The Growth Capability and Partner Appointment Playbook: In-House, Specialist, Agency or Hybrid

Choose growth support by matching the work to the capability you need. Agree which decisions stay internal, who implements changes and how results are measured. Check conflicts, commercial controls and what evidence and skills your team will retain when the engagement ends.

This playbook produces an appointment decision and operating contract. It does not recommend a universal in-house, agency or hybrid answer. It does not certify a supplier, replace a regulated procurement, give legal advice or invent evidence about a provider. Every capability, capacity, experience, commercial and outcome claim remains REQUIRES VALIDATION until accepted through proportionate due diligence.

1. The Market Connection Context

The recognisable condition is a leadership team that knows growth performance needs attention but cannot agree what to appoint. Marketing wants execution capacity. Finance wants commercial control. Procurement asks for comparable bids. Sales and operations worry that another agency will optimise leads without owning quality or fulfilment consequences. Internal specialists may have skill but no decision authority or protected time. Prospective providers describe services rather than the decisions, handoffs and evidence they will own.

The value path is market priority → accepted growth decision → capable execution → usable customer and operating evidence → qualified commitment → delivered value → retained organisational capability. Appointment fails when the requirement is a shopping list, accountability is split ambiguously, evidence remains inside a supplier platform, implementation is assumed, incentives reward local activity, internal owners are unavailable, or exit removes access and knowledge. Possible economic effects include wasted spend, duplicated work, opportunity cost, weak decisions, supplier dependency, data or brand risk, delayed implementation and lost learning. Their prevalence and value are organisation-specific and REQUIRES VALIDATION.

The Growth Capability and Partner Appointment Playbook: In-House, Specialist, Agency or Hybrid owns the capability and delivery-model decision, market engagement, evaluation, due diligence, appointment controls, mobilisation and capability-transfer contract. The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work owns whether the growth investment and capacity should be funded within the wider portfolio. The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates owns the ongoing backlog, cadence, experiments, handoffs and scale or stop system once the appointment is operating. Specialist legal, procurement, security, privacy, tax, employment and financial assurance remains outside this method.

The UK government's Sourcing Playbook recommends thinking about delivery model, evaluation quality, whole-life cost, risk allocation, testing and resolution rather than defaulting to the lowest initial bid; it applies to its stated public-sector context, but these are useful control principles for private appointments too (Sourcing Playbook). UK Procurement Act guidance says preliminary market engagement can clarify requirements and market capacity while conflicts and unfair advantage need control (preliminary market engagement guidance). This playbook does not claim compliance with that Act or any procurement regime; qualified authorities must set the applicable process.

Use the playbook when the need crosses strategy, evidence, execution and organisational ownership; several delivery models are credible; a partner may handle important data or systems; or the engagement must transfer capability. Use a bounded direct appointment only where policy permits and one narrow requirement, evidence threshold, commercial boundary and internal owner are already accepted. Use recruitment or workforce planning methods when the real decision is a permanent role, and use formal procurement processes where law, policy or materiality requires them.

Do not begin provider outreach until the requirement and conflicts are controlled. Do not ask suppliers to prove causation through unverifiable case claims, reuse confidential client work, provide unpaid speculative strategy, or accept outcome risk they cannot control. Do not treat badges, logos, partner tiers, awards, references or polished pitches as sufficient evidence. Verify the specific team, method, governance, implementation responsibility, data handling, commercial model and exit conditions.

The decision is: should leadership build internally, appoint a narrow specialist, appoint an integrated agency, use a hybrid model, validate the requirement, defer or stop, and on what evidence, conditions and transfer obligations? Expected results are a capability charter, internal baseline, delivery-model options, market-engagement record, evaluation and evidence contracts, due-diligence findings, whole-life commercial view, implementation and measurement boundaries, signed disposition, mobilisation acceptance and review or exit plan.

2. The Leadership vs. Delegation Boundary

A capable internal team can run the appointment when procurement or commercial governance is proportionate, the sponsor can protect evaluator time, the organisation has subject and evidence expertise, conflicts can be managed and operating owners participate. Independence does not require an external adviser if internal evaluators are credible and separate from candidate sponsorship.

