Twenty customer stories. Where the product earns its place.
Scenario-based product audit and software verification. These are 20 proposed customer stories, not interviews, observed customer tests or proof of product-market fit.
14 supportedBefore this audit: 6
6 partialBefore this audit: 7
0 gapBefore this audit: 7
Useful for a guided expansion discussion; not ready to recommend a real lease. Exact-clinic analysis and inventory matching are implemented. Six customer jobs remain partial because operating evidence, real inventory and field validation are still missing. Saturation and customer cannibalisation still require better evidence. These counts are not a readiness percentage.
What changed because of the audit
Final customer release: four short brief steps, a standalone location study, five comparable maps, named competitor landscapes, explicit record-quality flags and optional premises matching. Service focus and expansion purpose tailor verification questions. The 20 story statuses below assess the combined customer and analyst demonstration, not verified business outcomes. Final customer workflow checks.
Added a first-clinic readiness worksheet, visit break-even and cash-cover scenarios, staffed-capacity checks, a reusable property-search brief, provider disagreement comparison and an assigned action plan for each selected area. Added exact-coordinate catchments, own-clinic competitor exclusions, main-street preference, property CSV matching and rights-controlled exports. Saved runs and reports retain the decision context. Open the interview and live-demo test pack.
The next commercial test
Walk one actual clinic owner through the decision using their aggregate operating assumptions. Record whether it changes the areas they would investigate, what evidence they distrust, time saved and whether they would pay for a verified shortlist. Do not ask them to endorse the software in the abstract.
No outreach, interviews, client financial validation or independent POI field audit has been completed as part of this product audit.
How to read the status
Supported: The scoped demonstration workflow supports this story; underlying business conclusions may still be provisional.
Partial: A useful proxy or capture step exists, but material customer evidence or capability is missing.
Gap: The core customer job is not implemented in the hosted second-location flow.
Technical evidence: deterministic model checks, worksheet edge-case checks, phone/browser walkthroughs, saved-packet tamper checks and PDF layout review. Live business truth is assessed separately and remains unverified. Source licences and original data remain available in the main workflow.
As an owner, I need analysis centred on my own address so the baseline represents the business I run.
Before: Gap → Now: Supported
What is present: An independently sourced first-clinic coordinate drives fresh metric 1/3/5 km catchments and overlaps. Nearby own-clinic records can be excluded separately in each provider.
Still needed: Actual operator identity and coordinates must be supplied. This workflow does not verify an address or operating performance.
Acceptance criterion
An exact clinic coordinate and identity must drive catchments and allow removal of the existing practice from competitor records.
As an owner, I need the next area to match my service mix and paying customers, not just a wealthy population.
Before: Partial → Now: Partial
What is present: Age profiles and income-distribution similarity are available; readiness notes capture missing origins and referrals.
Still needed: No aggregated customer-origin calibration, service specialty, price-point match or observed customer mix. Age alone is not a customer segment.
Acceptance criterion
Change the target age profile and see a different analysis without treating higher income as universally better.
As an owner, I need the same measures for the first catchment and candidates so differences are understandable.
Before: Supported → Now: Supported
What is present: The entered first clinic stays visible beside three selected areas using the same measures. Commercial-street preference adds a declared 15% street-context weight.
Still needed: Similar neighbourhoods do not demonstrate a transferable business; field checks and customer-origin evidence remain necessary.
Acceptance criterion
Baseline and selected areas must show residents, mapped supply, similarity and overlap on the same basis.
As an owner, I need to know whether a gap is real before interpreting low competitor counts as an opportunity.
Before: Partial → Now: Partial
What is present: Demand and mapped supply use the same distance kernel; minimum demand and missing-coverage rules prevent false empty-market wins.
Still needed: No verified service capacity, waiting times, appointment availability or independent 30-business / ten-catchment coverage audit. No saturation conclusion is supported.
Acceptance criterion
Missing queries must remain missing and minimum demand must exclude tiny empty catchments.
As an owner, I need area, rent, access, parking and opening constraints recorded before searching premises.
Before: Gap → Now: Supported
What is present: The saved property brief now filters authorised CSV inventory by area, base rent, known occupancy cost, access, parking, opening window and fit-out budget. Weekly, monthly and per-square-metre rent are normalised.
Still needed: Real lease costs, fit-out scope and permitted use still need broker and professional verification.
Acceptance criterion
Blank inputs stay missing; min area cannot exceed max; the saved packet preserves the requirements.
15 / Choose from premises that are actually available
Partial
As an owner, I need a real available unit with quoted rent, date and source rather than a promising neighbourhood alone.
Before: Gap → Now: Partial
What is present: The CSV importer records source rights and dates, removes address/unit duplicates, assesses up to 100 distinct premises and shortlists at most ten. The shipped nine-row sample is entirely fictional.
Still needed: No authorised real inventory or verified top-three facts has been supplied. Actual availability is still a paid-pilot evidence requirement.
Acceptance criterion
Only authorised, dated inventory can support a real property recommendation. POA and unknown access must remain provisional.
As an operator, I need use, accessibility, parking and fit-out checks before committing to a lease.
Before: Partial → Now: Partial
What is present: Point-centred property analysis combines supplied access, parking, readiness and use facts with mapped commercial streets, activity and transport. Unknown critical facts remain provisional.
Still needed: Inspect usable frontage, safe access and fit-out; confirm clinic use. Mapped street activity is not footfall and road proximity is not frontage.
Acceptance criterion
A planning label or nearby stop must never be described as legal use approval or accessible premises.
As an owner, I need to know whether the leading areas survive reasonable changes in assumptions.
Before: Supported → Now: Supported
What is present: Area and property catchment/weight scenarios are shown separately from financial stress tests. Property eligibility is reapplied when rent rises 15%.
Still needed: Scenario robustness does not establish the correctness of the source data or business hypothesis.
Acceptance criterion
Preserve unranked outcomes and do not present scenario ranges as confidence intervals.
As a paying client, I need the tool to reject a brief it cannot satisfy instead of manufacturing recommendations.
Before: Supported → Now: Supported
What is present: Impossible demand or property rent constraints and missing coverage produce explicit no-result reports with no manufactured recommendations.
Still needed: An empty supplied inventory or bounded pilot is not proof there are no options across Melbourne.
Acceptance criterion
No-result flows must work in the interface and export without dummy recommendations.
As an adviser, I need a readable phone walkthrough and a saved packet so I can explain and resume the exact scenario.
Before: Partial → Now: Supported
What is present: Five responsive steps, coordinate and inventory calculations, review-gated reports, CSVs, hash-checked saved inputs and an empty customer interview/test pack.
Still needed: Explicit file save only. No shared client database or automatic outreach. Real customer interviews have not been performed.
Acceptance criterion
Worksheet changes invalidate review; changed/foreign saved packets are rejected; no provider calls occur during export.