Scope Priority Workflows
- Define scope boundary and user stories for prioritised workflows
- Agree acceptance criteria before configuration begins
Commercial Management
Commercial Management · Palantir Workflows
June 2026
·
Confidential
Session Agenda
Agree which commercial workflows Palantir builds first and confirm the data records needed to begin
01
Workflow Overview
Five workflows across the commercial lifecycle
02
Workflow Deep-dives
Lifecycle, data sources, and where Palantir adds value
Target Output
Agreed priority workflows and pre-requisite data actions
03
Prioritisation
Framework and ranked deployment sequence
04
Next Steps
Scope, records, sprint plan
Overview of Workflows for Discussion
The following workflows cover commercial management (excluding procurement) from contracting to close-out
| Workflow | Key Decision | What It Governs |
|---|---|---|
| W1 · Obligations & Renewals | Does every obligation across owner and contractor have a current status and accountable entity before the deadline? Is every expiry and renewal tracked? | Contract obligations and event (e.g. renewals, expiry) extracted, tracked, and linked to programme risks |
| W2 · Change Control | What is the owner's accepted position on each change, and is it aligned with the contractor's? What early warning indicators and governance can provide early visibility? | Baseline cost and schedule with owner change register reconciled with contractor; early warning indicators inform governance |
| W3 · Forecast & EAC | Does the owner hold a clear view of budget current position, impact of EAC changes on budget and what does it mean for forecast and contingency at package level? | Owner's accepted cost, budget position, contingency drawdown, cashflow |
| W4 · Claims Management | Does the owner have a valid position on every claim before the notice window closes? | Immutable claim event ledger: notice, evidence, entitlement |
| W5 · Commercial Close-out | Is the final commercial position agreed and archived before handover? | Variation reconciliation, final account, retention, transition |
02
Workflow Deep-dives
Lifecycle, data sources, and where Palantir adds value.
Workflow 1 · Obligations & Renewals
Every active obligation is extracted from the contract on execution, tracked to a confirmed outcome, and linked to the programme risk register
EXECUTE
Contract live in CLM
EXTRACT
AIP reads obligations
VALIDATE
User reviews, edits
TRACK
Dashboard live
NOTIFY
90/60/30 day alerts
CONFIRM
Fulfilled / waived / overdue
AUDIT
Immutable outcome log
| What the workflow achieves | In commercial terms |
|---|---|
| Obligation extraction at contract execution | An AI agent reads every contract on execution and surfaces obligation type, value, due dates, and assignee. Obligations are structured from the document at the point of execution. |
| Proactive renewal window alerts | Configurable alerts fire at 90, 60, and 30 days before expiry. Each stakeholder — procurement, legal, finance, contract owner — gets the right notice at the right stage, before the window closes. |
| Automatic RAID item creation | Contracts approaching expiry, high-value obligations nearing due date, and overdue obligations raise risks and issues in the programme RAID register. Nothing requires manual transfer between systems. |
| Immutable audit trail per obligation | Every status change — fulfilled, extended, waived, or overdue — is timestamped with the user and captured. The log supports compliance review and dispute resolution without reconstruction. |
Decision Supported
Every contract obligation has a current status and a confirmed owner. No renewal window is missed, and every overdue obligation generates a visible programme risk.
