This page details the governance artefacts delivered in every 30-day FIT 4 SAP Proof of Concept prototype. In short, Scar Log, Decision Register, Board Pack, and Executive Briefing provide evidence-based decision materials instead of consultant theatre. It matters because burnt executives need governance receipts that prove accountability and document learning for full implementation. Use it when evaluating what makes FIT 4 SAP different from typical vendor demos or agile sprints.

</aside>

Every FIT 4 SAP engagement produces five governance artefacts regardless of technical outcome. These aren't optional nice-to-haves. They're core deliverables. You get receipts, not reassurances. Plain language, executive-readable, no jargon hiding problems.

The Problem with Traditional Deliverables

Traditional pilot outputs: PowerPoint decks claiming "90% complete" for months, status reports sanitised for steering committees, RAID logs buried in appendices. Consultants vanish post-go-live, taking knowledge with them. No audit trail of what was decided when or why.

When implementations burn, blame shifts: "You never told us your business worked this way." Problems are hidden until it is too late to fix without massive change orders. Optimism bias is baked into every progress report.

Most implementation documentation is designed to avoid accountability, not enable it.

The Five Core Governance Artefacts

1. Scar Log — What broke and why 2. Decision Register — What changed and who approved 3. Board Pack — Executive summary with evidence 4. Executive Briefing — Plain-language recommendations

Each explained in detail below.

Artifact 1: Scar Log

Running document of every problem encountered during the 30-day sprint. Chronological, dated entries with no euphemisms. Problems documented in real-time, not sanitised for stakeholders at project end.

If a consultant tries to hide a problem, it reappears later as a seven-figure change order. The Scar Log prevents this by making every issue visible immediately.

Example entry:

Day 7 Problem: Triangular invoicing fails when NL entity invoices UK customer for FR shipment Impact: Core business scenario doesn't work in standard SAP Workaround: Manual journal entry to correct intercompany clearing Root Cause: Tax determination logic incomplete for three-country flow Resolution Status: Fixed Day 8 via BRF+ rule, retested Day 9, working

Day 12 Problem: BRF+ rule for customer-specific pricing returns wrong discount tier Impact: Prototype can't demonstrate pricing logic accurately Workaround: None—rule logic needs redesign Root Cause: Business requirement more complex than questionnaire revealed Resolution Status: Documented as gap, recommended for Phase 2 investigation