Launch & Enablement - Effort Model (Internal)¶
Never client-facing. Fixed-price chapter: the lines below are near-fixed, and the pricing deliberately provisions above the historical baseline - the formalised process is the improvement. Expected mix: 60:40 P:M - readiness and cutover are lead-engineer work; monitoring is mid.
The Lines¶
| Line | Hours | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1 Launch readiness | 4 per readiness cycle | Staged checklist, lab "after" capture, window + dependencies. Cycle volume tracks the site, as Validate's does: S 1 · M 2 · L 2 · XL 3 |
| 6.2 Deployment | 2 | Runbook, DNS window, redirect + search verification |
| 6.2 Early-life monitoring | 4 | Across the two weeks: checks week one, passes week two |
| 6.3 Handover | 2 | Setup audit + the kickoff meeting (or email). Every size |
| 6.3 Day-30 success baseline report | 3 | Discovery baseline + launch lab + 30 days lived data. Every size |
| Conditional: codebase handover | ~8 | Only when a client does not continue: cleanup pass (comments, AI tooling, test frameworks), repo and Storyblok-space transfer |
6.3 is carried at every size. The handover is the delivery process's final gate and, for the ~95% who continue, the Momentum kickoff - a conversion moment, never an unfunded one. The day-30 report is owed on every project, per both the chapter and 6.3 itself. It is tempting to drop the step on small sites, on the reasoning that a site of a dozen surfaces or fewer has no redirect map worth a formal handover audit; flag 6 records why that reasoning does not hold, and flag 8 what carrying it costs.
Fixed Price by Size¶
| Size | 6.1 | + 6.2 | + 6.3 | Hours | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | 4 | 6 | 5 | 15 | £2,000 |
| M | 8 | 6 | 5 | 19 | £2,500 |
| L | 8 | 6 | 5 | 19 | £2,500 |
| XL | 12 | 6 | 5 | 23 | £3,500 |
Each price is its hours × the 60:40 blend (£143/hr) rounded to £500, then held as a fixed SKU - the hours drive cost, the SKU is the price, so whole-hour rounding cannot drift a published figure. L reproduces the £2,500 this chapter has always charged. The codebase handover is a conditional line, +£1,000, priced when taken. All + VAT.
Calibration Flags¶
- The historical baseline is deliberately below the model. Actuals for validation + launch + deployment together: CDSDS 6.5h · Concurrent 6h · Into Games 5h · Source EV 3h · Tracsis 13h. The formalised process provisions 10 hrs for the same stages plus 4 hrs of early-life monitoring that history ran informally and untracked. That delta is the improvement being bought - staged readiness, baseline rollback, watched early life - not padding. Capture line-level actuals to verify the formal process lands where provisioned.
- Early life was historically invisible - it happened, but nobody logged it. It is now a line, so the first captured projects will look like growth when they are actually disclosure.
- The standalone cleanup pass is real work (comments, AI tooling, testing frameworks stripped before the repo transfers) - never absorbed, and only ~5% of projects should hit it.
- Project close is internal and unpriced - the retro that banks actuals into every effort model, case-study assembly at day 30, team release. House overhead, mandatory, ~2 hrs.
- Training hours live in Validate's cycle line - training happens there, where the client populates. Nothing here prices teaching.
- 6.3 at S and M buys the proof, not just the hours. The day-30 report is the artefact comparing the Discovery baseline against 30 days of lived data - what demonstrates the Discovery was worth buying, and the input flag 4 relies on for case-study assembly. S and M clients are the most likely to question Discovery's value, so they are the last clients to withhold it from. If the proof library (ROADMAP §1) is healthy at the small end, this line is why.
- XL is open-ended at 26+ surfaces. Its £3,500 is priced at the 35-surface representative; a materially larger site is a bespoke quote, not this SKU. There is no tier above it: MAJOR has not shipped a project at that scale.
- M and L price identically, and that is the ladder's weak point. Both are 19 hrs at £2,500, because 6.3 is carried at every size and the two already share 2 readiness cycles and the same deployment line - so nothing separates them. The chapter's ladder is three steps, not four. Either that is accepted (an M and an L site genuinely do launch the same way), or a lever has to differentiate them: readiness cycles are the only candidate, and moving L to 3 would collide with XL instead. Settle it before the next quote rather than at it.