A senior independent partner is justified when requirements cross functions, an incumbent has informational advantage, internal sponsors are evaluating their preferred supplier, evidence is contested, or no internal role can challenge delivery-model assumptions. Independence can also support a complex mobilisation or recovery, but the adviser must disclose conflicts and cannot steer work toward its own downstream appointment.

Use a narrow procurement, legal, privacy, security or finance specialist for conclusions in those domains. Use a recruitment specialist when permanent employment is the accepted route. Use direct internal allocation when current capability, protected capacity, authority and acceptance tests are verified.

The reader recognises that a defensible appointment must reconcile internal capability, specialist depth, implementation ownership, measurement independence and commercial controls.

Stop when no accountable outcome or implementation owner exists, the appointment process is designed around a named provider without justified authority, material conflicts cannot be mitigated, evidence requests would breach confidentiality, required data protection or security terms cannot be established, or the organisation cannot support mobilisation. Escalate legal and procurement route to qualified owners, financial standing and commercial exposure to finance, technology supply-chain risk to security authority, personal-data roles to privacy authority, and portfolio displacement to The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work.

Questions to ask an adviser or prospective provider:

1. Which decisions and outcomes will you own, influence or explicitly not control?
2. Who is the named team, what will each person do, and what happens if they change?
3. What evidence demonstrates the method without disclosing another client's confidential information?
4. How do you separate platform, channel and supplier incentives from independent measurement?
5. Which implementation work remains with us or other parties?
6. What access, data, security, privacy and sub-provider controls are required?
7. How are changes, additional work, intellectual property and third-party costs governed?
8. What knowledge, artefacts, accounts and decision records transfer to us?
9. What would cause you to recommend no appointment or a smaller route?
10. How will exit, continuity and unresolved work be handled?

Reject a provider that guarantees outcomes outside its control, refuses named-team or method evidence, claims every capability through subcontractors without transparency, makes access dependent on continuing payment without justification, or cannot describe a safe exit.

3. The Step-by-Step Execution Standard

Use the Capability Appointment Charter and Authority Register, Internal Capability and Delivery Model Evidence Register, Provider Evaluation Due Diligence and Commercial Ledger, and Appointment Mobilisation Performance and Exit Register. Keep evidence, evaluator decisions and provider submissions controlled and attributable.

Step 01: Charter the capability and appointment decision

Purpose and decision served Turn a request for “an agency” or “more capacity” into one outcome, capability gap and dated delivery-model choice.

Accountable owner CMO or executive sponsor, with the economic buyer accepting materiality.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead with finance, procurement, legal, HR, operations, data, technology and customer owners as relevant.

Preconditions, inputs and access Accepted growth priority, current operating evidence, portfolio authority, known constraints and decision forum.

Actions

1. State the market and business decision the capability must improve.
2. identify the needed decision, evidence, execution and transfer capabilities.
3. write the dated build, specialist, agency, hybrid, validate, defer or stop choice.
4. Bound term, markets, systems, data, budget authority and exclusions.
5. Set evidence, fairness, safety and stop conditions.

Evidence to retain Charter, decision ID, outcome, capability hypothesis, boundary, exclusions and sponsor acceptance.

Decision or scoring rule Proceed only when the appointment can alter a real outcome and leadership can choose no appointment.

Output and template Charter rows in T01.

Acceptance gate PROCEED, NARROW, VALIDATE, DEFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor confirms a delivery model is being chosen, not a preselected supplier justified.

Human control point Only the authorised sponsor accepts business need and appointment boundary.

Failure modes and safeguards Writing a service list before the capability need; start with decisions, outcomes and internal ownership.

Change, stop or escalation condition Stop before commitment, appointment or mobilisation if the growth priority lacks applicable The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work funding authority or no operating owner exists. Bounded assessment and market engagement may proceed under the assessment authority when the decision, assessment budget and access are authorised; The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work funding, The Growth Capability and Partner Appointment Playbook: In-House, Specialist, Agency or Hybrid appointment and mobilisation remain separate gates.

Handoff to the next step Pass the accepted charter into governance and conflict design.

