Work Output - Practical Assessment
Objective. Certify that a learner can use Work Output correctly under pressure: read a figure with its denominator, standard and value type; refuse an invalid comparison; and keep recoverable, billed, collected and capacity value apart while never presenting a projection as a result - at the gate standard of 80 or above, no critical error, with manager review.
This is the certification assessment for Work Output. It gives two realistic scenarios the learner must work end to end, a scored checklist of what a correct answer contains, and the critical errors that fail the assessment regardless of score. The self-check items are the actual assessment questions with model answers. The bar is mastery of the signature guardrail - output is not activity, and opportunity and projection are not realised value - demonstrated in a live reading, not recited.
See it in the demo
How this assessment is scored
The certification gate is practical score of 80 or above, no critical error, and manager review - the same gate as every Academy certification. Score is built from the checklist in the section below (100 points across the two scenarios). A critical error fails the assessment outright regardless of points, because these are the errors that destroy credibility with a real customer. The learner works both scenarios live on the demo and narrates their reading aloud; the reviewing manager marks the checklist and confirms no critical error occurred. Reciting the rules is not a pass - the learner must demonstrate them on the screens.
Scenario 1 (CSM lens): the disputed cost per clean claim
A customer's operations lead challenges a Work Output figure in a business review: 'Your tool says our cost per clean claim is lower than we believe, and one team's attainment is 115% which my manager says is impossible. I do not trust these numbers.'
The learner must, live on the demo:
- Diagnose from the bottom of the time-to-outcome chain up - scope and period, counted-work coverage, completion definition, standards and complexity, quality filter, denominator, value type.
- Identify that the low cost figure may rest on incomplete coverage or on demo/default rates rather than the customer's own, and that 115% attainment points to an unagreed or complexity-mismatched standard.
- State clearly which figures are safe to stand behind, which must be rebuilt on the customer's baseline, and which must be withdrawn until validated.
- Separate any value figure by type and confirm that no recoverable or capacity opportunity has been presented as collected cash.
- Decide what is a CSM validation task versus an implementation or commercial escalation.
Scenario 2 (Sales lens): the seven-minute output demo and the ROI question
A revenue-cycle prospect says: 'Our teams are fully utilised, so we must be delivering. Show me why I would need this, and tell me what we would save.'
The learner must, live on the demo:
- Run the five-beat arc and land the utilisation-versus-attainment contrast on a genuinely comparable, normalised basis - finding the fully-occupied-but-below-standard team.
- Reach cost per clean unit as the payoff the prospect's current tools cannot produce, naming the denominator.
- State the spoken limitation out loud - seeded demo data, and opportunity/projection kept separate from realised cash - before being asked.
- Answer the 'what would we save' question honestly: size it from AI impact or cost as a projection to test in a pilot on the customer's baseline, never as a guaranteed or booked saving.
- Close on a pilot next step with capacity value and cash separated in the success criteria.
Scored checklist (what a correct answer contains)
Scenario 1 - CSM (50 points):
- Diagnoses bottom-up in the right order (coverage/definition before standards before quality/denominator before value type) - 12
- Correctly attributes the low cost figure to coverage or non-customer rates - 8
- Correctly attributes 115% attainment to an unagreed or complexity-mismatched standard - 8
- States which figures stand, which to rebuild, which to withdraw - 10
- Names the value type of every value figure and catches any opportunity-as-cash - 7
- Draws the CSM-versus-escalation line correctly - 5
Scenario 2 - Sales (50 points):
- Lands the utilisation-versus-attainment contrast on a normalised basis - 12
- Shows normalisation (type, complexity, period, tenure) before comparing - 8
- Reaches cost per clean unit and names the denominator - 8
- Delivers the spoken limitation unprompted - 10
- Answers the savings question as a projection to test, on the customer's baseline - 7
- Closes on a pilot with capacity value and cash separated - 5
80+ with no critical error = pass, subject to manager review.
