#1 Contracts waiting on lender funding
5 of 19 eligible contracts were not funded within the store's 7-day standard, leaving $131,700 unresolved.
Next step: Deal Flow Investigation
Sample Diagnostic
See what a Diagnostic looks like.
This synthetic sample of the Dealership Technology Diagnostic shows how we document where work is stalling, how strong the evidence is, what the stall affects, and what should happen next.
Synthetic example. Fictional store. Invented data. Not a benchmark.
What you get
What every finding tells you.
01
What stalled.
Where in the operation work stopped, measured against the store's own standards.
02
How credible the evidence is.
Every finding is rated Confirmed, Strong signal or Likely, and says what it rests on.
03
What the data shows it affects.
Records affected, time past the standard, and unresolved dollars in the records. No projected savings.
04
What happens next.
A recommended next step for each finding, in the order to look at them.
Top three
The three findings to look at first.
From the sample report for Example Motors, a fictional store.
#2 Missed calls with no recorded callback
The data strongly indicates that 58 of 134 eligible missed or abandoned calls had no callback recorded within 4 business hours.
Next step: Implementation scoping
#3 After-hours leads with no owner
The data strongly indicates that 47 of 112 leads received when the store was closed had no owner by 10:00 a.m. the next open day.
Next step: Deal Flow Investigation
Full ranking
The full ranked list.
Eight findings, in the order to look at them. Findings are ordered first by observed impact, then by strength of evidence. Estimated financial upside is never used.
| # | Finding | Confidence | Impact | Next step |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Contracts waiting on lender funding | Confirmed | High | Deal Flow Investigation |
| 2 | Missed calls with no recorded callback | Strong signal | High | Implementation scoping |
| 3 | After-hours leads with no owner | Strong signal | High | Deal Flow Investigation |
| 4 | Aging items in the accounting schedule | Strong signal | High | Implementation scoping |
| 5 | Leads matched to a vehicle that sold | Likely | High | Deal Flow Investigation |
| 6 | Provider A leads with no logged contact | Likely | High | Deal Flow Investigation |
| 7 | Appointments with no final disposition | Likely | High | Deal Flow Investigation |
| 8 | Incomplete deal jackets at the pre-delivery gate | Strong signal | Medium | Deal Flow Investigation |
How to read the order
- Why is #8 last? Its impact is Medium, which places it below every High finding even though its evidence is Strong.
- Why is #4 above #5? Within the same impact level, a Strong signal ranks above a Likely one.
Two terms. A Deal Flow Investigation is a deeper look at one journey, such as how a lead becomes a deal. Implementation scoping defines the fix for a store-wide issue.
Example Motors is built with many stalls so the report can show every part of its format. A real Diagnostic may find fewer, or none.
Anatomy of a finding
Anatomy of a finding.
Finding #1, in full. Every finding in the report is built the same way.
| Part | Finding #1 | What this part does |
|---|---|---|
| What was observed | 5 of 19 eligible contracts (26.3%) were not funded within the store's 7-day standard. Eligible contracts are those submitted on Days 1 to 7, so each had a full 7 days by Day 14. 3 of the 5 deals are still unposted. | Facts only: counts, the store's own standard, and the window. |
| Observed impact | $131,700 is unresolved, which is 23.1% of the $571,200 in eligible contracts. | Only what the records show. No projections. |
| Evidence | The lender portal funding report identifies each contract. The bank deposit report shows no lender deposit for the same five. The deal-status export shows the same deals still open. The F&I manager interview names outstanding stips as the usual cause. | Every source is named. |
| Confidence | Confirmed. The five contracts are identified individually, the counts reproduce from the source records, and an independent source verifies them. | The level, and exactly why. |
| Cause | Waiting. The contracts are waiting on lender conditions that have not been cleared. | The kind of stall found. |
| Business implication | Unfunded contracts may tie up cash and may leave deals unposted at month-end. No amount is estimated beyond the $131,700 observed. | Labeled as interpretation, and kept apart from the facts. |
| Recommended next step | A Deal Flow Investigation to trace each of the five contracts to its outstanding condition and to the role that clears it. | Diagnose before prescribing. |
Coverage
Not everything becomes a finding.
A Diagnostic that only reports problems isn't a diagnostic. Three other outcomes from the same sample.
No signal found.
59 of 64 appointments (92.2%) had a logged confirmation the day before, against the store's 90% target. The Diagnostic found no credible signal. That does not show the workflow is working well.
Not enough evidence.
Suspected but not confirmed. A blank appraisal field on 7 of 31 deals could mean a missing appraisal or an unlinked one. What would settle it: an export from the appraisal tool with timestamps.
Not assessed at Store depth.
Assessing it needs live desking data. It is left for a deeper look and is not guessed at.
None of these is read as a clean result.
The complete sample
The complete sample.
The full synthetic report: an executive summary, all eight findings in detail, the flow and stage view, coverage, recommendations and the evidence appendix.
Synthetic example. Fictional store. Invented data. Not a benchmark.
See where your store is actually stalling.
The Diagnostic looks across the dealership and reports what the evidence supports, including where no signal was found and where deeper data is still needed.
No deck. No pitch.