VisionVolve · Engage

Engagement Configuration Draft · Working document

Engagement Configuration Draft — VisionVolve — Internal

For internal VV use, then negotiation with client. Working draft generated 2026-09-02 from current platform state. Edit freely; re-generate after major edits to platform state to refresh derived sections.

1. Executive summary

Client: VisionVolve — Internal

Archetype: Greenfield — Build the AI capability from zero — no internal AI function exists yet. Partner installs full methodology stack.

Duration: 6 months core engagement + 12 months long-tail compensation tail

Primary VV win: _[Anton to fill — reference engagement / methodology validation / pharma vertical entry / Penta relationship]_

Primary client win: _[Anton/Michal to fill — likely AI Act compliance + AI capability foundations + measurable operational benefits in 12 months]_

Indicative engagement value: €240K – €375K across 18 months (T1+T2+T3+T4 combined).

Today's diagnostic shape: 7 active obstacles, 4 carrying critical/large engagement-value-at-risk. Cumulative delay if unresolved: 26–64 weeks. Illustrative € exposure: €1.2M–€4.0M across 5 measured obstacles.

2. Engagement structure

This is not a typical outside-in consulting engagement. It is a co-leadership pattern for 6 months:

VV roles

Michal Lickó — Interim CAIO / AI Transformation Partner. Titled role, 1/4 FTE, ~5 days/month. Board-facing. Sits inside Dr Max leadership topology, not externally. Owns: strategic AI portfolio, board reporting, exec sponsor relationship, methodology installation.
Anton Rakhmanov + 1–2 VV consultants — Delivery rota. Hourly billing within agreed advisory cap. Owns: workshops, analysis, mentorship of Kateřina + her team, methodology IP transfer, document/report drafting.
VV (entity) — Delivery arm Michal recruits as needed for workshops, PoCs, analyses, reports. Commercially separate from Michal's CAIO retainer. Engaged through Michal but invoiced independently.

Client-side counterparts

CEO (CEO)
CIO (CIO)
HeadOfAI (HeadOfAI)

Commercial responsibility split

Michal owns the CAIO engagement contract (T1 retainer) and the commercial framing of VV delivery scope (T2). Recuses on technical decisions of which VV consultant does what.
VV owns delivery quality and consultant assignment. Michal does not invoice for delivery work; Anton et al. do not invoice for CAIO advisory work. Independent invoice trails.
Recusal protocol declaration signed at M0 acknowledging the structure. This is the methodology's response to obstacle O-008 (VV Commercial Capture) — by declaring the structure, the obstacle does not fire.

3. Commercial structure

Four-tier compensation. Tiers are independent — each negotiated and invoiced separately to keep the structure clean.

T1 — Advisory time (CAIO + delivery rota)

Michal as Interim CAIO (1/4 FTE @ €2,000/day × 5 days/month = €10K/month) + Anton + 1–2 VV consultants on advisory rota (~20h/month @ €250/h = €5K/month). Capped monthly. Invoiced monthly against logged time.

Monthly cap: 60 hours (capped, not minimum)
Monthly cost: ~€15,000
6-month total: ~€90,000

T2 — Delivery scope (workshops + PoCs + analysis)

Workshops at €2,400/day (60K CZK/day) for facilitation + delivery; analysis, PoCs, reports invoiced separately at agreed rates. Indicative envelope of 6 workshops + 4–8 analysis pieces over 6 months. Budget capped at €120K with explicit scope ladder (must-have / should-have / nice-to-have).

Workshop rate: €2,400/day (≈ 60,000 CZK/day)
Indicative budget envelope: €60K – €120K
Scope ladder: must-have (workshops with Kateřina + C-suite, AI Act conformity scoping, BDN sessions per market) → should-have (PoC support, decision register stand-up, training) → nice-to-have (advanced analytics, vendor evaluation, deeper coaching)

T3 — Exit-criteria bonus (paid at M6)

€40K bonus paid at M6 if methodology-defined exit criteria satisfied. Each criterion independently observable. Weighted partial payout if subset achieved (e.g., 65% criteria met → €26K paid). Independently verifiable from platform state — no measurement debate.

Target: €40,000

Weighted criteria (sum = 100%):

Weight	Criterion
20%	Heavy Gate 2 fired ≥ once
15%	AI Council met monthly for ≥ 4 consecutive months
20%	Track 3 (AI OS) at L4 maturity
20%	Track 5 (Risk & Compliance) at L4 maturity
15%	AI conformity assessment (L3-329) operational
10%	≥ 2 of 6 markets running cross-market sync forum

T4 — Benefits-realization tail (paid at M+6 and M+12 post-engagement)

Two long-tail compensation packages tied to measurable Dr-Max-side business benefits, paid 6 and 12 months after engagement closes. Designed jointly during M0–M2 with Kateřina + CFO Bornemann; specific metrics, baselines, targets, and bonus sizes locked at M2. Pre-condition: measurement plumbing for the chosen benefits must be operational by M3.

M6+6 months (≈ post-engagement Q2)

Indicative size: €25K – €50K
Tied to: Tied to a single high-confidence operational benefit measurable within 6 months of engagement close (e.g., stockout reduction in CZ retail, forecasting accuracy improvement, decision cycle time on first-wave initiatives).
Pre-condition: measurement plumbing operational by M3 of engagement.

