Five projects, five site teams, five versions of the truth — and a board pack that takes a week to assemble.

The situation

Monthly visibility on weekly problems

Each site team reports in its own format: one tracks bookings by tower and floor, another by unit type; one logs collections against demand letters, another against milestones. The CFO's assistant spends the first week of every month reconciling the five formats into the board pack — normalizing definitions, chasing missing numbers, and resolving the same discrepancies she resolved last month.

The lag has costs. Collections aging is the sharpest one: a buyer who missed a milestone payment is a phone call in week one and a legal notice in week twelve, and the difference is when someone noticed. Sales velocity shifts matter too — a project whose bookings slowed needs a pricing or marketing response before the quarter is lost, not after the board asks why.

Construction milestones drive both: a slipped slab date pushes demand letters, which pushes collections, which pushes the cash-flow projection the board actually cares about. The dependencies are known; nobody has time to trace them weekly across five spreadsheets.

The work

What Taz builds for this developer

Taz normalizes the five reporting formats into one weekly view, defines the exceptions leadership wants surfaced, and builds a board-pack drafter that works from the same verified numbers — with the CFO reviewing everything before it circulates.

• Format normalization: Each site team keeps its own spreadsheet; Taz builds the mapping layer that translates all five into one canonical structure — units, bookings, collections, milestones — with per-project mapping documents the teams approve.
• Exception rules: Written thresholds set with the MD and CFO: collections aging past N days by amount tier, booking velocity dropping against trailing average, milestone slippage beyond tolerance, and cancellation clusters — each flag showing its underlying rows.
• Cross-project dependencies: Milestone slips are traced to the demand letters and collections they delay, so the digest shows the cash consequence of a construction delay, not just the delay.
• The weekly pulse: One document each Monday: portfolio headline numbers, per-project exceptions with evidence, and the items aging toward escalation — readable in fifteen minutes.
• Board-pack drafter: At month-end, the same verified data drafts the recurring board sections — sales, collections, progress, exceptions and actions taken — in the board's existing format, with every figure traceable and the narrative left for the MD to own.

The deliverable

What the developer receives

• Working pulse pipeline — five-format ingestion through weekly digest, running on real project data, with operating instructions for the CFO's team.
• Mapping and definitions document — the canonical data structure and per-project mappings, so "booked," "collected," and "complete" mean one thing portfolio-wide.
• Exception rulebook — the thresholds and escalation windows as a written, amendable policy.
• Board-pack template and two drafted packs — the drafter proven on two real month-ends during the engagement, in the board's own format.
• Operating guide — weekly time cost, how site teams submit, how to amend rules, and what the workflow never does (send demand letters, contact buyers, alter ledgers).