{
  "example_kind": "invented job and manual worksheet",
  "slug": "customer-review-meeting-overload",
  "title": "Replace repetitive customer check-ins with useful review checkpoints",
  "layout": "dispatch",
  "story": "When daily meetings repeat the same progress, I want a shared update and specific review gates so customer time is used for the decisions that matter.",
  "problem": "An onboarding calendar has daily calls even though most only repeat preparation progress. A first demonstration and readiness acceptance still need customer judgment.",
  "symptoms": [
    "A meeting slot is treated as evidence that work was reviewed.",
    "The same status is retold while a real decision is left vague.",
    "Canceling calls risks removing the actual customer acceptance moment."
  ],
  "failed_workaround": "Canceling every meeting can hide a required receiving decision just as preserving every call can waste attention.",
  "before": "Daily customer status calls until onboarding is done.",
  "after": "Review rhythm: preparation progress moves to an owned shared note with the next ask visible. Keep a first-demonstration review for workflow feedback and a separate readiness review for acceptance. A live call is used when the customer needs to make one of those choices; routine updates travel through the agreed async route.",
  "success_check": "The customer still has real demonstration and readiness decisions while routine progress no longer requires repeated status calls.",
  "choices": [
    [
      "The meeting only repeats known progress",
      "Use the agreed async note",
      "Preserve visibility and the clarification route."
    ],
    [
      "A customer decision needs discussion",
      "Keep a focused review",
      "The call has an explicit output."
    ],
    [
      "Readiness has not been demonstrated",
      "Keep acceptance open",
      "Attendance or update frequency is not proof."
    ]
  ],
  "route": [
    {
      "label": "Track the preparation and gates",
      "capability": "task-record",
      "action": "Keep ordinary preparation distinct from demonstration and readiness review work.",
      "human_check": "An attended call is not the acceptance evidence."
    },
    {
      "label": "Prepare the status note",
      "capability": "daily-report",
      "action": "Use a dated task-linked update for progress and the next customer ask.",
      "human_check": "The customer receives it through an approved agreed route."
    },
    {
      "label": "Record review findings",
      "capability": "task-comment",
      "action": "Preserve demonstration feedback and the readiness verdict with the relevant work.",
      "human_check": "Human receiving acceptance determines the next stage."
    }
  ],
  "editor": {
    "heading": "Prepare a useful update",
    "fields": [
      {
        "key": "routine",
        "label": "Updates suitable for async sharing",
        "example": "Preparation progress and current open asks",
        "help": "Identify routine information."
      },
      {
        "key": "owner",
        "label": "Update owner and route",
        "example": "Onboarding coordinator through the agreed shared note",
        "help": "Agree receiving access and responsibility."
      },
      {
        "key": "first",
        "label": "First decision checkpoint",
        "example": "Customer reviews the first demonstration",
        "help": "Retain the decision that needs feedback."
      },
      {
        "key": "ready",
        "label": "Readiness checkpoint",
        "example": "Receiving reviewer accepts the agreed workflow",
        "help": "Keep acceptance distinct."
      },
      {
        "key": "clarify",
        "label": "Clarification route",
        "example": "Customer contact schedules a focused discussion if the note cannot resolve the ask",
        "help": "Avoid silent calendar removal."
      }
    ],
    "template": "Customer review rhythm\nRoutine update: {routine}.\nOwner and route: {owner}.\nDemonstration review: {first}.\nReadiness review: {ready}.\nClarification path: {clarify}.\nChange meeting cadence only after the receiving parties agree."
  },
  "limitations": "No measured meeting-time saving or automatic customer distribution is claimed. Cadence and communication preferences need agreement.",
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Classify the recurring calls",
      "Onboarding lead",
      "Status-only calls are distinguished from actual customer decisions."
    ],
    [
      "Agree the async update route",
      "Customer contact",
      "The customer knows who updates the note and how to request clarification."
    ],
    [
      "Retain acceptance checkpoints",
      "Readiness reviewer",
      "Demonstration feedback and readiness acceptance still have their own evidence and owner."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Should every review become asynchronous?",
      "No. Use a live discussion where the receiving decision needs it; this guide removes redundant status retelling."
    ],
    [
      "How do we keep the customer from feeling abandoned?",
      "Agree the update owner, expected content and clarification route before changing the rhythm."
    ],
    [
      "What is TeamBoost’s part?",
      "Use documented tasks and daily-report context to keep preparation, open asks and review work visible. External customer communication and meeting preferences are still agreed by people."
    ]
  ]
}