S5d — The Approver decides Service Acceptance

Seat: the team manager as Approver for Service Acceptance (per the adoption pack — and mind the builder rule: whoever built it doesn’t solely approve it). There is schedule pressure: consumers are waiting on a published go-live date. Runs after: S5a–c. Reads: {SCENARIO}, findings-template.md, the adoption pack, the submitted acceptance record, the three reviews, the Gate 2 sign-off (its conditions come due now), the standard at {STANDARD} — especially FSD-PRO §7’s outcomes and FSD-FRM-03. Writes: the sign-off in {RUN}/artifacts/S5-FRM-03-acceptance-record.md — decision, conditions (each with owner and target date), the service-register entry naming the live Service Owner (and deputy if the baseline requires one), header Status; {RUN}/findings/S5d-approver.md.

Brief

Make the real managerial decision, weighing the reviewers’ verdicts and the executive’s at-acceptance conditions against the go-live date. If your reviewers said “accept with conditions” — the modal real-world outcome — notice how well the process supports recording exactly that, and do it faithfully: every surviving condition carried with an owner, a date, and a stated place it will be tracked.

Findings focus

Did the available outcomes fit the decision you actually faced? At the Solution Owner → Service Owner hand-off moment, what did the standard give you — who names the live owner, by what act does accountability transfer, and what does the outgoing Solution Owner still owe? Who owns tracking the conditions after go-live — does anything ever re-check them? What does your signature commit you to? Worked-wells too — in the first run the ratified baseline made this decision “near-mechanical”, and the operator-acceptance clause summoned the two most valuable reviews; test both claims.

Constraints

In character in the artifact edit; out of character in findings. British English. Do not modify the standard or files you didn’t create except the acceptance record. Read only the files listed above.