I supervise a 7‑person team, 9 weeks into a procurement fraud review where IDEA/SQL surfaced $2.3M in round‑trip payments across three shell vendors. Counsel wants a preliminary in 48 hours and ops is pushing to reopen POs before we finish vendor corroborations. What’s worked for you to protect scope and objectivity without burning goodwill?
, been there — I’d get @counsel to issue a one‑pager risk‑acceptance memo that says “prelim only — don’t operationalize,” and requires the ops VP to sign if they want to reopen POs before vendor corroborations. Then ship a tight 1‑pager inside the 48‑hour window summarizing the $2.3M round‑trip hits and the specific tests outstanding, so you’re responsive without conceding scope. If they still push, would you drop a temporary ERP block on the three shell vendors?
I’d set a “gated reopen” playbook: only vendors that clear predefined corroboration checks reopen; everything else stays frozen. Put the gates and a rollback trigger (e.g., new IDEA hit) in the prelim and require ops to sign the decision log, which pairs well with @zach_griff88’s memo. Would your ops VP trade that for a 72‑hour refresh cadence?
In situations like these, I’ve found it’s crucial to communicate clearly with ops about the long-term impact of reopening POs too soon. You might suggest a temporary pause on the process until you can provide a thorough preliminary report. Otherwise, you risk muddying the waters of verification, especially on such a significant amount like $2.3M.