# BidOps — Sample report (excerpt)

> This is an illustrative, anonymised excerpt of a BidOps deliverable package.
> Real reports are tied to your own documents and evidence. Figures here are fictional.
> For an asynchronous product, this artifact is what replaces a sales call.

---

## 1. Compliance matrix (excerpt)

| # | Requirement | Status | Owner | Deadline | Proof source | Gate |
|---|-------------|--------|-------|----------|--------------|------|
| R-04 | ISO 27001 certificate | ⚠ missing | — | 2026-04-14 | — | proof |
| R-07 | Reference > 500k CHF | ✓ ok | M. Berger | — | CaseStudy_CH.pdf | reference |
| R-12 | Project-lead CV (current) | ⚠ update | H. Wenger | 2026-04-10 | CV_2024.docx | proof |
| R-18 | Bank guarantee §12 | ✗ missing | — | 2026-04-14 | — | form |
| R-23 | Data-protection concept | ✗ unclear | — | — | — | form |

Legend: ✓ ok · ⚠ needs action · ✗ missing/blocking.

---

## 2. Bid-chain risk map (the critical path)

The following items are **not** isolated. They combine into a single rejection chain:

    R-04 certificate missing
        -> no owner assigned (R-04)
            -> deadline conflict (2026-04-14)
                -> format non-compliance (§12, R-18)
                    -> BID REJECTION

Isolated (lower-priority) risks: R-12 (CV update), R-23 (clarify with buyer).

---

## 3. Bid cut-set (minimal interventions, in order)

1. **Provide the ISO 27001 certificate or a substitute proof (R-04).**
   Cuts the chain at its origin — three downstream steps fall away.
   _Gate: proof._

2. **Name an owner for section 4 (R-04 / R-18).**
   Resolves the deadline conflict before it endangers format compliance.
   _Gate: owner._

3. **Raise a buyer question on the reference threshold (R-07).**
   Clarifies the last critical must-have criterion before submission.
   _Gate: reference._

> Fixing these three breaks the critical rejection path. The remaining items
> are quality improvements, not blockers.

---

## 4. Questions to the buyer

- Q1 (tied to R-18): Is an alternative to the §12 bank guarantee admissible
  (e.g. a parent-company guarantee)?
- Q2 (tied to R-07): Does a reference of 480k CHF satisfy the ">500k" threshold
  if scope is comparable?

---

## 5. Answer draft (DOCX) — section confidence

| Section | Source | Confidence |
|---------|--------|------------|
| Company profile | StandardText_DE.docx | high |
| Methodology | CaseStudy_CH.pdf | high |
| Team & CVs | CV_2024.docx | medium (update needed) |
| Compliance annex | — | low (evidence missing) |

---

## 6. Go / Conditional Go / No-Go

**Decision: Conditional Go.**

Rationale:
- Blocking: missing must-have proof (R-04), missing form item (R-18).
- Resolvable within deadline if the 3-item cut-set is executed this week.
- Reference fit is borderline (R-07) — pending buyer answer Q2.

Recommendation: proceed **only** if the cut-set is completed by 2026-04-11.
Otherwise: No-Go, to avoid a formal rejection that also costs reputation.

---

_Prepared asynchronously by BidOps · operated by SKV Graph Labs · no call required._