Add risks and constraints document
This commit is contained in:
parent
d733b600bb
commit
5f0c360a2e
560
risks-and-constraints.md
Normal file
560
risks-and-constraints.md
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,560 @@
|
|||||||
|
# Risks & Constraints
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## AWS Non-Compete Constraint
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Current Situation
|
||||||
|
**Non-compete with AWS exists** - specific timeline and details need clarification.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Strategic Implications
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**What This Rules Out:**
|
||||||
|
- ❌ Building services that directly compete with AWS IoT Core, SiteWise, Greengrass
|
||||||
|
- ❌ Marketing as "AWS alternative" or "AWS replacement"
|
||||||
|
- ❌ Offering managed services that replace AWS products
|
||||||
|
- ❌ Using AWS infrastructure for customer workloads
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**What This ALLOWS:**
|
||||||
|
- ✅ Consulting and integration services (helping customers USE AWS better)
|
||||||
|
- ✅ Working with companies who DON'T use AWS (non-customers)
|
||||||
|
- ✅ Edge-first architecture (complementary, not competitive)
|
||||||
|
- ✅ Building on Azure, GCP, or on-premise infrastructure
|
||||||
|
- ✅ Targeting niches AWS doesn't address well (data sovereignty, SMB market)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Compliance Strategy
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Positioning:**
|
||||||
|
- "Edge-first industrial IoT partner" (NOT "cloud platform")
|
||||||
|
- "OT/IT integration specialist" (NOT "AWS competitor")
|
||||||
|
- "Data sovereignty and on-premise solutions" (DIFFERENT from cloud-first)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Customer Targeting:**
|
||||||
|
- Focus on companies with data sovereignty concerns
|
||||||
|
- Target AWS non-users (plenty in manufacturing)
|
||||||
|
- Position as "on-ramp to cloud" not "cloud replacement"
|
||||||
|
- Offer to integrate WITH AWS if customer wants (complementary)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Messaging to Avoid:**
|
||||||
|
- "Cheaper than AWS"
|
||||||
|
- "AWS alternative"
|
||||||
|
- "Replace your AWS IoT infrastructure"
|
||||||
|
- Any direct competitive language
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Safe Messaging:**
|
||||||
|
- "Edge-first architecture for data sovereignty"
|
||||||
|
- "Works on-premise, integrates with cloud if desired"
|
||||||
|
- "We bridge OT to IT, including AWS when appropriate"
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Timeline Considerations
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Questions to Clarify:**
|
||||||
|
1. What is the exact non-compete expiration date?
|
||||||
|
2. Does consulting/integration violate the non-compete?
|
||||||
|
3. Are edge-first/on-premise solutions acceptable?
|
||||||
|
4. Can we help customers connect to AWS (integration)?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Strategic Options Based on Timeline:**
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**If expires in <12 months:**
|
||||||
|
- Focus heavily on consulting (safe)
|
||||||
|
- Build network and customer base
|
||||||
|
- Plan platform launch post-expiration
|
||||||
|
- Use consulting to fund infrastructure
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**If expires in 12-24 months:**
|
||||||
|
- Start with consulting (safe)
|
||||||
|
- Build edge-first platform (likely safe if positioned correctly)
|
||||||
|
- Avoid any AWS competitive language
|
||||||
|
- Launch premium features post-expiration
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**If expires in 24+ months:**
|
||||||
|
- Edge-first platform is likely fine (different market)
|
||||||
|
- Focus on data sovereignty/on-premise customers
|
||||||
|
- Explicitly avoid AWS competitive positioning
|
||||||
|
- Build moat before non-compete expires
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Market Risks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 1: Customer Acquisition Difficulty
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Can't find customers willing to pay.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low-Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (no revenue)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Start with personal network (13 years of contacts)
|
||||||
|
- Pilot pricing ($10k) reduces barrier to entry
|
||||||
|
- Multiple outreach channels (LinkedIn, ISA, referrals)
|
||||||
|
- Consulting model allows flexible pricing
|
||||||
|
- Can work part-time while employed (no income pressure)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Extend pilot period (90 → 120 days)
|
||||||
|
- Lower pilot pricing ($5k-8k)
|
||||||
|
- Expand geographic reach (remote work)
|
||||||
|
- Partner with system integrators (referrals)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 2: Project Scope Creep
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Projects take 2-3x longer than estimated, burning time and profit.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (reduced hourly rate, delayed other projects)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Fixed scope in contract (specific deliverables)
|
||||||
|
- "Out of scope" clause for additional work
|
||||||
|
- Charge extra for scope changes
|
||||||
|
- Start small (40-80 hour projects)
|
||||||
|
- Time tracking to identify issues early
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Renegotiate scope mid-project
|
||||||
|
- Charge T&M for additional work
|
||||||
|
- Learn from experience, improve scoping
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 3: Platform Technical Failures