Step 02: Establish appointment authority and conflicts

Purpose and decision served Protect fairness, confidentiality and independent judgement before market contact.

Accountable owner Procurement or commercial authority and executive sponsor.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead, legal, finance, security, privacy, HR and evaluator representatives.

Preconditions, inputs and access Charter, applicable policy, approval thresholds, incumbent relationships, evaluator interests and information classifications.

Actions

1. Name requirement, process, evaluation, finance, contract, risk, data and final-decision authorities.
2. Determine the applicable competition, recruitment, direct-award or formal-procurement route through qualified owners.
3. Collect conflicts and incumbent-advantage declarations.
4. Define information-sharing, confidentiality, recusal, clarification and audit rules.
5. establish complaint, dissent, termination and escalation routes.

Evidence to retain Authority map, route decision, conflict assessment, mitigations, evaluator declarations and communication protocol.

Decision or scoring rule No market engagement starts while material process authority or conflict treatment is unresolved.

Output and template Authority, route and conflict rows in T01.

Acceptance gate AUTHORISED, REVISE, REFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor accepts process integrity and cannot override reserved authorities silently.

Human control point Qualified legal and procurement owners decide applicable obligations.

Failure modes and safeguards Allowing an incumbent or adviser to draft criteria only it can satisfy; disclose influence and neutralise advantage.

Change, stop or escalation condition Escalate unmitigated conflict, unfair advantage or route uncertainty.

Handoff to the next step Provide authorised governance for the internal capability baseline.

Step 03: Baseline internal capability and protected capacity

Purpose and decision served Determine what the organisation can own and execute before assuming an external gap.

Accountable owner CMO and relevant functional owners.

Delegated lead and contributors Capability assessor, HR, current practitioners, operating owners and independent challenger.

Preconditions, inputs and access Role descriptions, current backlog, decision rights, performance evidence, workload, skills evidence and current partner responsibilities.

Actions

1. Map strategic, research, content, channel, analytics, engineering, commercial and operating responsibilities.
2. distinguish skill from protected capacity, authority, access and adoption support.
3. assess current artefacts, methods, source ownership and handoff quality.
4. identify single-person dependency, vacancies, conflicts and development potential.
5. classify capability as available, developable, constrained, absent or requiring validation.

Evidence to retain Capability rows, workload and authority evidence, artefact samples, owner statements, contradictions and gaps.

Decision or scoring rule An external gap exists only when required capability, capacity or independence is not credibly available in the decision window.

Output and template Internal capability rows in T02.

Acceptance gate AVAILABLE, DEVELOP, CONSTRAINED, EXTERNAL GAP, VALIDATE or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint Leaders accept which internal work and authority must remain regardless of delivery route.

Human control point Functional owners can correct evidence; employment conclusions remain with authorised HR and leadership.

Failure modes and safeguards Calling a team incapable when it lacks mandate or time; record skill, authority and capacity separately.

Change, stop or escalation condition Return to The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work when freeing internal capacity is the real portfolio decision.

Handoff to the next step Pass accepted gaps and retained ownership into delivery-model options.

Step 04: Define outcome, role and handoff contracts

Purpose and decision served Specify what any delivery model must accomplish and how accountability crosses boundaries.

Accountable owner Growth decision owner and receiving operating owner.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead, finance, sales, service, content, data, technology and measurement owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Internal baseline, growth priority, value path, current handoffs, source systems and governance requirements.

Actions

1. Define outcome, decision, evidence, delivery and knowledge-transfer responsibilities.
2. Name inputs, access, internal contributions and receiving owners.
3. set deliverable and handoff acceptance tests.
4. Separate provider-controlled indicators from shared and business-owned outcomes.
5. Record implementation, change, exception and stop routes.

Evidence to retain Role contracts, responsibility map, deliverable criteria, measure ownership and handoff definitions.

Decision or scoring rule No model advances while material implementation or outcome ownership is unassigned.

Output and template Requirement and handoff rows in T02.

Acceptance gate COMPLETE, REVISE, NARROW or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor accepts what cannot be transferred to a provider.

