← Back to Tracker
Original language: Russian / Translated to English
Critical Root-Cause Discoveries
Configuration sequence breaks SPIFF
Discovered through trial and error: periods must be defined BEFORE plans; sheets must be created INSIDE folders. Wrong order breaks the designer entirely. This is likely what broke the previous demo org. ~3 months of work may have been avoidable if sequence was known upfront.
No documented configuration sequence exists anywhere
Training materials (PDFs, DFK docs, YouTube) say WHAT to configure but never in WHAT ORDER. No experienced consultant has ever walked through the sequence on screen. This is tribal knowledge held only by experienced SPIFF consultants who "do it without thinking."
API vs UI desync (spaghetti code)
API (Hitless 360) can configure things that don't sync to the UI. This explains the "black box" problem from last meeting — calculations were done via API/code but not reflected in worksheets. Multiple databases synchronize behind the scenes.
Source files contaminated with manual comments
The intake/configuration file has entries like "to be defined" and "to be discussed with client" — forcing AI to improvise with fake data. This leads to incorrect settings and burns tokens on dead-end paths.
Import function much more efficient than UI clicking
For bulk operations (quotas for 1,500 reps), import button is far superior. Many nuances like this are known only to experienced consultants.
Speaking Time by Participant
Participants
Max Votek (strategy, parallel board meeting)
Max Shevchenko (SPIFF config, root-cause analysis)
Taras Khudoba (facilitator)
Key Takeaways
- Mohammad is absent — on PTO. Team can't progress key items without him as process lead.
- Configuration sequence is the root cause — periods before plans, sheets inside folders, step-by-step verification needed. Without this, the designer breaks and you waste tokens on dead ends.
- ~3 months potentially wasted — if the correct configuration sequence had been documented from the start, much trial-and-error could have been avoided.
- Nobody has ever demonstrated the process — in the entire project lifecycle, no consultant has screen-shared a proper step-by-step SPIFF configuration session.
- Jaspal is the closest to a subject matter expert — ex-Salesforce, ex-Spiff employee, recently hired as lead consultant. His training sessions were "very useful, watched carefully several times."
- API (Hitless 360) explains the black box — found API that configures database directly but doesn't sync with UI. This is why Valeria couldn't find where calculations were stored.
- United Veins is blocked — Max Shevchenko's production access was revoked after initial work. Needs new access, credentials, and billable hours assigned. Client hasn't responded.
- Proposed solution: Get Jaspal to verbally walk through the configuration sequence, capture as text transcript, use as definitive step-by-step reference — needs blocks/dependencies, not detailed clicks.
Key Quotes (Translated from Russian)
"I now know through trial and error that you first need to define periods before defining a plan. If you define the plan before the period, the designer will break." — Max Shevchenko
"We basically wasted 3 months. If this had been there from the start..." — Max Votek
"Not once, during the entire time we've been doing this project, has any consultant said 'let me show you how I configure this.'" — Max Votek
"You need a subject matter expert you can sit with, and he says 'click here, don't click there.' When I know an application well, I automatically avoid things a newbie would do." — Max Shevchenko
"The source file is full of manual comments — 'to be defined', 'to be discussed with client.' You have to invent fake data. Naturally, this doesn't lead to correct settings." — Max Shevchenko
"It's configured inside the database but not synchronized with the user interface. There's a bunch of old spaghetti code." — Max Shevchenko on why the "black box" happens
Score Trend Across All Meetings
Adopt
KB
Wflow
UAT
Roles
Biz
PM
Agent
Accel
Avg
Delta
-1
--
-1
-1
--
--
-1
--
--
-0.6
Workstream Assessment
1. Team Adoption -1
People actively using AI tools
4/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Mohammad on PTO — team progress stalled. Planned training session hasn't happened. Valeria can't proceed without him coordinating. The team training with Max Votek hasn't been scheduled yet.
2. Knowledge Base = 0
MD files, GitHub repo, reuse
4/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Critical knowledge gap identified: configuration sequence not documented anywhere. Existing PDFs, DFK docs, YouTube courses all describe WHAT but not in WHAT ORDER. Proposal to have Jaspal dictate the correct sequence as text. This would be the single most valuable knowledge artifact for the project.
3. AI Workflows -1
Doc, config, test, implementation
4/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Root cause of AI workflow inefficiency found: wrong configuration order burns tokens on dead ends. Without the correct step-verification sequence, AI will keep hitting breakages and rolling back. The source file has "to be defined" entries forcing improvisation. Fixing the input sequence would dramatically improve the config workflow.
4. UAT & Refinement -1
Feedback loop compression
4/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
UAT session with Valeria still not conducted — waiting on Mohammad. Root cause of "black box" now explained: API configures database but doesn't sync with UI. Knowing this, the gap review session with Valeria + Max Shevchenko can be much more targeted — but hasn't happened yet.
5. Role Compression = 0
Fewer roles, broader coverage
5/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Not discussed. Staffing model from Apr 28 still stands.
6. Business Model = 0
Fixed-price / outcome-based shift
4/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Not discussed. Monday Salesforce presentation status unknown.
7. PM & Tracking -1
Profitability, plan vs actual, forecast
2/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Mohammad as single point of failure is a PM-level risk. No process for when the process lead is unavailable. "Chain of command" concern prevents others from acting independently. No tracking of the ~3 months lost or how to prevent recurrence.
8. Agent Architecture = 0
Specialized agent experiments
2/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
Not discussed.
9. Accelerators = 0
Packaged products (e.g. territory mgmt)
7/10
Not started
Early
In progress
Mature
United Veins blocked (access revoked). Estimator/health check status unknown. Max Shevchenko's production access was revoked after initial engagement. Needs new access + billable hours. Client hasn't responded. Other accelerators (estimator, health check) weren't discussed — likely progressing separately.
Blockers & Risks
We need Mohammad's help to step in — currently on PTO, team waiting for his availability to move forward.
CRITICAL
No configuration sequence documentation exists — not in PDFs, not in DFK, not on YouTube. Only tribal knowledge from experienced consultants.
BLOCKING
United Veins production access revoked. Sandbox too old. No billable hours assigned.
AT RISK
Source files still contain "to be defined" entries, forcing AI to improvise. Not cleaned up.
WATCH
Action Items
Message Mohammad: schedule session with Valeria + Max Shevchenko to review configuration gaps
Max Votek
Get Jaspal to dictate the correct SPIFF configuration sequence (text, not video) — blocks and dependencies, not individual clicks
Mohammad / Max Votek
Re-read SPIFF training PDFs specifically for configuration order/dependencies
Max Shevchenko
Ask Claude to analyze existing training materials for implied configuration sequence
Max Shevchenko
Resolve United Veins access: get production credentials, billable hours, and task assignment
Max Votek / Mohammad
Clean source/intake file: remove "to be defined" and manual comments, replace with actual data or clear placeholders
Mohammad / Valeria
Generated from meeting transcript (Russian → English) — SPIFF/SPM AI Configuration Project