina (WS1 Lead) verbatim Tue 23 Jun 2026, in a working session reviewing the CRM scoping artefact: "the crm tool is being (designed buikt implemented ) in phase 1 project. Then being handed over to bau (hypercare. Growth, exit) as a team carla matt and myself need to ensure we have defined the user requirements for all roles in flip360 to use ince cutover to bau to ensure the business achieves its financial goals... Thats how investors get paid, matt founder gers paid and carla and corrina gwt paid." Deep codebase analysis surfaced 13 distinct roles that materially touch the CRM, not the 4 originally identified (CMO / BD / Sales / CS). The additional 9 roles — Founder, PMO Director/CFO, Platform Admin, Member-side Sales Rep, Member (Referring), Community Manager, Compliance Officer, Finance Operator, Investor Read-Only — are all named in the existing architecture (/architecture.tsx ACTORS, /payouts.tsx Payout Officer, /community-manager.tsx, /investors/* surfaces). Every named principal's Phase 2 performance pool routes through this CRM working: YDT acquisition KPI ladder (Corrina's pool per framework §5.3), CoSai Revenue+NPBT vs Budget (Carla's pool per framework §5.2), exit valuation (Matt's equity), and revenue trajectory (investor pack $240k FY27 → $42M FY31). The CRM is not a feature — it is the operating system the business is sold and listed against.

Options(a) Formalise the all-13-role scope as the Phase 1 build envelope with three-signature sign-off gate (Corrina operator voice · Matt founder + Steerco chair · Carla WS2 Lead + PMO Director). User requirements + UAT + functional spec authored in three sequential waves (operator-side / leadership / federated-marketplace) so steering is live as the spec emerges. Spec sign-off precedes the build-sequencing decision (which roles get Phase 1 MVP vs Phase 2 — separate decision at SC#3). (b) Build only the 4 originally-identified roles (CMO/BD/Sales/CS) in Phase 1 and defer the other 9 to Phase 2. (c) Buy off-the-shelf CRM (HubSpot/Salesforce) and customise.

PMO recommendation(a) — the federated-trust marketplace + 5-handshake commission chain + dual-face CRM (operator + member) architecture cannot be served by off-the-shelf SaaS. Building 4 roles now and discovering the other 9 in Phase 2 means rebuilding the data model under live members — the worst possible time to fork the schema. The 3-wave sequencing keeps steering live: Wave 1 (CMO + BD + Sales + CS), Wave 2 (Founder + PMO Director + Compliance + Finance), Wave 3 (Platform Admin + Member-side Sales + Member + Community Manager + Investor RO). Sign-off discipline = three signatures on the final, complete spec before build accelerates past spec into hardened MVP. Signed instrument anchored as a permanent hash-anchored surface on cosaiflip360.org, same discipline as /engage and /engagement/sow-ydt. Artefact home at /engagement/pmo/scoping/crm/user-requirements; Wave detail pages chained off it; FR register grows from 15 to ~80–120 items.

D114

ContextCarla's verbatim instruction Mon 22 Jun 2026: "i need to set up a deal room on the plaform cosaiflip360.org that is a place where the costs to date and the costs to complete can be capture, stored retrieved analysed and reported. a place where invoices sent and receipts for payment made costs to date and costs to compelte" — refined same day: "i need to track the costs to date and costs to complete by workstream and total of all workstreams, every workstream is responsible for on time, on scope, on budget delivery. the pmo director cosai cfo services carla oliver is accountable for ensuring every workstream delivers on time on scope on budget and must work closely with the workstream leads to ensure this". RACI: WS Leads = Responsible for their own workstream OTOSOB (On Time / On Scope / On Budget); Carla (PMO Director, CoSai CFO Services) = Accountable for the engagement rollup. The deal room is the financial twin of the live PMO board: same workstreams, same governance, but the lens is cash + variance, not RAID + sprint.

