Prove · baseline BL-063

Quality & Coaching

Quality & Coaching, all regions, as run before the agents were switched on. Owner at the time of measurement: Director, Service Quality.

Baseline register

Status

Contested

confidence 0.88

Cost per unit

$22.47

188,799 units in the window

Cycle time

33.0 hrs

pre-agent, measured end to end

Quality

87.1%

rework rate, inverted

Claimed on this baseline

$8.51m

$0 independently verified

Posted to the ledger

0 of 5

cash lines with a journal reference

How it was measured

Invoice reconstruction

Method

Invoice reconstruction

Method note

Vendor invoices, contractor timesheets and purchase orders re-added for the window and tied back to the posted ledger balance.

Window

FY24 Q4, thirteen weeks

Sample

15,104

Confidence in the method

0.88

Sign-off

Who accepted this as the number to beat

Status

Contested

Signed by

Sofia Lindqvist

Role

Finance Business Partner, Operations

Signed

19.1 months ago

Challenged by

Grace Abbott, Head of Internal Audit

Caveat carried with the number

Signed and then challenged. The challenge is open, so every benefit line resting on this baseline is shown as disputed rather than netted off.

Where the benefit lands

Account and cost center this baseline reconciles to

General ledger account

6100 · Salaries and wages

Fully loaded permanent payroll. Benefit posted here is a reduction against the approved establishment, not a cash refund.

Corporate GL · Personnel · owner Ana Duarte, Group Financial Controller

Cost center

CC-5020 · Customer Service

Global · owner Ravi Menon · annual budget $23.51m

Customer Servicefunction view

Benefit lines resting on this baseline

10 lines · $8.51m claimed · $7.57m realized · $0 verified

Period	Category	Claimed	Realized	Verified	Status	Variance	Journal
FY25 Q3	Labor cost	$1.10m	$953.4k	not verified	Disputed	Scope Scope drifted after the baseline was signed. The added work is real but it is not this baseline.	not posted
FY25 Q4	Labor cost	$1.59m	$1.43m	not verified	Disputed	Timing Benefit landed one period later than claimed. The run rate is intact; the period attribution was wrong.	not posted
FY26 Q1	Labor cost	$2.04m	$1.87m	not verified	Disputed	Method mismatch The baseline was measured by survey and the realized figure by system extract. The two are not comparable without a bridge, and no bridge has been built.	not posted
FY26 Q2	Labor cost	$2.43m	$2.43m	not verified	Disputed	Volume Seasonal volume ran ahead of baseline, which flatters the realized figure rather than the claim.	not posted
FY26 Q3	Labor cost	$1.36m	$881.9k	not verified	Period open	Period open The period is not closed. The realized figure is a run rate, not a result, and nothing in it has been verified.	not posted
FY25 Q3	Quality	$241.1k	$173.6k	not verified	Non cash	Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving.	not posted
FY25 Q4	Quality	$350.2k	$287.1k	not verified	Non cash	Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving.	not posted
FY26 Q1	Quality	$447.7k	$371.6k	not verified	Non cash	Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving.	not posted
FY26 Q2	Quality	$533.8k	$357.7k	not verified	Non cash	Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving.	not posted
FY26 Q3	Quality	$298.5k	$256.7k	not verified	Non cash	Non cash This is a cycle time or quality improvement. It has no journal entry, so it is carried outside the amount reconciled to the ledger rather than converted into a saving.	not posted

What this record is, and what it is not

A benefit realization ledger reconciled to a general ledger needs the customer’s actual baseline figures and account structure. Modeled numbers demonstrate the instrument and prove nothing about the business case.

The measurement window ran FY24 Q4, thirteen weeks over a sample of 15,104. That sample size is on the page because a baseline drawn from twelve cases and one drawn from forty thousand are not the same instrument, and averaging them into a single confidence figure would hide which one you are looking at.

0 of 5 cash lines resting on this baseline carry a journal reference. A benefit line with no journal reference has not touched the general ledger, so it is shown as claimed rather than counted as realized cash.