Public product · Implementation Workbench
Move from approved strategy to operational readiness.
Three connected implementation mechanisms for the work that determines whether change survives contact with operations: launch gates, process and decision rights, and risk-control closure.
- Launch decision
- Go / No-goWeighted critical gates
- Operating design
- SOP + RACIWorkflow and decision rights
- Control system
- Risk registerExposure through closure
- No signup
- Local working state
- Exportable artifacts
- Published scoring
Working dataThe workbench opens with demonstration gates, workflow steps, and risks. Edits persist only in this browser until the visitor resets the demo or clears local storage.
Product boundaryThe workbench structures launch, process, ownership, and control decisions. It does not establish legal or compliance sufficiency, approve a launch, or replace accountable owners.
Launch Readiness Command Center
Make the go/no-go decision from evidence—not optimism.
Operations2/3
Technology2/3
People2/3
Compliance2/3
Data2/3
Customer2/3
Readiness gatesCritical gates carry 2× weight
Decision rule: No-go when any critical gate remains open or weighted readiness is below 70%. Conditional from 70–89%. Go at 90%+ with no critical gate open. The checklist must be adapted to applicable legal, safety, technology, and customer obligations.
SOP + RACI Architect
Design the work, the handoffs, and the decision rights in one operating thread.
01Receive request→
02Triage and classify→
03Assign capacity→
04Execute service→
05Close exception
| Reorder | Step | Responsible | Accountable | Consulted | Informed | Input | Output | SLA min | Control | Remove |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control-gap analysisNo structural gaps detected
Every step has a responsible owner, accountable owner, defined output, SLA, and control point.
Design boundary: Completeness checks structure an SOP; they do not validate whether the procedure is safe, legal, technically feasible, or executable under real operating conditions. Validate at the point of work before release.
Risk + Control Register
Translate risk language into exposure, ownership, and closure.
| Band | Risk / category | Owner | Likelihood | Impact | Control | Effectiveness | Residual | Response / due | Remove |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | 8.0 | ||||||||
| high | 6.6 | ||||||||
| moderate | 3.8 | ||||||||
| moderate | 3.0 |
Highest residual exposureLaunch capacity is below demand at peak hourOperations · residual 8.0 · Validate roster at T-14 and T-7
Scoring boundary: Residual score = likelihood × impact × (1 − stated control effectiveness). It is a prioritization mechanism, not an actuarial probability or compliance opinion. Control effectiveness must be evidenced and periodically tested.
Implementation outputsThe meeting ends.
The meeting ends.
The operating artifact remains.
Each module produces something a program team can implement, challenge, assign, and carry into governance—not a generic score.
Go/no-go decision brief
A weighted readiness view with critical gates, domain progress, owners, and the exact conditions blocking launch.
Executable SOP + RACI
A sequenced workflow connecting inputs, outputs, service levels, controls, and the responsible and accountable owners.
Risk + control register
A ranked view of inherent and residual exposure, control effectiveness, named responses, due dates, and closure priority.
Adapt the workbench
Generic mechanisms are useful. Context-specific controls are valuable.
Luna Sol adapts the gates, workflows, decision rights, compliance controls, and governance cadence to the actual operating environment.