Human control point Receiving owners explicitly accept their responsibilities before market engagement.

Failure modes and safeguards Writing outputs without decisions and operating handoffs; attach each deliverable to acceptance and use.

Change, stop or escalation condition Stop if the organisation cannot supply required decisions, access or implementation ownership.

Handoff to the next step Provide complete requirement contracts for delivery-model comparison.

Step 05: Compare in-house, specialist, agency and hybrid models

Purpose and decision served Choose plausible operating architectures before choosing names.

Accountable owner Executive sponsor and economic buyer.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead, finance, HR, procurement, functional and operating owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Capability baseline, requirement contracts, constraints, budget range, data and system boundary.

Actions

1. Define credible in-house, narrow specialist, integrated agency and hybrid options.
2. show decision rights, team composition, internal load, dependencies and handoffs for each.
3. assess mobilisation, continuity, independence, learning, flexibility and exit.
4. include develop-internally, do-minimum, defer and stop alternatives.
5. identify uncertainties for market engagement rather than assuming supplier solutions.

Evidence to retain Delivery-model cards, assumptions, capacity, responsibility, risks, rejected models and questions.

Decision or scoring rule A model enters market testing only when it can meet mandatory ownership and safeguard conditions.

Output and template Delivery-model rows in T02.

Acceptance gate TEST MARKET, DEVELOP INTERNALLY, VALIDATE, DEFER or REJECT.

Leadership checkpoint Leadership accepts the internal burden and retained capability of each route.

Human control point The economic buyer approves which models receive proportionate market engagement.

Failure modes and safeguards Treating hybrid as a vague compromise; name every boundary and integrator.

Change, stop or escalation condition Return to Step 03 when a model depends on unavailable internal roles.

Handoff to the next step Pass testable models and questions into controlled market engagement.

Step 06: Conduct fair, bounded market engagement

Purpose and decision served Test requirement, feasibility and commercial assumptions without granting unfair advantage or outsourcing design.

Accountable owner Procurement or commercial authority.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead, market-engagement owner, evaluators and governance representatives.

Preconditions, inputs and access Approved route, model options, information pack, questions, confidentiality rules and supplier population.

Actions

1. Define purpose, participants, information shared and records retained.
2. invite an appropriate and accessible market sample under applicable policy.
3. ask about capacity, team, delivery model, dependencies, evidence, commercial structures and risks.
4. record information consistently and distinguish supplier claims from verified facts.
5. update the requirement for all candidates without tailoring it unfairly.

Evidence to retain Engagement plan, invitations, shared pack, attendance, questions, responses, conflicts and requirement changes.

Decision or scoring rule Market input may refine requirements but cannot become provider evidence without later validation.

Output and template Market-engagement rows in T03.

Acceptance gate PROCEED TO EVALUATION, REVISE REQUIREMENT, CHANGE ROUTE, DEFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor sees market capacity and material requirement changes.

Human control point Process authority controls information parity and conflict mitigation.

Failure modes and safeguards Using informal conversations to preselect a supplier; record, share and neutralise material information appropriately.

Change, stop or escalation condition Stop on unavoidable unfair advantage, confidentiality breach or distorted competition.

Handoff to the next step Provide the final requirement and market evidence for evaluation design.

Step 07: Design evaluation and evidence contracts

Purpose and decision served Make appointment judgement reproducible and relevant to the real work before submissions arrive.

Accountable owner Procurement authority and decision owner.

Delegated lead and contributors Evaluation lead, finance, commercial, subject, data, security, privacy and operating evaluators.

Preconditions, inputs and access Final requirement, approved route, delivery models, risk assessment and market evidence.

Actions

1. Define mandatory conditions separately from comparative criteria.
2. specify evidence for team, method, governance, implementation, measurement, transfer and exit.
3. create anchored evaluation rules and clarification boundaries.
4. rehearse representative strong, weak and non-compliant responses.
5. obtain evaluator declarations, training and approval before opening submissions.

Evidence to retain Criteria, evidence contract, mandatory gates, scoring anchors where applicable, rehearsal and evaluator acceptance.