Workflow 1 · Obligations & Renewals · Data Sources
CLM is the only system integration needed to begin. RAID linkage extends reach into the programme risk register
| Record | Current Source | Final Source |
|---|---|---|
| Contract documentsExecuted contract documents from which obligation type, value, due dates, and assignee are extracted by AIP | CLM | CLM |
| Contract register (expiry dates)Contract identifiers, parties, values, execution dates, and expiry milestones used to trigger renewal workflows | CLM | CLM |
| Obligation registerOwner-validated list of obligation instances with type, value, due date, assignee, and current fulfilment status | Not held | Owner-authored in Foundry |
| Stakeholder contact directoryContact records for contract owners, procurement, legal, and finance used to route obligation notifications at 90, 60, and 30 days | Procurement spreadsheets | Procurement system |
| RAID registerProgramme risk, assumption, issue, and decision register into which contract expiry risks and overdue obligations are automatically created | RAID Foundry App | RAID Foundry App |
Workflow 2 · Change Control
The owner's change register exists in parallel with the contractor's — reconciliation runs automatically when each extract arrives
EARLY WARNING
Risk and mitigation identified
ORIGINATE
Event identified and logged
RECORD
Owner register opened
SUBSTANTIATE
Rates, hours, fragnet
REVIEW & RECONCILE
Adequacy checked; owner vs. contractor
ACCEPT / DISPUTE
Decision recorded
REPORT
Open / closed register
| What the workflow achieves | In commercial terms |
|---|---|
| Contractor change request submission | Contractors submit RFCs to request authorisation of changes in their parallel instance of the change log. |
| Substantiation gating at intake | A change pack without rates, hours, or fragnet is returned at intake. Adequacy is confirmed at intake, so the review meeting starts from a substantiated position. |
| Owner acceptance | The owner governs the change position, in turn maintaining control of baseline. Change governance forums review early warning notices and RFCs to determine accepted / rejected change notices, or mitigation instructions. |
| Direct flow to W4 on acceptance | Changes cleared through authority thresholds update the W4 EAC automatically. Positions stay consistent across workflow boundaries without re-entry. |
Decision Supported
The accepted change position is the owner's (vs. contractor). Reconciliation confirms alignment before payments are released.
Workflow 2 · Change Control · Data Sources
Contract terms from CLM and contractor change extracts via CSV are both available from day one — P6 (on-prem) fragnet adds programme linkage from weeks 10–12
| Record | Current Source | Final Source |
|---|---|---|
| Contractor change requestChange ID, originator, description, contract reference, status, impact on contract value, programme and substantiation reference | Contractor (ad hoc) | Contractor CSV / workflow export |
| Contract terms and clausesContract document providing the instruction basis, change valuation rules, and authority thresholds governing the change process | CLM | CLM |
| Delegated authority thresholdsInternal governance parameters defining which change values require escalation above commercial team level | Not formally held | Owner-authored in Foundry |
| Substantiation packsContractor-supplied rates, hours, productivity impact, and fragnet supporting each change submission | SharePoint | ACC (from week 10) |
| Programme fragnet / P6 activitiesSchedule impact evidence attached to change packs showing affected P6 activities and programme delay | Not integrated | P6 (on-prem) via XER |
Workflow 3 · Forecast & EAC
Forecast and budget fidelity is maintained through close alignment of budgets with contractual changes and drawdowns
SUBMIT
Contractor submits EAC + CTC
INTAKE CHECK
Budget and cost codes validated
RECONCILE
Owner EAC compared
CHALLENGE
Variance flagged automatically
ACCEPT
Drawdown position updated
UPDATE CASHFLOW
Forward schedule updated
REPORT
Exec pack generated
| What the workflow achieves | In commercial terms |
|---|---|
| High fidelity budget and forecast view | High frequency reconciliation of allocated budget with early warnings, EAC, and change events produces a more accurate view of budget spend and forecast |
| Owner-computed EAC | The owner calculates its EAC from validated cost-code data, independent of the contractor's submission. The gap between the two positions is the structured challenge agenda for the review meeting. |
| Automated contingency tracking | Each accepted EAC adjusts the programme contingency position. Threshold breaches surface before executive review, giving the governance cycle time to respond. |
| Payment schedule updated on acceptance | Acceptance flows directly into the forward payment schedule, aligned to milestones and treasury cut-off. There is no manual assembly step between the accepted position and reporting. |
| Submission gating at intake | A contractor EAC without cost-code alignment or movement narrative is returned before the review meeting opens. The challenge is structured from the first exchange. |
Decision Supported
The accepted EAC is the owner's position. Contingency drawdown is tracked and threshold breaches are visible before executive review.