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Multi-tenant platform has stability issues, data loss, or downtime.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium (new platform)
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (customer churn, reputation damage)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Start with 2-3 pilot customers (test thoroughly)
|
||||||
|
- Automated backups (daily + offsite)
|
||||||
|
- Monitoring and alerting (proactive)
|
||||||
|
- Gradual rollout (don't scale too fast)
|
||||||
|
- 99.5% uptime SLA (reasonable, achievable)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- 24-hour support commitment
|
||||||
|
- Free month of service for outages >4 hours
|
||||||
|
- Backup to customer premises (if needed)
|
||||||
|
- Migrate to more stable infrastructure if needed
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 4: Competition from Established Players
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Siemens, Rockwell, or others target SMB market with aggressive pricing.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low-Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (harder to compete)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Focus on speed (weeks vs months)
|
||||||
|
- Stay nimble (can pivot faster)
|
||||||
|
- Personal service (vs enterprise bureaucracy)
|
||||||
|
- Edge-first positioning (different than cloud)
|
||||||
|
- Build relationships (sticky customers)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Differentiate further (AI features sooner)
|
||||||
|
- Partner with them (reseller/referral)
|
||||||
|
- Go deeper in vertical (specialize)
|
||||||
|
- Geographic focus (local presence wins)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 5: Customer Churn
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Customers leave after 6-12 months.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (recurring revenue loss)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Deliver value (measurable ROI)
|
||||||
|
- Excellent support (fast response)
|
||||||
|
- Continuous improvement (new features)
|
||||||
|
- Annual contracts (reduce churn)
|
||||||
|
- Regular check-ins (relationship building)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Exit interviews (learn why)
|
||||||
|
- Win-back campaigns
|
||||||
|
- Improve product/service
|
||||||
|
- Target higher LTV customers
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Operational Risks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 6: Solo Founder Burnout
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Working full-time + building venture leads to burnout.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium-High
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (health, business failure)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Set boundaries (nights/weekends only, initially)
|
||||||
|
- Phase 1 is part-time friendly (consulting)
|
||||||
|
- Automate early (reduce manual work)
|
||||||
|
- Hire contractor at $15k/month MRR
|
||||||
|
- Plan exit from full-time job at $30k MRR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Take breaks (1 week off per quarter)
|
||||||
|
- Reduce scope (focus on high-value activities)
|
||||||
|
- Hire sooner (even at lower MRR)
|
||||||
|
- Consider part-time job (vs full-time)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 7: Technical Debt Accumulation
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Moving fast creates messy code/infrastructure that's hard to maintain.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: High (expected in bootstrap)
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (slower future development)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Document as you go (runbooks, architecture)
|
||||||
|
- Refactor periodically (quarterly)
|
||||||
|
- Use proven technologies (not bleeding edge)
|
||||||
|
- Leverage existing expertise (LXC from ZLH)
|
||||||
|
- Plan for refactoring in roadmap
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Allocate 20% time for tech debt
|
||||||
|
- Hire contractor to clean up (when cashflow allows)
|
||||||
|
- Pause new features to refactor
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 8: Regulatory/Compliance Issues
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: GDPR, HIPAA, or industry-specific compliance requirements.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low-Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (fines, lawsuits)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Avoid regulated industries initially (healthcare, finance)
|
||||||
|
- Data sovereignty approach helps with GDPR
|
||||||
|
- Consult lawyer before regulated customers
|
||||||
|
- Insurance (E&O, cyber liability)
|
||||||
|
- Contracts with limitation of liability
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Hire compliance consultant
|
||||||
|
- Obtain necessary certifications (ISO 27001)
|
||||||
|
- Partner with compliant platform (pass-through)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Financial Risks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 9: Insufficient Capital
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Run out of money before reaching profitability.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low (bootstrap model)
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (business failure)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Start with only $500
|
||||||
|
- Consulting generates cash quickly
|
||||||
|
- Customer-funded platform development
|
||||||
|
- Work part-time while employed
|
||||||
|
- 3-month cash runway target
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Take on more consulting projects
|
||||||
|