Decision or scoring rule One failed mandatory gate cannot be averaged away by presentation strength or low cost.

Output and template Evaluation-criterion rows in T03.

Acceptance gate READY, REVISE, REFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor confirms criteria reflect outcomes, operating model and whole-life value.

Human control point Evaluators apply accepted judgement; no automated score appoints a provider.

Failure modes and safeguards Changing criteria after seeing a favoured bid; freeze and version before evaluation.

Change, stop or escalation condition Restart the affected stage if material criteria change cannot be applied fairly.

Handoff to the next step Provide approved evidence contracts for provider due diligence.

Step 08: Verify team, method, proof and supply chain

Purpose and decision served Test whether a provider can deliver the stated model through the actual team and controlled supply chain.

Accountable owner Evaluation lead and relevant risk authorities.

Delegated lead and contributors Evaluators, procurement, security, privacy, finance, reference and subject specialists.

Preconditions, inputs and access Submissions, evidence contracts, consented references, corporate records, security and data questionnaires.

Actions

1. Verify legal identity, named team, availability, roles, subcontractors and conflicts.
2. inspect method artefacts using redacted or provider-owned evidence rather than confidential client material.
3. distinguish project context, provider contribution, observed output and independently verifiable outcome.
4. test security, resilience, data handling, sub-provider and continuity claims proportionately.
5. record contradictions, unresolved evidence and conditions without filling gaps by reputation.

Evidence to retain Due-diligence rows, reference consent, evidence copies, team confirmation, supply-chain map, findings and referrals.

Decision or scoring rule Unverified material claims remain REQUIRES VALIDATION; missing mandatory evidence fails or holds the candidate.

Output and template Provider-evidence and due-diligence rows in T03.

Acceptance gate PASS, CONDITIONAL, CLARIFY, REFER, FAIL or EXCLUDE UNDER APPLICABLE AUTHORITY.

Leadership checkpoint Leaders see evidence limits and do not infer results from logos, awards or credentials.

Human control point Qualified authorities decide security, privacy, legal, financial and exclusion conclusions.

Failure modes and safeguards Accepting an agency's corporate capability when the proposed team or subcontractor cannot evidence it; assess delivery reality.

Change, stop or escalation condition Stop on misrepresentation, unacceptable supply-chain risk or an unmitigated mandatory failure.

Handoff to the next step Pass eligible providers into whole-life commercial comparison.

Step 09: Reconcile whole-life commercial and control terms

Purpose and decision served Compare the complete cost and incentive structure rather than headline fees.

Accountable owner CFO or authorised commercial owner.

Delegated lead and contributors Commercial analyst, procurement, legal, finance, operating and technology owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Eligible submissions, pricing schedules, assumptions, internal resource model, third-party costs and contract terms.

Actions

1. separate fixed, variable, pass-through, media, platform, travel, transition and exit components.
2. quantify internal decision, review, implementation and data effort as evidence-bounded ranges.
3. identify incentive conflicts, mark-ups, rebates, minimum commitments and change controls.
4. compare intellectual property, accounts, data, artefact access, audit, liability, termination and continuity.
5. record scenario sensitivity and unresolved legal or finance referrals.

Evidence to retain Commercial model, assumptions, whole-life ranges, term comparison, conflicts, clarifications and authority decisions.

Decision or scoring rule Lowest initial price cannot override mandatory quality, control, continuity or outcome ownership.

Output and template Commercial and contract rows in T03.

Acceptance gate ACCEPT FOR FINAL COMPARISON, NEGOTIATE, CLARIFY, REFER, REJECT or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint Finance accepts the range, internal burden and conditions without treating them as outcome forecasts.

Human control point Legal and finance approve within delegated authority.

Failure modes and safeguards Ignoring internal effort or exit cost; show who must decide, implement, assure and transfer throughout the lifecycle.

Change, stop or escalation condition Escalate terms that create uncontrolled data, brand, financial or continuity exposure.

Handoff to the next step Pass eligible commercial models into operating and transfer design.

Step 10: Design mobilisation, measurement and capability transfer

Purpose and decision served Prove that the proposed appointment can enter operation, generate decision evidence and reduce avoidable dependency.