Workflow 3 · Forecast & EAC · Data Sources
Core records are available as extracts (e.g. CSV) from day one — programme schedule and financial systems linkage adds cashflow fidelity when they are available
| Record | Current Source | Final Source |
|---|---|---|
| Contractor EAC / cost-to-completeWBS / cost code, budget, actuals to date, committed cost, forecast to complete, EAC, variance, movement narrative | Contractor ERP (ad hoc); Owner's system | Contractor ERP governed output; Maintained on owner's system |
| Budget and cost codesOwner WBS and cost coding structure used to validate and align contractor EAC submissions | Google Sheets | Owner-authored in Foundry / Owner's ERP |
| Contract reference dataContract identifiers, package names, and counterparty details required to code EAC submissions against the owner's commercial register | Google Sheets | CLM |
| Certified payments to dateCumulative and current-period certified amounts by contract, reconciled to the payment run | Finance team extract | SAP / Coupa |
| Contingency registerOwner-maintained position tracking contingency allocation, drawdown decisions, and remaining balance by contract | Google Sheets | Owner-authored in Foundry |
| Risk registerProgramme risk register into which EAC changes, budget threshold breaches, and change events are automatically linked | Already in Foundry | Already in Foundry |
| Programme schedule / cashflowMilestone dates and forward cashflow phasing used to align certified payment projections to treasury cut-off | Not integrated | P6 (on-prem) via XER |
Workflow 4 · Claims Management
Claims are won on notice compliance and the quality of the chronology — both will be designed to be built into the system from day one
EVENT
Delay or disruption logged
NOTICE ASSESS
Clause and deadline flagged
EVIDENCE
Transmittals, diaries, costs
ENTITLEMENT
Clause mapping, causation
QUANTUM
Time and money impact
NEGOTIATE
Without-prejudice discussion
ESCALATE
Formal dispute package
| What the workflow achieves | In commercial terms |
|---|---|
| Notice obligations flagged at event | When a claim event is logged, the clause, required notice form, and deadline appear immediately. The team has what it needs before the first call. |
| Immutable notice compliance record | Each event is timestamped at creation and cannot be altered retrospectively. The notice compliance record is fixed at the point of logging, which matters when the dispute reaches adjudication or litigation. |
| Evidence assembled continuously | Transmittals, RFI references, and cost actuals attach to the event as they become available. The evidence pack builds over time, so it is ready when pressure arrives. |
| Live exposure in the programme risk register | Total live claim exposure rolls into the programme risk register at the executive level. Visibility precedes any contractor submission. |
Decision Supported
Every live claim has a documented owner position — notice status, entitlement basis, and exposure estimate — before the response window closes.
Workflow 4 · Claims Management · Data Sources
Contract clauses from CLM and CDE transmittals can connect today. P6 schedule integration adds critical-path linkage when it is available
| Record | Current Source | Final Source |
|---|---|---|
| Contract clauses and notice requirementsContract provisions defining claim entitlement, notice obligations, timescales, and the response process | CLM | CLM |
| RFI / TQ chronologyRequest for information and technical query log evidencing information-flow failures and delays that form the factual basis of a claim | Google Sheet / email | ACC RFI module |
| CDE transmittals and document historySite instruction records, drawing issues, and formal transmittals forming the primary factual chronology for claims | SharePoint | ACC (from week 10) |
| Cost actuals (quantum estimation)Cost code, description, labour hours, rates, material quantities, subcontractor reference, period actuals and cumulative | Procurement spreadsheets | Finance system CSV |
| Programme schedule — critical pathCurrent and contemporaneous schedule used to demonstrate programme impact, delay causation, and critical path disruption | Not integrated | P6 (on-prem) via XER |
Workflow 5 · Commercial Close-out
The W2 change register means the owner's variation position is already in the system when practical completion is issued
TRIGGER
Practical completion issued
VARIATION RECON
W3 register vs. contractor
FINAL ACCOUNT
Owner position prepared
RECONCILIATION
Gaps resolved or referred
RETENTION & BONDS
Release schedule checked
FINAL CERTIF.
