GRIDS/365FYI

SHARED MODEL READINESS · 01/04

01 · Choose

Choose the model that matters

Bring one business-critical spreadsheet or model. Make its ownership, purpose, trigger, decision, and assessment boundary visible before deciding what to migrate.

Identify the model

Model or workbook name Business area Current location or system Date assessed

Complete the model contract

When changes or occurs, this model helps decide or produce so that .

How often / what triggers an update? What action, report, plan, or approval follows?

Why is it business-critical?

Supports an operational decision Allocates money, people, capacity, inventory, or time Implements policy or contractual rules Coordinates more than one team or organization Produces an executive, regulatory, or customer-facing result Is difficult to reconstruct after the fact Has no dependable fallback Creates material impact when late or unexplained

Name the responsible people

Responsibility	Named role or team	Confirmed?
Owns the business outcome		Yes / No
Owns source data		Yes / No
Owns formulas or model logic		Yes / No
Maintains interfaces or automations		Yes / No
Approves consequential decisions		Yes / No

Bound the assessment

Included Explicitly excluded

The first useful migration outcome would be

GRIDS/365FYI

SHARED MODEL READINESS · 02/04

02 · Reveal

Reveal the model as it exists today

The model may be one file in name but many implementations in practice. Inventory copies, interfaces, and important logic before choosing a future architecture.

Inventory copies and implementations

Copy or implementation	Location	Owner	Purpose or users	How synchronized	Unique logic?
					Yes / No / ?
					Yes / No / ?
					Yes / No / ?

Which copy is treated as authoritative? Which copy is actually used most often?

Where do answers disagree, and how are differences reconciled?

Map information crossing the boundary

Information	In / out	Source or destination	Manual or automated	Timing	Failure behavior

Check copy/paste, email, shared drives, exports, queries, APIs, macros, dashboards, AI transformations, and human re-entry.

Make the important logic visible

Element	Example from this model	Where it lives	Owner or source	Version known?
Source fact				Yes / No
Assumption				Yes / No
Formula or relationship				Yes / No
Rule or constraint				Yes / No
Override or judgment				Yes / No

Trace one consequential dependency

Changed fact Calculation Rule / constraint Decision View / action

GRIDS/365FYI

SHARED MODEL READINESS · 03/04

03 · Define

Define the shared model and boundary

A shared model does not require everyone to use the same interface. Agree which facts, relationships, rules, and results are canonical—and where external authority begins.

What should become shared?

Model element	Shared and canonical	Remains local	Needs discovery
Source identities and revisions
Core calculations and relationships
Rules, constraints, and assumptions
Approved outputs and evidence history
Role-specific views and permissions

Assign ownership and draw the authority boundary

Business owner Owner of source facts Who proposes, reviews, and approves a logic change?

The model may calculate or compare The model must not Final authority belongs to

Define the evidence record

Facts used: source, time, revision Assumptions, rules, and constraints Dependency path and model version Alternatives accepted or rejected Uncertainty or missing information Approval and any AI review Observed outcome, if action occurred Exceptions and overrides

Choose a disposition and bound the first slice

Component	Keep	Connect	Rebuild	Replace	Retire	Later	Reason

Include in the first slice Do not include yet

Existing authority and fallback that remain in place

GRIDS/365FYI

SHARED MODEL READINESS · 04/04

04 · Evaluate

Design a bounded pilot and decide readiness

Test one useful slice under controlled conditions. Record the baseline first, keep desired targets separate from observed results, and name who may continue, narrow, or stop.

Write the pilot statement

For , use facts and logic to support without replacing authority unless separately approved.

Pilot mode / period / casesEvidence owner / go-no-go authority

Choose three to five measures

Measure	Current baseline	Observation method	Desired criterion	Observed result
Time from change to updated result
Manual reconciliation effort
Agreement across copies or views
Correctness against approved test cases
Ability to reconstruct why it moved

Confirm safeguards

Source and rule owners confirmed Approved correctness cases exist Security and privacy review scoped Human authority remains visible External actions separately authorized Exceptions and overrides recorded Fallback or rollback path exists AI contribution identified and reviewed

Score readiness

Dimension	Ready	Needs work	Not yet	Evidence or next action
Ownership and authority
Sources, revisions, and visible logic
Copy and interface inventory
Evidence and bounded scope

Disposition: ready / prepare / discover / repair current model / not appropriate Next action / owner / due date / unresolved question