Accountable owner Receiving The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates operating owner.

Delegated lead and contributors Provider lead, internal counterpart, data, technology, content, sales, service and governance owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Requirement, proposed team, methods, systems, access needs, measures, deliverables and exit expectations.

Actions

1. define mobilisation gates for team, access, data, tools, accounts, baseline and first decisions.
2. separate provider delivery, operating adoption, commercial outcome and guardrail measures.
3. assign backlog, approval, implementation, incident, evidence and benefit roles.
4. specify documentation, paired work, training, account ownership and transfer acceptance.
5. rehearse team change, underperformance, breach, termination and continuity scenarios.

Evidence to retain Mobilisation plan, role map, measure contracts, transfer plan, access schedule, rehearsal and exit conditions.

Decision or scoring rule A provider is not appointment-ready when the organisation cannot supply required counterparts or receive the work.

Output and template Mobilisation and transfer rows in T04.

Acceptance gate OPERABLE, REVISE, CONDITION, DEFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor accepts internal load, measurement independence and transfer obligation.

Human control point Operating owners accept the handoffs; the provider cannot declare itself mobilised.

Failure modes and safeguards Treating onboarding as account setup; include decisions, data, workflows, controls and receiving capability.

Change, stop or escalation condition Stop if essential internal ownership, account control or safe access cannot be established.

Handoff to the next step Provide a complete decision pack for final appointment.

Step 11: Issue the appointment disposition

Purpose and decision served Select a delivery model and provider, or decide to build, validate, defer or stop, through documented human judgement.

Accountable owner Authorised appointment forum.

Delegated lead and contributors Appointment lead presents; procurement, finance, legal, risk, operating and evaluator roles advise.

Preconditions, inputs and access Charter, internal baseline, models, evaluation, due diligence, commercial comparison, mobilisation design and dissent.

Actions

1. present requirement fit, evidence, mandatory gates, commercial conditions and uncertainty separately.
2. compare appoint, build, hybrid, validate, defer and stop alternatives.
3. record conflicts, clarifications, conditions and rejected-route reasons.
4. issue the human disposition and resource authority.
5. set contract, mobilisation and performance gates.

Evidence to retain Decision record, evaluation summary, rationale, dissent, conditions, approvals and next gates.

Decision or scoring rule Every option receives an attributable disposition; no average score replaces mandatory-gate and judgement records.

Output and template Appointment decision rows in T04.

Acceptance gate APPOINT, BUILD INTERNALLY, HYBRIDISE, VALIDATE, DEFER or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor and economic buyer accept retained internal accountability and whole-life commitment.

Human control point Only the authorised forum appoints; agents or tools cannot approve a provider.

Failure modes and safeguards Choosing the strongest presentation rather than the evidence and operating model; retain criterion-level rationale.

Change, stop or escalation condition Defer when a material condition or authority remains unresolved.

Handoff to the next step Pass accepted disposition into contract finalisation and mobilisation.

Step 12: Contract and mobilise through acceptance gates

Purpose and decision served Turn the appointment decision into controlled access, work and ownership without assuming performance.

Accountable owner Contract owner and receiving operating owner.

Delegated lead and contributors Provider lead, procurement, legal, security, privacy, finance, data and functional owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Signed decision, approved contract, named team, data and security terms, account plan, baseline and mobilisation gates.

Actions

1. verify contract, statement of work and decision conditions agree.
2. confirm named team, subcontractors, accounts, tools, access and data roles.
3. establish baseline, backlog, decision cadence, measures and incident routes in The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates.
4. test first deliverable and handoff against acceptance criteria.
5. record access, exceptions, changes and human mobilisation acceptance.

Evidence to retain Executed agreements, team confirmation, access approvals, baseline, first acceptance, unresolved conditions and change log.

Decision or scoring rule Mobilisation is complete only when internal receivers accept controlled work and evidence, not when the contract starts.

Output and template Contract and mobilisation rows in T04.

Acceptance gate ACCEPT, CONDITIONALLY ACCEPT, RETURN, PAUSE or TERMINATE UNDER AUTHORITY.