Options(a) Ship the deal room as four routes (cover dashboard + per-WS deep dive + invoices register + receipts register), seeded with provisional best-inference budgets pending PMO Director ratification at SC#2 — single TypeScript-constants-as-data source of truth at /src/data/deal-room.ts, audit trail = git history (b) Defer to an external spreadsheet (Excel/Google Sheets) (c) Wait until Phase 2 when more cost data exists

PMO recommendation(a) — the deal room is foundational governance infrastructure for an IPO-grade narrative. Same breed as Air BnB, Afterpay, Uber, Airtasker, Canva: cost performance reported by workstream, rolled up to engagement, with OTOSOB triple constraint visible to Steerco in real time. Live at /engagement/pmo/deal-room with per-WS deep dive at /engagement/pmo/deal-room/workstream/:ws, invoices register at /engagement/pmo/deal-room/invoices, receipts register at /engagement/pmo/deal-room/receipts. Provisional budget allocation (WS2 50%, WS1/WS3/WS4/WS6 10% each, WS5/WS7 5% each = $15K CoSai PMO + $5K AI tokens = $20K ex-GST committed, plus $1.5K contingency = $21.5K ex-GST envelope) flagged for SC#2 ratification — that ratification reserved as D115. OTOSOB lights = PMO Director's manual judgement with rationale field (governance is human judgement, not an algorithm).

D113

ContextCarla's verbatim instruction Mon 22 Jun 2026 (same conversation as D112): "i need an invoice for aud 5000 for the ai workforece credits/tokens to build the commission engine". The Flip 360 commission engine is already live at /app — six functional guarantees met, chain ledger at /chain, Stripe Connect payouts wired, Pine Lawyers Governing Agreement at /legal — but the AI workforce credits that physically powered that build were never invoiced for. CSC-INV-2026-001 (May 2026, $5,500 inc.GST) covered CoSai PMO + technical oversight fees only. CSC-INV-2026-003 closes the gap by recognising the AI compute itself as a discrete line item, retrospectively. This is a recognition invoice (asset delivered), not a forward-funded sprint budget.

Options(a) Approve $5,000 AUD ex-GST + $500 GST = $5,500 AUD total payable as retrospective invoice CSC-INV-2026-003 for AI workforce credits already consumed to deliver the live commission engine asset; same-day payment; CoSai CFO Services issues the invoice (b) Defer recognition to year-end true-up via the master engagement (c) Absorb into CSC-INV-2026-001 retroactively (cannot — that invoice is already paid + closed)

PMO recommendation(a) — retrospective recognition invoice issued as CSC-INV-2026-003 ($5,000.00 ex-GST + $500.00 GST = $5,500.00 AUD total payable), payable same-day alongside CSC-INV-2026-002 ($550 inc.GST CRM scoping credits). Combined funding today: $6,050 AUD inc.GST. Consideration delivered: live commission engine at /app, six functional guarantees verifiable, Pine Lawyers governing agreement at /legal. Audit trail anchors the spend to D110 + D113 + master engagement CSC-INV-2026-001 in the decisions register + invoice ledger. Live at /engagement/pmo/commission-engine/invoice.

D112

ContextCarla's verbatim instruction Mon 22 Jun 2026: "I NEED $500 AUD as the budget for this scope of work, payable today 22 monday 26, cosai cfo services to issue an invoice for payment. cosai cfo services to buy the ai workforce credits (tokens)" — clarified same day: "$500 + $50 GST = $550 total" (the $500 is ex-GST, the gross figure payable is $550 AUD). WS2 Lead is funding the AI workforce credits required to execute WS2-B007 (the CRM scoping sprint). CoSai CFO Services Pty Ltd (where Carla is Principal) procures the credits on Flip 360's behalf under the master engagement signed at /engage in May 2026 (CSC-INV-2026-001). This is the credit-funding sub-invoice — separate from the monthly PMO services invoice.

Options(a) Approve $500 AUD ex-GST + $50 GST = $550 AUD total payable ring-fenced budget for AI workforce credits funding the WS2-B007 scoping sprint only; same-day payment; CoSai CFO Services issues invoice CSC-INV-2026-002 (b) Defer funding to monthly invoice cycle (c) Reject — fund from existing monthly engagement (no extra spend)

PMO recommendation(a) — invoice issued as CSC-INV-2026-002 ($500.00 ex-GST + $50.00 GST = $550.00 AUD total payable), payable same-day. Funds ring-fenced to WS2-B007 sprint window (Mon 22 Jun → Fri 26 Jun 2026); unspent credits forfeited at end-of-sprint. Live at /engagement/pmo/scoping/crm/invoice. Spillover into the CRM build sprint requires a separate SC#2-approved budget. Audit trail anchors the spend to D110 + D111 + D112 in the decisions register.