- Slow platform development
|
||||||
|
- Personal loan ($5k-10k if needed)
|
||||||
|
- Stay at full-time job longer
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 10: Pricing Too Low
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Price too low to be profitable or attract wrong customers.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (low margins, wrong market)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Research competitive pricing
|
||||||
|
- Start higher, discount selectively
|
||||||
|
- Value-based pricing (not cost-plus)
|
||||||
|
- Regular price reviews (quarterly)
|
||||||
|
- Test pricing with pilots
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Raise prices for new customers
|
||||||
|
- Grandfather existing customers (temporarily)
|
||||||
|
- Add premium features (justify higher prices)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 11: Payment Collection Issues
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Customers don't pay on time or at all.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low-Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (cash flow issues)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- 50% deposit on all projects
|
||||||
|
- Credit card on file for recurring
|
||||||
|
- Net 15 payment terms (not net 30)
|
||||||
|
- Automated payment reminders
|
||||||
|
- Pause service for non-payment (after grace period)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Collections agency (last resort)
|
||||||
|
- Legal action (if >$10k)
|
||||||
|
- Write off as bad debt (<$5k)
|
||||||
|
- Tighten credit requirements
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## People Risks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 12: Can't Find Good Contractors
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Hire contractor who doesn't work out.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Medium
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (wasted money, customer issues)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Start with part-time contractor (10-20 hours/week)
|
||||||
|
- Trial period (30-60 days)
|
||||||
|
- Clear expectations and metrics
|
||||||
|
- Start with simple tasks (customer support)
|
||||||
|
- Use Upwork/Fiverr initially (lower commitment)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Fire quickly (if not working)
|
||||||
|
- Try multiple contractors (find good fit)
|
||||||
|
- Do work yourself temporarily
|
||||||
|
- Adjust expectations (good > perfect)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 13: Key Person Dependency
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Business depends entirely on founder's knowledge/relationships.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: High (solo founder)
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (business can't run without you)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Document everything (runbooks, processes)
|
||||||
|
- Train contractors early
|
||||||
|
- Standard operating procedures
|
||||||
|
- Automated systems (reduce manual work)
|
||||||
|
- Build team (hire full-time employees)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- If health/emergency: Pause new sales, maintain existing
|
||||||
|
- Contractor can handle day-to-day
|
||||||
|
- Sell business (if necessary)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Strategic Risks
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 14: Wrong Market Segment
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: Targeting SMB manufacturers isn't viable; need enterprise.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: High (pivot required)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Validate with Phase 1 consulting
|
||||||
|
- Multiple customer conversations (discovery)
|
||||||
|
- Test pricing with pilots
|
||||||
|
- Be willing to pivot
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Pivot to enterprise (need capital)
|
||||||
|
- Pivot to different vertical (food/bev to automotive)
|
||||||
|
- Pivot to pure consulting (no platform)
|
||||||
|
- Partner with enterprise vendor (reseller)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk 15: Technology Becomes Obsolete
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Risk**: LXC, MQTT, InfluxDB become outdated; need to rebuild.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Probability**: Low (these are mature)
|
||||||
|
**Impact**: Medium (need to refactor)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Mitigation:**
|
||||||
|
- Use proven, mature technologies
|
||||||
|
- Standard protocols (MQTT, OPC UA)
|
||||||
|
- Containerized (easy to migrate)
|
||||||
|
- Monitor technology trends
|
||||||
|
- Plan for evolution (not revolution)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Contingency:**
|
||||||
|
- Gradual migration (not big bang)
|
||||||
|
- Containers make it easier
|
||||||
|
- Customer data is portable
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Mitigation Summary
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### High-Priority Mitigations (Do First)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1. **Clarify AWS non-compete** (impacts entire strategy)
|
||||||
|
2. **Start with consulting** (fast cash, low risk)
|
||||||
|
3. **Document processes** (reduce key person risk)
|
||||||
|
4. **50% deposits** (payment risk)
|
||||||
|
5. **Start small** (pilot customers, test thoroughly)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Medium-Priority Mitigations (Do After Launch)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
6. Automated backups and monitoring
|
||||||
|
7. Contractor hiring process
|
||||||
|
8. Regular price reviews
|
||||||
|
9. Customer success program
|
||||||
|
