Data readiness check · fixed price, one day
Your reports disagree with each other.
That is not a reporting problem.
Two people pull the same number and get two answers. Forecast slips every quarter for a reason nobody can name. Before you fund a rebuild, a migration or an AI agent, it is worth knowing what the data underneath is actually doing to those numbers, and what it costs you each month that it stays as it is.
Fixed price
€500
Effort
One working day
Access needed
Read only
Credited
In full
The fee is credited in full against any engagement booked within sixty days of delivery, so if the work goes ahead the check has cost nothing. If it does not, you still hold a document your own admin can reproduce without me. Order it below, or measure four of these yourself, free, in the browser.
What arrives
Two pages. One of them is the evidence.
Not a slide deck, not a workshop, not a discovery call that ends in a proposal. A document you can forward to whoever signs the budget, and a second page that lets your admin check every figure without taking my word for any of it.
Page one: the verdict and what it costs
A grade of A, B or C against four measures, the monetary exposure attached to each one, and a repair order sorted by what returns the most for the least work. Every figure is a number, not an adjective.
Page two: the query behind every figure
The SOQL that produced each number, written out so your team can run it themselves, next quarter, without me. If you later hire somebody else, the document still works and they can verify what I claimed.
What you can fix without paying anyone
Named explicitly, with the effort each one takes. Usually two or three of the findings are an afternoon of work for somebody who already has the access. Those are listed first, not buried.
What gets measured
Four things, because these four cause the rest.
Every org has hundreds of imperfections and almost none of them cost money. These four do, they compound quietly, and each one has a threshold above which the numbers stop being defensible.
Pipeline that is not real
Open opportunities with a close date already in the past, or with nothing logged against them for a month. They inflate the forecast, they distort every conversion rate calculated from it, and the longer they sit the more confidently wrong the board reporting becomes.
One customer read as three
Accounts sharing a web domain with at least one other account. Revenue per customer is understated, the same buyer is worked by two people who do not know about each other, and any account level reporting is arithmetic performed on the wrong denominator.
Work that was done but never recorded
Logged emails and meetings per open opportunity. Whatever is not captured did not happen as far as the system is concerned, which means no reliable measure of engagement, no early warning when a deal goes quiet, and no basis for coaching anyone.
Attribution that answers nothing
The share held by the largest single lead source value. When one value swallows the field, and it usually does, nobody can say which channel produced revenue. Budget then gets argued rather than decided, every year, with the same two people on opposite sides.
How it runs
One working day, and about twenty minutes of yours.
The work is done by Serhii Skrypnyk and is not passed to anybody else. The certifications, and what I do not take on.
You give read-only access, or four exports
Either a read-only user for three days, or four standard reports your admin exports and sends. Both work. The exports route means I never touch your org at all, which is usually the faster answer for anyone who needs security sign-off.
I measure and cost it
One working day of analysis, delivered within three. No standing meetings, no interviews with eleven stakeholders, no workshop. If something in the data needs explaining I ask one question by email rather than booking an hour of your time to hear the answer.
You get the document and decide
No presentation unless you want one. If you want the repair done, the fee comes off the price of it. If you want to hand it to your own team, that is what page two exists for. If the answer is that nothing needs fixing, the document says so.
Order it
Four fields, and no call in between.
This reaches me directly and nothing is charged here. I reply within one working day with the read-only access request or the four report definitions, whichever you prefer, and an invoice for €500 payable on delivery rather than up front.
DATA READINESS CHECK €500 · ONE DAY PAYABLE ON DELIVERY
Your address is used to reply to this request and to send the invoice. It is not added to a mailing list, because there is not one. What happens to it.
When not to buy this
Three situations where it is a waste of your money.
You already know what is wrong
If your team can name the problem and the only question is who fixes it and for how much, skip this and go straight to a scope. Measuring something everybody already agrees on is theatre.
The org is under six months old
Most of these measures need history to mean anything. A young org has not had time to accumulate the damage, and what looks like a finding is usually just a small data set.
Nobody has agreed to act on the answer
A measurement changes nothing on its own. If there is no budget and no appetite to fix whatever it finds, you will have bought a document that makes people uncomfortable and nothing else.
Questions
Asked often enough to answer here.
Can we do this without giving you a login?
Yes, and most companies choose that. Your admin exports four standard reports, which takes about twenty minutes, and I never touch the org at all. The alternative is a read-only user for three days. Both produce the same document, and security sign off is usually faster for the exports route.
How is this different from the free version on this site?
The free one runs in your browser against four report exports and gives you the verdict immediately. This one runs against your full data set rather than an export sample, and adds the costed repair order and the reproducible query page. The free version is genuinely useful on its own and most people should start there.
What if the answer is that nothing needs fixing?
Then that is what the document says, and roughly a third of them do. You keep the measurement and the evidence behind it, nothing further is owed, and you have a defensible answer for whoever kept insisting the data was the problem.
Why is the fee credited against the work?
Because otherwise the measurement has to justify itself twice, once as a purchase and again as a reason to buy the repair. Crediting it removes the second argument. It also means I have no incentive to find problems that are not there, since finding nothing costs me the same either way.
Can you do this for an org that is not Salesforce?
No. The measures are written against the Salesforce data model and the queries are SOQL. The same four questions are worth asking of any CRM, but somebody who knows that platform should ask them.
Start
Measure it before you argue about it.
Run the free version first. It takes about ten minutes and it will tell you whether the paid one is worth ordering at all.