Leadership checkpoint The sponsor confirms operating ownership and commercial controls are active.

Human control point Named authorities approve access, data processing, spend and mobilisation.

Failure modes and safeguards Granting broad access for convenience; apply minimum purpose, named accounts and closure dates.

Change, stop or escalation condition Pause on team substitution, control failure or material scope drift until reapproved.

Handoff to the next step Pass accepted operation into performance, transfer and exit review.

Step 13: Review performance, transfer capability and exit cleanly

Purpose and decision served Decide whether to continue, change, expand, reduce, internalise, re-compete or stop while preserving evidence and continuity.

Accountable owner Executive sponsor, contract owner and benefit owner.

Delegated lead and contributors The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates operating lead, provider lead, finance, procurement, measurement, data, security and internal capability owners.

Preconditions, inputs and access Contract, operating evidence, deliverables, outcomes, guardrails, capability-transfer evidence, incidents and market changes.

Actions

1. reconcile delivery, adoption, decision quality, commercial outcomes and guardrails separately.
2. review named team, method, costs, changes, incidents and unresolved dependencies.
3. test whether internal capability, artefact access and account ownership improved as contracted.
4. issue continue, change, reduce, internalise, re-compete, exit or stop disposition.
5. execute account, data, artefact, knowledge, access and continuity transfer.

Evidence to retain Performance review, proof statuses, transfer acceptance, commercial reconciliation, disposition, access closure and lessons.

Decision or scoring rule Activity and relationship quality cannot substitute for outcome, control and transfer evidence.

Output and template Performance, transfer, renewal and exit rows in T04.

Acceptance gate CONTINUE, CHANGE, REDUCE, INTERNALISE, RE-COMPETE, EXIT or STOP.

Leadership checkpoint Leadership accepts current value, dependency, capability and opportunity cost.

Human control point Only authorised humans renew, change or terminate and accept final transfer.

Failure modes and safeguards Renewing because switching is difficult; maintain exit evidence and organisation-owned accounts throughout.

Change, stop or escalation condition Escalate breach, loss of critical team, unapproved subcontracting, unsafe processing or failed continuity.

Handoff to the next step Close the appointment or issue a new charter for a materially changed capability need.

4. The Evidence & Measurement Checklist

Preflight and authority

• The appointment charter names one market and business outcome. Evidence: accepted charter. Owner: Executive sponsor.
• The applicable appointment or procurement route is approved. Evidence: route decision. Owner: Procurement authority.
• Decision, evaluation, finance, contract and risk authorities are named. Evidence: authority register. Owner: Executive sponsor.
• Conflicts, incumbent advantage and recusal are documented. Evidence: conflict assessment. Owner: Governance owner.
• Build, validate, defer and stop remain genuine options. Evidence: option statement. Owner: Decision owner.

Evidence access and quality

• Internal skill, authority and protected capacity remain separate. Evidence: capability register. Owner: Functional owner.
• Provider claims identify source, period and proposed team. Evidence: evidence ledger. Owner: Evaluation lead.
• Named team and subcontractor roles are verified. Evidence: team confirmation. Owner: Provider lead.
• Case evidence separates context, contribution, output and outcome. Evidence: proof assessment. Owner: Proof evaluator.
• Material contradictions and evidence gaps remain visible. Evidence: due-diligence record. Owner: Independent challenger.

Method execution

• In-house, specialist, agency and hybrid models are compared. Evidence: delivery-model cards. Owner: Appointment lead.
• Requirement and criteria are approved before submissions. Evidence: versioned evaluation contract. Owner: Procurement owner.
• Mandatory gates remain outside comparative scoring. Evidence: gate register. Owner: Evaluation lead.
• Whole-life cost includes internal, third-party, transition and exit effects. Evidence: commercial model. Owner: Finance owner.
• Mobilisation and capability transfer have acceptance criteria. Evidence: operating plan. Owner: The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates operating owner.