10. Technical debt allocation
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Low-Priority Mitigations (Do When Scaling)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
11. Compliance certifications
|
||||||
|
12. Insurance (E&O, cyber)
|
||||||
|
13. Multi-server redundancy
|
||||||
|
14. Advanced automation
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Risk Acceptance
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risks We Accept
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Solo founder limitations**: Building slowly, hiring when cashflow allows
|
||||||
|
**Technical debt**: Will refactor periodically, not trying to be perfect
|
||||||
|
**Market uncertainty**: Willing to pivot if needed
|
||||||
|
**Competition**: Can't compete on everything; focus on differentiation
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Why**: These risks are inherent to bootstrapping and acceptable given the low capital requirements and fast validation approach.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Decision Points
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Go/No-Go Criteria
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**End of Phase 1 (Month 3):**
|
||||||
|
- [ ] Generated $20k+ revenue (consulting)
|
||||||
|
- [ ] 2+ completed projects
|
||||||
|
- [ ] 5+ warm prospects for Phase 2
|
||||||
|
- **Decision**: Proceed to Phase 2 or continue consulting only
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**End of Phase 2 (Month 9):**
|
||||||
|
- [ ] $10k+ MRR achieved
|
||||||
|
- [ ] 5+ monitoring customers
|
||||||
|
- [ ] <10% churn rate
|
||||||
|
- [ ] Platform stable (99%+ uptime)
|
||||||
|
- **Decision**: Proceed to Phase 3 or stay at Phase 2
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**End of Phase 3 (Month 18):**
|
||||||
|
- [ ] $30k+ MRR achieved
|
||||||
|
- [ ] 3+ premium customers
|
||||||
|
- [ ] Contractor hired and productive
|
||||||
|
- **Decision**: Continue scaling or consider exit options
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Insurance & Legal Protection
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Recommended Insurance (When Revenue Hits $100k)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Errors & Omissions (E&O):**
|
||||||
|
- Coverage: $1M-2M
|
||||||
|
- Protects: Professional mistakes, bad advice
|
||||||
|
- Cost: $1k-3k/year
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Cyber Liability:**
|
||||||
|
- Coverage: $1M
|
||||||
|
- Protects: Data breaches, cyber attacks
|
||||||
|
- Cost: $1k-2k/year
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**General Liability:**
|
||||||
|
- Coverage: $1M
|
||||||
|
- Protects: General business operations
|
||||||
|
- Cost: $500-1k/year
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Total**: $2.5k-6k/year (affordable at scale)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Contract Protection
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Always Include:**
|
||||||
|
- Scope of work (specific deliverables)
|
||||||
|
- Payment terms (50% deposit, net 15)
|
||||||
|
- Limitation of liability (cap at project value)
|
||||||
|
- Warranty disclaimer (no guarantees)
|
||||||
|
- Indemnification (customer indemnifies us)
|
||||||
|
- Termination clause (either party can exit)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Lawyer Review**: Have lawyer review standard contract ($500-1k one-time)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Contingency Plans
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Worst Case Scenarios
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Scenario 1: Can't find any customers**
|
||||||
|
- **Response**: Extend timeline, lower prices, expand geography, pivot to pure consulting
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Scenario 2: Platform fails catastrophically**
|
||||||
|
- **Response**: Restore from backups, migrate to new server, refund customers, rebuild trust
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Scenario 3: AWS non-compete violation alleged**
|
||||||
|
- **Response**: Consult lawyer immediately, potentially pivot positioning or pause business
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Scenario 4: Major competitor enters SMB market**
|
||||||
|
- **Response**: Differentiate faster (AI features), go deeper in vertical, partner with them
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Scenario 5: Personal emergency (health, family)**
|
||||||
|
- **Response**: Contractor handles day-to-day, pause new sales, maintain existing customers
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Monitoring & Review
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Risk Review Cadence
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Monthly**: Financial risks (cash flow, collections)
|
||||||
|
**Quarterly**: Operational risks (churn, technical debt)
|
||||||
|
**Annually**: Strategic risks (market, competition)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Key Risk Indicators (KRIs)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Financial:**
|
||||||
|
- Cash runway <90 days
|
||||||
|
- Collections >30 days overdue
|
||||||
|
- Churn rate >15%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Operational:**
|
||||||
|
- Platform uptime <99%
|
||||||
|
- Response time >24 hours
|
||||||
|
- Customer satisfaction <4/5
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Strategic:**
|
||||||
|
- Customer acquisition cost increasing
|
||||||
|
- LTV decreasing
|
||||||
|
- New competitor launches
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Action**: If any KRI triggered, immediately review and adjust.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
*Last Updated: December 2025*
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user