You do the building. This page is written for you, not for your owner.
What you are being asked to do, in hours, by week. Why the owner sees the raw numbers. What the authority assessment actually is. And what you keep at the end of it.
YOUR HOURS
~30 across 13 weeks
YOUR SESSIONS
13 · the owner attends 4
WEEKLY LOAD
~2 hours, mostly in session
YOUR TOOL
The BM-OS instrument panel
Roughly thirty hours over thirteen weeks. Published here rather than discovered in week three, because the second one is worse for everybody.
Weeks 1–4 · SEE
~9 hours
Three critical systems connected. You establish which system is authoritative for each number. Most of this happens inside the weekly session; between sessions it is short, specific checks.
Weeks 5–8 · WRITE
~11 hours
The heaviest stretch. You document what currently lives in someone’s head — the close checklist, the follow-up sequence, the decision rules. You are writing down how the business already works, not inventing a new process.
Weeks 9–13 · SEQUENCE
~10 hours
Gates defined, weekly review installed, diagnostic re-scored on screen at day 90. Nothing gets automated in these thirteen weeks.
During the install, the owner sees the raw numbers directly — from the source systems, not only through your summary. That sentence makes most operations managers tense, so here is the honest reading of it.
Right now, if a figure is wrong, you are the person standing next to it. You relayed it, so you own it — even when the error was in a system nobody had ever reconciled. That is the exposure you carry today, and it is invisible until the month it isn’t.
Every number becomes her alibi, not her exposure.
Once each number has one authoritative source and that source is visible to both of you, a disagreement stops being about your credibility and starts being about a system. You stop being the person blamed for a figure you only passed on. In our experience this is the single change delegates value most, and almost nobody anticipates it before week four.
What it is
One short call, before the install starts, without the owner present. It is a condition of starting. We are listening for one thing: whether you describe changing a process, or describe checking first. Those two answers sound completely different and neither is easy to fake.
What it is not
It is not a test you can fail. If it turns out you cannot change a process without asking permission, that is a finding about the business, not about you — and it is the first thing the install fixes. What you say in confidence stays in confidence; the owner gets the shape of the answer, never the transcript.
Keep /01
A documented operating system you built
Not a consultant’s deck. The artefacts carry your name in the version history because you wrote them.
Keep /02
Three artefacts that travel with you
The Close Checklist, the Source-of-Truth Map, and the Thirty-Day Continuity File. Every one of them is evidence of work most operators are never given the chance to do.
Keep /03
A demonstrable case for your next role
At the end of this you can describe, with numbers, a business that measurably depended less on one person than it did ninety days earlier. That is a rare thing to be able to say about yourself.
“We’re looking at a 90-day install that writes down how this business actually runs. You’d be in all thirteen sessions; I’d be in four. It’s about two hours a week for you, and the systems and documents that come out of it have your name on them. There’s a page that explains it from your side — including a call you’d have on your own, without me. Read it and tell me honestly whether you want to do it.”