D109

ContextVerbatim Steerco #1 feedback: "steer co wanted to have 24/7 live access to the status of every workstream.... whats on the backlog for that workstream and what is being sprinted this week mon to sun from the back log, they wanted to be able to access the library of steer co papers, decisions (resolutions) issues/risks via a resolutions and issues, risk register, they wanted to see a workstream status report of done, doing, what up next, and the RAID per workstream, steer co members corrina and matt have NEVER seen a workstream project status report before, and what to see sample data as a show and tell to help them learn how to operate under a PMO governance structure. they asked to be shown the best practice that they could learn ADKAR ways of getting the PMO governance right first time — so a show me an example of what i have to do every two weeks as a workstream report due to steer co and how it gets updated to cosaiflip.org (which is our project management tool — like notion is to the marketplace, but we have an equivalent that is driven on url cosaiflip360.org)". Mathew and Corrina have never seen a fortnightly workstream status report; they need sample data + ADKAR teaching, not a blank template.

Options(a) Build the full PMO operating system inside cosaiflip360.org: per-workstream operating page (Done/Doing/Next + sprint Mon–Sun + backlog + RAID slice + linked decisions) for WS1–WS7, a Registers hub (decisions, issues+risks, RAID full with ?ws= filter), and an ADKAR-structured learn pack with an 8-step worked walkthrough of a fortnightly WS report (b) Defer to an external Notion workspace (c) Hand-write the per-WS reports as Word docs and attach to Steerco papers

PMO recommendation(a) — cosaiflip360.org is the same-breed home of the IPO narrative. Air BnB, Afterpay, Uber, Airtasker did not run their PMOs in someone else’s tool; the operating system IS the brand. Sample data shows Corrina + Mathew exactly what a Steerco-ready report looks like before they have to produce one. ADKAR + walkthrough teaches the rhythm. Zero new infrastructure: TypeScript-constants-as-data, D1-table-shaped for Phase 2 migration path. Audit trail = git history.

D204

ContextWS2 Milestone W4·SC#2 was "Stripe Connect test mode validated end-to-end". Bottom-up report 17 Jun 2026: Stripe SDK is not installed, no API keys wired, no Connect onboarding route exists. ABA file rail is wired and working. The marketing copy on /faq, /sweetener and /architecture references Stripe Connect as the rail.

Options(a) Approve 3-4 day Stripe Connect sprint between SC#2 and SC#3 (10 working days available) (b) Re-baseline milestone to "ABA validated + Connect scoped" and defer Connect to Phase 2 (c) Accept slip with no re-baseline as Red RAID

PMO recommendation(a) — Stripe Connect is the rail the investor narrative depends on. Cost: 3-4 days of engineering. Air BnB, Afterpay and Uber all run on platforms with the equivalent integration. Flip 360 cannot credibly claim the same breed without it.

D205

ContextWS2 Milestone W1·SC#1 was "six functional guarantees demo + ADR-7". Bottom-up report 17 Jun 2026: the demo surfaces (/demo, /walkthrough, /see-it-work, /architecture) exist but no formal demo was run with Mathew signing acceptance, and no ADR-7 document exists in /docs.

Options(a) Run the demo at the start of SC#2 (all parties at Wotso), Mathew signs the acceptance card live, ADR-7 drafted by 24 Jun and ratified by countersigned email by 27 Jun (b) Defer to SC#3 (c) Accept as standing Amber until G4

PMO recommendation(a) — all parties are physically present at Wotso. 30 minutes at the start of the meeting closes the milestone properly.

D206

ContextWS2 Milestone W8·SC#4 is "observability stack live". Bottom-up report 17 Jun 2026: no observability dependency installed, no error-rate dashboard, no payout SLA dashboard. 8 weeks away — still time to plan, not yet time to escalate.

Options(a) Cloudflare Workers Analytics Engine — native, lowest friction (b) Sentry — industry standard, broader ecosystem (c) Honeycomb — best observability UX (d) Defer choice to SC#3

PMO recommendation(a) at SC#2 to allow SC#3 scoping and SC#4 ship date. Cloudflare Workers Analytics Engine aligns with the existing Worker runtime.

D207

ContextBottom-up report 17 Jun 2026 surfaces that current marketing copy on /faq, /sweetener and /architecture references Stripe Connect, hardware-key signatures and KPMG/EY anchoring as live capabilities. These are aspirational at this date. The PMO position is: never soften the ambition — accelerate the build so the copy becomes true.

Options(a) Publish a "Phase 1 hardening" backlog at /engagement/pmo/backlog tracking every claim to either evidence or a committed sprint (b) Scrub the copy now to past-tense or "Phase 2 capability" badges (c) Do nothing

PMO recommendation(a) — Flip 360 is in the same breed as Air BnB, Afterpay, Uber, AirTasker, Canva. The standard of diligence is that standard. Every claim is either evidenced today or has a sprint committed against it on the published backlog. We never compromise on thought leadership or quality.