Value Leakage sales demo - one defensible finding, from sized to Verified
Objective. Give a runnable, evidence-led demo script for Value Leakage using the 5-beat method (question -> screen -> evidence -> interpretation -> next step). The story proves the number is defensible, not big: one finding broken into quantity x unit-cost x confidence, owned, and read on Recovery with capacity and cash kept separate.
The weak Value Leakage demo lists six categories and a huge total. The strong one picks a single finding and walks it end to end, so the buyer sees provenance, a confidence-discounted number, a named owner and an honest recovery state. This script is built for a live call: a tight arc, the exact screens in order with the one value point each, the limitation to state out loud, and the discovery questions the demo answers. Never quote the seeded magnitudes as the customer's opportunity.
See it in the demo
The story arc
The arc is 'you already know you are leaking value - here is how we make it a number finance will fund.' Open on the buyer's real pain: improvement ideas compete on anecdote, and the loudest leak wins the budget, not the biggest. Then show the app turning that into an honest, owned, trackable ledger. The emotional turn is the confidence discount and the capacity-vs-cash separation: the moment the buyer realises the app is built to resist its own inflation is the moment they trust the number. Land on one finding carried from sized to Verified, and the next step is a customer-owned baseline, not a signed total.
Keep it to one finding. One finding told completely beats six categories listed. The demo's job is credibility, not volume.
The exact screens in order, one value point each
Run these in order; each screen earns one sentence, not a tour:
- Overview (https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/overview) - value point: 'Leaks are sized and bucketed into six categories, not just listed.' Note the category tiles carry magnitudes (for example Capacity ~78 lakh, Process ~1.12 crore) to show sizing, and say out loud these are seeded demo figures.
- Workflow detection (https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/workflow) - value point: 'Findings are surfaced from observed work, not guessed in a workshop - that is the provenance.'
- Top value leaks (https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/leaks) - value point: 'Findings are ranked by confidence-discounted value, so effort follows the biggest defensible leak, not the loudest.' Pick one finding here to carry.
- A category screen for your chosen finding (for example Capacity https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/capacity or Process https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/process) - value point: break it down live - 'This is quantity, the hours we measured, times unit-cost, your loaded rate, times confidence, how sure we are. That confidence factor is why your CFO can argue with this number instead of dismissing it.'
- Attribution (https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/attribution) - value point: 'This finding has a named owner - it is assignable work, not a statistic.'
- Recovery (https://leakage.demo.timechamp.io/#/recovery) - value point, the climax: 'Here is the status from Open to Verified, and crucially this is capacity we could free and this is cash actually recovered - we never add them together.'
The explicit limitation to state out loud
Say this plainly during the Recovery beat, do not bury it: 'Two honesty rules make this credible. First, these magnitudes are seeded demo data - your real number comes from your measured volumes and your finance-agreed rates, which we confirm together. Second, recovered capacity and cash recovered are never summed. Freed capacity only becomes cash if you choose to redeploy or remove it - that is your decision, and we will not claim it for you. A detected or Open finding is a sized opportunity, not money won; only Verified-with-evidence counts.'
Stating the limitation is not a weakness in the pitch - it is the pitch. A buyer who has been burned by inflated consultant slides trusts the vendor who draws the line first.
The discovery questions this demo answers
Use the demo to surface and answer the buyer's real questions, and close with a qualifying ask:
- 'When you pitch an improvement internally today, how do you size it, and does finance believe the number?' (answered by the confidence-discounted model)
- 'How do you decide which improvement to fund first?' (answered by Top value leaks ranking)
- 'When something is supposed to be fixed, how do you know it actually was?' (answered by the Open-to-Verified recovery states with evidence)
- 'How do you avoid over-claiming freed capacity as cash?' (answered by the capacity-vs-cash separation)
Close with the next step that fits the honesty of the app: 'Let us build one finding on your own data - your measured quantity, your finance-agreed rate - and take it from sized to a verification definition. One defensible finding is a better proof than any total I could show you.'
Interpretation check
The demo wins on defensibility, not size: one finding carried from detection through quantity x unit-cost x confidence to a named owner and an honest recovery state. The seeded magnitudes are demo data, and recovered capacity and cash recovered are shown as separate lines that are never summed.
In the field
KnackGlobal (RCM, ~6,000 seats): against an incumbent attack the demo must win on hard ROI, so the one-finding, confidence-discounted, capacity-vs-cash-separated story is the right play - it offers a number finance will back rather than a headline total they would write down.
Practical task
Script and rehearse a seven-minute live demo on leakage.demo.timechamp.io: run the six screens in order, carry one finding you can defend, break it into quantity x unit-cost x confidence out loud, show its owner, and finish on Recovery reading capacity and cash as two separate lines. Write the one explicit limitation you will state and the four discovery questions you will ask, ending on the one-finding-on-your-data next step.
Self-check
Why carry one finding end to end instead of touring all six categories?
Because the demo's job is credibility, not volume. One finding broken into quantity x unit-cost x confidence, owned, and read on Recovery proves the model is honest and defensible. A tour of six categories and a big total is exactly the inflated slide the buyer distrusts.
What is the climax beat of the demo and what must you say there?
The Recovery screen. Say: here is the status from Open to Verified, this is capacity we could free, this is cash actually recovered, and we never add them together - freed capacity only becomes cash if you redeploy or remove it.
How do you handle the seeded demo magnitudes on the Overview tiles?
Show them to prove leaks are sized and ranked, and say out loud they are seeded demo figures. The customer's real number comes from their measured quantity and finance-agreed rates, built together - never quote the demo magnitude as their opportunity.
A buyer says 'every vendor shows me an inflated savings number.' How does this demo answer that?
By making the honesty the pitch: show the confidence discount that marks down uncertain findings, the provenance from workflow detection, and the capacity-vs-cash separation, then state the limitation first. The vendor who draws the line earns the trust.
What is the right next step to close on, and why?
Build one finding on the customer's own data - their measured quantity, their finance-agreed rate - and take it from sized to a verification definition. It fits the app's honesty: one defensible finding is a stronger proof than any demo total.
Verified vs demo. Every screen is live in the demo and the category magnitudes (for example Capacity ~78 lakh, Process ~1.12 crore) are seeded demo data that prove the model sizes, ranks and tracks leaks. The customer's real figures, rate sources, recoverable-share assumptions, detection coverage and verification evidence are customer-specific - confirm with product and the customer's finance; never quote a seeded magnitude as a customer result.