Governance, privacy, security and risk

• Market engagement records shared information and mitigations. Evidence: engagement log. Owner: Procurement authority.
• Personal-data roles and contract needs are referred appropriately. Evidence: privacy decision. Owner: Privacy authority.
• Security and supply-chain due diligence is proportionate and owned. Evidence: security assessment. Owner: Security authority.
• Confidential client evidence is not demanded or reused improperly. Evidence: evidence protocol. Owner: Evaluation lead.
• Accounts, data, intellectual property and exit rights are explicit. Evidence: contract schedule. Owner: Contract owner.

Deliverables and acceptance

• Charter, authority and conflicts use a controlled record. Evidence: T01. Owner: File custodian.
• Internal baseline and delivery models are traceable. Evidence: T02. Owner: Capability owner.
• Provider evaluation, diligence and commercial evidence are linked. Evidence: T03. Owner: Evaluation lead.
• Decision, mobilisation, performance and exit use stable IDs. Evidence: T04. Owner: Contract owner.
• A cold reader can reproduce the disposition from accepted evidence. Evidence: traceability test. Owner: Editorial owner.

Measurement

• Evaluation quality, mobilisation, operating, outcome and guardrail measures are distinct. Evidence: measure contracts. Owner: Measurement owner.
• Every measure has a baseline or states baseline required. Evidence: measure rows. Owner: Analyst.
• Formula, unit, denominator and exclusions are explicit. Evidence: measure dictionary. Owner: Evidence owner.
• Thresholds trigger human continue, change or stop decisions. Evidence: review gate. Owner: Benefit owner.
• Provider contribution and wider business attribution limits are visible. Evidence: interpretation note. Owner: Independent challenger.

Decision and handover

• Every delivery model and eligible provider has a disposition. Evidence: decision register. Owner: Appointment forum.
• Appointment funding reconciles with The Growth Investment Portfolio: A Leadership Standard for Funding, Sequencing and Stopping Growth Work authority. Evidence: portfolio reference. Owner: CFO.
• Receiving internal owners accept mobilisation obligations. Evidence: handover acceptance. Owner: Operating owner.
• The Growth System Operating and Scale Standard: Cadence, Experiments, Handoffs and Stop/Scale Gates receives backlog, measures, handoffs and stop controls. Evidence: operating transfer. Owner: Growth operating lead.
• Provider appointment does not imply scale approval. Evidence: authority boundary. Owner: Executive sponsor.

Review, change and stop controls

• Team substitutions and subcontractor changes require review. Evidence: change log. Owner: Contract owner.
• Performance review separates activity from decisions and outcomes. Evidence: review record. Owner: Benefit owner.
• Capability transfer and account ownership are tested. Evidence: transfer acceptance. Owner: Internal capability owner.
• Exit closes access and returns controlled artefacts. Evidence: exit checklist. Owner: Security and contract owners.
• A materially changed capability need triggers a new charter. Evidence: re-charter decision. Owner: Executive sponsor.

Measurement contracts

Measure A: Evaluation evidence coverage

Measure B: Mobilisation gate acceptance

Measure C: Decision-grade deliverable acceptance

Measure D: Accepted provider contribution

Measure E: Capability transfer acceptance

Measure F: Provider dependency and control guardrail

Evidence classifications used in this guide

• VERIFIED: accepted direct evidence about the named provider, team, artefact, period and scope.
• INFERRED: a bounded evaluator interpretation with assumptions and alternatives visible.
• PROPOSED: a requirement, delivery model, criterion, term or appointment awaiting authority.
• REQUIRES VALIDATION: a material capability, capacity, proof, commercial or outcome claim lacking sufficient evidence.

The Growth Capability and Partner Appointment Playbook: In-House, Specialist, Agency or Hybrid method is a PROPOSED Abrasim appointment standard and does not certify any provider. NIST describes technology-supplier due diligence as researching pertinent information to support informed acquisition decisions and scopes its July 2026 quick-start guide to ICT supply-chain risk (NIST SP 1326); qualified security owners must decide applicability and depth. The ICO states that data-controller and processor responsibilities require appropriate contractual treatment and notes that its guidance is under review following legal change (ICO contracts guidance). These sources support due-diligence and contract control principles, not provider quality or legal conclusions for a particular appointment.