M6+12 months (≈ post-engagement Q4)

Indicative size: €25K – €75K
Tied to: Tied to a slower-cycle compounding benefit (e.g., portfolio-level AI initiative ROI, % of revenue running through AI-supported decisions, AI Act compliance audit pass).
Pre-condition: measurement plumbing operational by M3 of engagement.

Total indicative engagement value (18-month horizon)

€240K – €375K

Note: the actual T2 and T4 sizes are negotiated. T1 is fixed-rate. T3 is fixed-target with weighted partial payout.

4. Authority asks for the Interim CAIO seat

These are the L1 partner authorities Michal needs to function as Interim CAIO. Methodology defaults for Greenfield engagements are filtered below; current state has all 32 set to Out (Day-0 baseline).

Must-have (engagement cannot deliver without)

Hiring:

L1-118 — Approve AI function hires

5. Mechanisms to install

L3 mechanisms (forums, gates, escalation paths, protocols, cadences, artifacts) the engagement stands up over 6 months. Currently none stood up at Dr Max for AI specifically.

Forum (11)

L3-301 — AI Council
L3-302 — Portfolio Council
L3-303 — Scale Decision Forum
L3-304 — Exec Sponsor 1:1
L3-305 — Internal AI Lead 1:1
L3-306 — Board AI committee / chair 1:1
L3-314 — Portfolio-BDN review
L3-315 — Strategy-BDN review
L3-324 — Exit Review
L3-326 — Cross-market sync forum
L3-327 — Vendor portfolio governance

Gate (4)

L3-307 — Heavy Gate 1 (Validated → Pilot)
L3-308 — Heavy Gate 2 (Pilot-Validated → Scaling)
L3-309 — Risk gate at Scoped
L3-310 — Risk gate at Pilot-Validated

ArtifactEvent (3)

L3-311 — Initiative-BDN snapshot v0 (at Scoped)
L3-312 — Initiative-BDN snapshot v1 (at Pilot-Validated)
L3-313 — Initiative-BDN snapshots v2/v3 (Realizing)

Path (4)

L3-316 — Escalation L0 (Initiative team)
L3-317 — Escalation L1 (AI Council)
L3-318 — Escalation L2 (Exec sponsor + CEO)
L3-319 — Escalation L3 (Board chair)

Protocol (6)

L3-320 — Stop-the-line right
L3-321 — Recusal protocol (commercial)
L3-322 — Conflict-of-interest disclosure (5d SLA)
L3-328 — External Champion handover protocol
L3-329 — AI conformity assessment process
L3-330 — Post-acquisition AI integration template

Cadence (1)

L3-323 — Velocity checkpoint

Artifact (1)

L3-325 — Decision register

6. Exit criteria — what "engagement complete" means

Tied to T3 bonus (Section 3). Independently observable from platform state at M6.

○ Heavy Gate 2 fired ≥ once (weight: 20% of T3 bonus)
○ AI Council met monthly for ≥ 4 consecutive months (weight: 15% of T3 bonus)
○ Track 3 (AI OS) at L4 maturity (weight: 20% of T3 bonus)
○ Track 5 (Risk & Compliance) at L4 maturity (weight: 20% of T3 bonus)
○ AI conformity assessment (L3-329) operational (weight: 15% of T3 bonus)
○ ≥ 2 of 6 markets running cross-market sync forum (weight: 10% of T3 bonus)

Methodology exit criteria reference: methodology/exit-criteria.json defines 8 hard criteria + 5 soft; the ones above are a curated subset weighted for this archetype + scope.

7. Long-term benefits to design with Kateřina + CFO

These are placeholders. Specific benefit pairing, baselines, targets, and bonus sizes are co-designed with Kateřina + Thomas Bornemann (CFO) during M0–M2 and locked at M2.

Candidate operational benefits for Dr Max (to validate)

Stockout reduction (CZ retail or group-wide): baseline TBD, target -X% over 6–12 months. Tied to forecasting + replenishment AI capability.
Decision cycle time for first-wave AI initiatives: baseline TBD (likely 8–16 weeks for Heavy Gate decisions today), target ≤ 4 weeks. Tied to Heavy Gate + AI Council operational rhythm.
AI Act compliance audit pass at first formal review: pass/fail. Tied to L3-329 operational + risk classifications fired on every initiative.
% of customer-facing decisions touched by AI (Benefit Card audience targeting, marketplace ranking, pharmacy operations): baseline TBD, target X% by M+12. Tied to Track 4 (Value Chain Coverage).
Cross-market parity on AI initiative roadmap: degree of alignment, measurable via initiative pipeline + cross-market sync forum cadence.

Pre-condition before commercial commitment to T4 packages

Measurement plumbing (data pipelines, baselines, monthly reporting cadence) must be operational by M3 for any benefit selected for T4 compensation. If plumbing isn't ready by M3 for a candidate benefit, it cannot anchor a T4 package — drop it and pick another.

8. Known risks (active obstacles + recovery)

Top 5 active obstacles in current diagnostic. Each has methodology-defined recovery actions.

O-003 — Risk Function Disengaged `[severity: high]`

Regulated profile but CRO/DPO not integrated; risk classification skipped

Impact: 8–16 weeks delay · LARGE VaR · compliance / relationship / schedule

Risk classifications skipped; one bad initiative kicks off and blows up audit/regulatory window. Pharma-high regulatory profile makes this catastrophic — potential SUKL / EMA exposure.