Critical errors (automatic fail)
Any one of these fails the assessment regardless of points, because each would mislead a real customer:
- Presenting a projection or AI-impact estimate as a realised result or booked cash.
- Summing or swapping value types - treating recoverable, capacity, billed or collected value as interchangeable, or adding opportunity to cash.
- Ranking or comparing teams on raw counts without normalising work type, complexity, period and tenure and applying the quality filter.
- Presenting attainment without a defensible, agreed, complexity-matched standard - or defending 115% attainment as performance.
- Quoting cost per raw unit as the unit cost, or quoting cost per clean unit on demo/default rates as if it were the customer's own.
- Standing behind a figure built on unconfirmed coverage instead of caveating or withdrawing it.
- Inventing a control, metric, integration or entitlement rather than saying confirm-with-product.
These map one-to-one to the app's signature guardrail: output is not activity, and opportunity and projection are not realised value.
Interpretation check
A pass requires demonstrating, live, that output is not activity and that opportunity and projection are not realised value: reading every figure with its denominator, standard and value type, refusing unnormalised comparisons, and keeping recoverable, billed, collected and capacity value strictly apart - any breach is a critical error.
In the field
Scenario 1 is modelled on a KnackGlobal-style dispute over cost per clean claim and an implausible attainment figure; scenario 2 is modelled on a ProHance-displacement prospect who equates utilisation with delivery - both are the real situations this certification exists to prepare for, where presenting opportunity as cash or activity as output would lose the account.
Practical task
Complete both scenarios live on the demo, narrated aloud for a reviewing manager: produce a written finding for scenario 1 (which figures stand, which to rebuild, which to withdraw, and the escalation decision) and a recorded seven-minute run for scenario 2 ending on a pilot next step. The manager marks the 100-point checklist and confirms no critical error occurred. Pass requires 80 or above with no critical error.
Self-check
ASSESSMENT Q1: In scenario 1, the customer's cost per clean claim looks too low. Give the correct diagnosis order and the two most likely causes.
Diagnose bottom-up: scope and period, counted-work coverage, completion definition, standards and complexity, quality filter, denominator, value type. The two most likely causes of a low cost figure are incomplete coverage (work uncounted) and cost built on demo or default rates rather than the customer's own model. Confirm the quality filter is on so raw output is not posing as clean.
ASSESSMENT Q2: The same customer's team shows 115% attainment. Is that a strong team? Justify.
Not established. 115% against a standard that was never agreed or does not match the work's complexity means the standard is wrong, not that the team is exceptional. Attainment and the standard are read together, and the standard must be customer-owned and complexity-matched before the figure is reported - otherwise it is withdrawn.
ASSESSMENT Q3: In scenario 2 the prospect says 'we are fully utilised so we must be delivering.' How do you demonstrate otherwise?
Put utilisation next to output attainment on a normalised, comparable basis and find the fully-occupied-but-below-standard team - the busy-versus-delivering gap. Show normalisation (type, complexity, period, tenure) first, then land that activity tools cannot surface this gap, and carry it to cost per clean unit.
ASSESSMENT Q4: The prospect asks 'what will we save?' Give the passing answer and name the critical error to avoid.
Passing answer: size the opportunity from AI impact or cost as a projection under stated assumptions, to be tested in a pilot on the customer's own baseline, with capacity value and cash separated in the success criteria. The critical error to avoid is presenting that projection as a realised or booked saving.
ASSESSMENT Q5: A learner adds recoverable value and capacity value into a single savings number during review. What happens and why?
Automatic fail - it is a critical error (summing value types). Recoverable value is an opportunity and capacity value is freed time; neither is cash and they cannot be summed. Only billed and collected value are realised money, and each value type is reported separately.
Verified vs demo. Both scenarios run on the seeded demo; a real customer's completion definitions, coverage, standards, quality signal, paid-hours denominator and cost basis are confirm-with-product, and a passing learner must say so rather than present demo figures as a customer's actual numbers.