Final certificate issued
OPS TRANSITION
Warranty objects transferred
| What the workflow achieves | In commercial terms |
|---|---|
| Owner-led final account preparation | The owner's close-out position is built from the W3 change register and certified payment ledger before any negotiation begins. The contractor receives a structured comparison, prepared in advance. |
| W2 register flows directly into close-out | The change register built throughout delivery feeds the close-out reconciliation automatically. Gaps appear as numbered exceptions, resolved from a structured base. |
| Retention and bond tracking with alerts | Release dates and bond expiry windows carry automated alerts. Calls are flagged by the system before they are due. |
| Commercial settlement retained as benchmark | Close-out produces a structured settlement record with variance analysis. That intelligence is retained as programme benchmark data for future contracts. |
Decision Supported
The final commercial position is agreed, evidenced, and archived. The owner controls close-out, not the contractor.
Workflow 5 · Commercial Close-out · Data Sources
Close-out draws on records built throughout delivery: the W2 register, certified payment ledger, and owner-authored retention register
| Record | Current Source | Final Source |
|---|---|---|
| Contract register and variation logChange ID, originator, description, contract reference, status, impact on contract value, programme and substantiation reference | W2 register (Foundry) | W2 register (Foundry) |
| Certified payment ledgerCumulative and current-period certified amounts by contract, reconciled to the payment run | Finance team extract | SAP / Coupa / Similar system |
| Contract terms and close-out schedulesContract provisions governing final account procedures, retention release, defects liability, and close-out certification | CLM | CLM |
| Retention / bond registerBond reference, type, value, expiry, renewal terms, and retention balance by contract and milestone trigger | Emails / Spreadsheets / GDrive | Owner-authored in Foundry |
| P6 milestone linkagePractical completion and sectional handover milestones used to trigger close-out procedures and retention release events | Not integrated | P6 (on-prem) via XER |
03
Prioritisation
Where to build first
Workflows ranked by programme impact and the data records available to hydrate them today.
Data Readiness
The focus should be on records which have data pipelines ready or where interim arrangements can hydrate the workflow in the near-term
Data Pipeline Ready Now
Workflow can be hydrated with interim arrangements
⠿
W1 · Obligations & Renewals
CLM integration available from day one. AI extracts obligations from executed contracts automatically. RAID linkage adds from week 4.
⠿
W2 · Change Control
Owner register deployable with CDE connector and MDR API. Contractor extract (e.g. CSV) available. P6 (on-prem) fragnet adds programme linkage from weeks 10–12.
⠿
W3 · Forecast & EAC
Core records available via CSV pathways today. P6 (on-prem) cashflow linkage adds richness from weeks 10–12.
⠿
W4 · Claims Management
The immutable event ledger and time-bar alerting need only contract clauses loaded from CLM. No integration required.
Workflow needs to wait for data
⠿
W5 · Commercial Close-out
Structure and design the register now — including retention, bond, and obligation objects. Active use follows practical completion milestones.
Workflow Prioritisation
Workflows with high programme impact and data readiness should be prioritised ahead of those with lower readiness
| Workflow | Programme Impact | Data Readiness | Priority | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
☰ |
W1 · Obligations & Renewals | |||
☰ |
W2 · Change Control | |||
☰ |
W3 · Forecast & EAC | |||
☰ |
W4 · Claims Management | |||
☰ |
W5 · Commercial Close-out | |||
Next Steps
Three actions before the first sprint: scope the priority workflows, share the interim records, and agree the build plan
Share Interim Records
- Share Relevant Google Sheet, CDE, CLM, and extracts (e.g. CSV) for each priority workflow
- Confirm field mapping and submission standards
Sprint Plan
- Accenture to produce sprint-level delivery plan aligned to prioritisation
- Share with commercial leadership