What the Audit
actually delivers.
Below is a sanitized, composite example of the written assessment you receive — structure, depth, and sizing are real; company specifics are synthetic. Three parts: the scorecard, the sized findings, and the sequence.
Product Org Audit · Written Assessment
B2B SaaS, ~€4M ARR (sanitized example)
12 working days · 2 weeks elapsed
1 · Executive summary
Of the 8 decision systems, 1 works, 3 are partial, 4 are broken. The highest-leverage gap is pricing: the product is monetized on a legacy flat price while usage-driven costs grow with the most engaged customers. Second is prioritization, which currently consumes leadership time without producing a stable roadmap. The fix sequence below is ordered by sized impact and dependency — not by ease.
2 · The 8-decision scorecard
01Metrics Tree
BrokenThree "north star" candidates in circulation; none decomposed to team-level levers. Initiatives justified by narrative.
Sized: Every prioritization debate restarts from zero — est. 2–3 leadership days/month
02Tracking Plan
PartialCore funnel tracked, but signup events double-fire on mobile; two dashboards disagree on trial starts by ~8%.
Sized: Conversion experiments unreadable below ~10% effect size
03Pricing Architecture
BrokenSingle legacy price point + ad-hoc enterprise discounts. No tier boundaries, no metering on high-cost usage features.
Sized: Largest gap found: ARPU expansion potential est. +12–19% MRR
04ICE Scoring
BrokenBacklog ordered by recency and stakeholder volume. Last quarter's decisions reopened in 4 of 6 planning meetings reviewed.
Sized: Roadmap churn — est. 20–30% of sprint capacity redirected mid-quarter
05Discovery Framework
PartialDiscovery happens but has no exit criteria; median idea-to-spec time in the sample reviewed: 4.5 months.
Sized: Two stale assumptions shipped in the last two quarters
06PRD Template
WorkingSpecs are consistent and complete. Missing only a pre-committed success metric per initiative.
Sized: Minor — add hypothesis block, keep the rest
07A/B Framework
BrokenLaunches evaluated by before/after eyeballing. No sample-size discipline; one "win" reviewed was statistical noise.
Sized: Product knowledge not compounding; risk of shipping on false positives
08Product Roles
PartialNext hire scoped as "senior PM" without a scorecard; seniority level not derived from the actual decision gaps.
Sized: Wrong-level hire risk — est. 6-month setback if missed
3 · The 90-day sequence
Weeks 1–4
Pricing Architecture
Largest sized impact (+12–19% MRR potential), independent of other fixes, revenue effect compounds from day one.
Weeks 3–6
Tracking Plan repair
Prerequisite for validating the pricing rollout — fix the double-fire and reconcile trial-start definitions first.
Weeks 6–10
ICE Scoring + Metrics Tree
Installed together: the tree defines the levers, the scoring model ranks against them. Ends roadmap re-litigation.
Weeks 10–14
A/B Framework
Now that tracking is trustworthy, build test discipline: sample-size gates, pre-registered hypotheses, verdict template.
Not recommended this quarter: Discovery Framework overhaul and the PRD hypothesis block — real gaps, but sequenced behind the four above. Doing everything at once is how nothing lands.
This, for your product org.
€1,500 fixed. 1–2 weeks. Fee credited in full against any Build. If the audit finds nothing material, you'll have the evidence that your org is healthy — in writing.