Policy document retirement finder

An MVP, or minimum viable product, is the smallest version that your users can actually work with. It is not a cheap version of the full solution. It is a test, built to answer the questions that decide whether the rest is worth building.

1. Pick the riskiest assumption. Here: will government knowledge managers use it to solve "superseded guidance remains discoverable and confuses staff"?
2. Build only what tests it. One team, one use case, a few core modules. People do the rest by hand for now.
3. Run a paid pilot. Agree the acceptance criteria, input limits and reviewer responsibilities before starting.
4. Measure, then decide. Track stale copies found and resolution time. Then expand, change course or stop, with evidence instead of opinions.

MVP scope for this solution. Costed pilot: Uploaded inventory; no automatic deletion. Start with one buyer organization and a bounded set of representative inputs. Implement the first two modules: identify version families; find outdated references. Support the third task through an assisted review queue: flag conflicting instructions. Handle the remaining required functions manually until validated. Include input upload, source references, user correction, a reviewer approval step and export of guidance retirement evidence report. Authentication, account isolation, deletion controls and basic operational logging are included. Specialized production certification, live write integrations and broader rollout are not included unless explicitly stated.

After the MVP. After paying customers repeatedly accept guidance retirement evidence report, automate draft retirement actions; capture owner approvals; export cleanup list. Add one tested read integration, reusable customer configuration and scheduled repeat delivery. Increase supported formats or teams only when evaluation cases and reviewer capacity cover the new scope. Uploaded inventory; no automatic deletion.

What the build depends on. Evidence coordinates, versioned rules, reviewer decisions and a representative reference set. Measure misses as well as confirmed findings before scaling. Obtain representative authorized inputs, an agreed review rubric and a buyer-side owner. Specific scope: Uploaded inventory; no automatic deletion.

Pricing to test

Test USD 500-2,000 for a defined audit sample and report. Offer recurring review priced by reviewed items and specialist hours. Software-only access can follow a reliable reviewed service. All prices require validation. For this buyer, package the first sale around audit one guidance collection and the defined guidance retirement evidence report. Record actual review effort before offering a recurring allowance. The commercial pilot fee is distinct from the platform development budget.

Message to test

Trace obsolete guidance to every known published copy. Demonstrate the result with audit one guidance collection for government knowledge managers. Use a concrete before-and-after example without promising unmeasured savings.

Where to find buyers

Records managers and public-sector intranet teams

Lead magnet

Audit one guidance collection

The first 30 days

1. Week 1: interview five prospective buyers from government knowledge managers and inspect how they handle superseded guidance remains discoverable and confuses staff.
2. Week 2: prepare audit one guidance collection using authorized or synthetic material.
3. Week 3: share the demonstration through records managers and public-sector intranet teams and seek one bounded paid pilot.
4. Week 4: measure stale copies found and resolution time, review delivery effort and ask for a repeat purchase. This is a validation schedule, not a promise that the full product can be built in thirty days.

Paid pilot

Agree the acceptance criteria, input limits and reviewer responsibilities before starting. Run audit one guidance collection and deliver guidance retirement evidence report. Compare stale copies found and resolution time with the buyer's current process on comparable cases; include corrections, missed issues and reviewer time. Seek payment and repeat use. Stop or revise the scope if data access, accuracy or unit economics fail.

Success metrics

Stale copies found and resolution time

Retention and expansion

Build repeat use around guidance retirement evidence report. Save approved configurations and review decisions with permission, revisit unresolved exceptions and show progress on stale copies found and resolution time. Offer a recurring volume allowance after repeat demand; expand to adjacent tasks only when the buyer asks and delivery quality remains acceptable.

Why clients would pick it

A domain-specific review rubric and rights-cleared examples of confirmed defects, false alarms and reviewer reasoning. For this concept, accumulate permissioned examples and reviewer corrections around trace obsolete guidance to every known published copy. The durable asset is reliable task-specific execution and trusted customer configuration, not access to a general-purpose AI model.

Alternatives and positioning

Manual reviewers, checklists, generic scanning tools and specialist audit services. Position this concept around trace obsolete guidance to every known published copy. Compare it against the customer's current process on the same representative task. This is proposed differentiation; no exhaustive competitor study or uniqueness claim has been established.

Main delivery costs

Document or media processing, model evaluation, expert review, false-positive handling, rechecks and customer-specific rubric calibration. Initial validation additionally budgets for records officer review. Track model usage, storage, reviewer minutes, exception handling and customer support per accepted deliverable.