What to look for—and what to do next.
Critical workflows are still being decided
If the team is debating the future-state workflow rather than testing it, the launch plan is carrying unresolved design risk. Confirm the path for common work, exceptions, approvals, and escalation before asking users to perform it under pressure.
Issue ownership and escalation paths are unclear
A risk log is not enough. Each critical issue needs one accountable owner, a decision deadline, and a named escalation path when the team cannot resolve it.
Training is scheduled, but proficiency is unverified
Attendance shows exposure—not readiness. Use role-based scenarios to confirm that people can perform essential tasks, recognize exceptions, and get help.
Dependencies and fallback procedures lack owners
Validate cross-team, vendor, data, facility, and cutover dependencies. For anything that could interrupt service, identify the trigger, fallback action, authority, and communication path.
Stabilization starts and ends with go-live support
Define how issues will be triaged, which measures will be reviewed, how long enhanced support will last, and what evidence allows the initiative to transition into normal operations.
Readiness should be an evidence-based decision—not a feeling created by activity.