Partner-review FAQ
Generated from the discovery pack: the questions Max Connect needs to answer before choosing a first wedge.
Is this a finished proposition?
No, but the lead hypothesis is now sharper after the Ant/Hadrian interview: a consulting-first Discovery & ITT Readiness Sprint. It still needs Rich, Andrew and named-account validation before external positioning.
Why does the pack talk so much about migration?
Migration is one credible lane, but Max Connect should also test optimisation and product/tooling gaps side by side.
How should Rich and Andrew be used differently?
Rich should mine end-user, Drax/power-generation, user-group, survey and named-organisation reality. Andrew should mine consultant/implementation detail, services/rates, cross-industry demand and product-gap opportunities.
Where are the sources if people cannot see the private notebook?
Use /source-index/ for the 420-source categorized map and the shared Google Drive folder for inspectable files. NotebookLM remains an internal synthesis tool unless sharing is explicitly opened.
What evidence upgrades the pack?
Named organisations, survey follow-up calls, direct Maximo-user language, service/rate evidence, product-gap examples, source-room corrections, source files and Rich/Andrew proof.
What should the next decision be?
Validate or kill the Discovery & ITT Readiness Sprint: first prospects, buyer language, artefacts, price/rate ballpark, and whether Rich/Andrew believe it can be sold and delivered credibly.