Build a roadmap

Strategic Overview

Our H1 goal is to reduce independent restaurant churn from 2.4% to 1.6% per month. Independents represent 82% of our accounts and 61% of our revenue. Exit surveys point to one glaring issue: "too much admin; didn't save us time on deliveries and invoices."

Usage and request data confirm this friction: * Deliveries: 56% of accounts use the desktop receiving checklist, and 71% of those print it on paper and manually re-type it later. * Invoices: 76% of accounts upload invoices, but 100% of matching to orders/deliveries is manual. * Demand: Out of 40 feature requests from independent restaurants in the last six months, 33 are for Receiving and Invoicing workflow improvements.

We have 40 squad-weeks across two squads in H1. We will dedicate one squad to Invoicing Automation and the other to Mobile Receiving, with a small allocation in Q2 to protect the Calder Group renewal without derailing our core strategy.

---

H1 Roadmap Table

---

Execution Plan & Sequencing

#### Squad A: End-to-End Invoicing (19 of 20 weeks) Squad A will spend the entire half building a seamless, automated invoicing pipeline. 1. New Invoice Parser (Q1, Weeks 1–5): Required foundation. 2. Automated Invoice Matching (Q1 Week 6 – Q2 Week 4): Our second most-requested feature by independents (8 requests). Automatically reconciles uploaded invoices against delivery records. 3. Credit Note Tracking (Q2, Weeks 5–7): Requested 5 times. Ensures restaurants actually recover money when suppliers shortchange them. 4. Accounting Export with Credits (Q2, Weeks 8–9): Requested 4 times. Pushes clean, reconciled data into their accounting tools. Week 10 is reserved as buffer for edge-case supplier invoice formats.

#### Squad B: Receiving & Strategic Retention (20 of 20 weeks) Squad B will solve physical delivery admin first, then pivot to a targeted retention play. 1. Mobile Receiving (Q1, Weeks 1–8): Our #1 most-requested feature (9 requests). Lets kitchen staff check off deliveries on their phones at the back door, killing the clipboards-and-retyping workflow. 2. Flag Short Deliveries at the Door (Q1 Week 9 – Q2 Week 1): Requested 7 times. Allows staff to log missing items on their phone during check-in. (Bonus: This creates the exact data needed for Squad A’s Automated Invoice Matching and Credit Note Tracking). 3. ERP Export CSV Variant (Q2, Weeks 2–5): Delivered by early May ahead of Calder Group’s renewal. 4. Workflow Polish & Onboarding (Q2, Weeks 6–10): Shipping features doesn't lower churn unless customers use them. Squad B will spend the final 5 weeks removing friction from mobile/invoicing onboarding to ensure we hit the 1.6% churn target.

---

What We Are Not Doing (and Why)

• Custom Report Builder (12 wks) & Reporting Add-ons: Only 19% of accounts use standard reports today. Spending 30% of our H1 capacity here starves our core receiving/invoicing workflows and guarantees we miss our churn goal.
• Enterprise Admin (Approval chains - 6 wks, Site permissions - 4 wks, SSO - 3 wks): Zero independent restaurants asked for these. Building them turns us into bespoke enterprise software at the expense of 82% of our user base.
• Catalogue Additions / Bulk SKU Tools: Catalogue already has 100% usage and isn't driving churn. Our Ops team can handle urgent supplier catalogue additions manually.
• Dark Mode & Multi-Currency: Low request volume (3 total) and zero impact on admin time savings.

---

What We Tell Calder Group ($186k ARR)

The Reality: Calder’s usage is up 20% YoY, they use standard reports daily, and they haven't complained to CS. The renewal risk is likely an Account Manager hedging their bets. However, $186k is significant, so we shouldn't ignore them entirely.

The Pitch (Delivered jointly by Product, CS, and the AM): 1. Lead with Operational Value: Show them Mobile Receiving and Automated Invoice Matching shipping in Q1/early Q2. Across their multiple sites, eliminating paper receiving and manual invoice reconciliation will save their site managers hundreds of hours a month. 2. Solve the Underlying Reporting Need: Explain that we are not building a custom pivot-table builder inside Fernhill this half because we are focused on core operational automation. Instead, we are building their requested Custom ERP CSV Export in April (before their May renewal). This allows them to pull granular, site-level data directly into their existing ERP/BI tools (or Excel) to build whatever custom pivots and dashboards they need. 3. Bridge the Gap with CS: Have Customer Success set up a weekly manual email of their daily standard reports so they don't have to pull them manually.

Fernhill H1 roadmap (Q1–Q2)

The plan: 30 of our 40 squad-weeks go to the delivery-to-invoice workflow that exit surveys blame for churn. 4 go to Calder's ERP export, and 6 are held as buffer. We are not building the report builder.

Assumption: I've treated the invoice parser (5) as additional to invoice matching (9), so matching is 14 weeks in total. If the 9 already includes the parser, we gain 5 weeks of buffer and nothing else changes.

Roadmap

Why this order

• Outcome. The goal is churn among independent restaurants, and the top exit reason is admin on deliveries and invoices. Receiving and invoicing are exactly that workflow.
• Demand. The request log is consistent with the usage data, though it shows who asks rather than who churns, so the exit survey and usage numbers carry more weight.
• Mobile receiving: 9 customers, about $60k ARR.
• Matching: 8 customers, about $45k.
• Short deliveries: 7 customers, about $48k.
• Credit notes: 4 customers.
• Export with credits: 4 customers, about $28k.
• Sequencing. The invoicing chain is strictly sequential, so it takes one squad for 19 of its 20 weeks. The receiving chain runs in parallel on the other squad.
• ERP export before flagging. Calder's renewal has a hard date, and flagging doesn't. The export is two requests from Calder and the cheapest of their asks. It lands mid-April.
• Timing risk. Mobile receiving ships around the end of March and matching around the end of April. Churn lags adoption, so I expect only partial movement toward 1.6% by June. I'd report leading indicators monthly (mobile share of receiving, auto-match rate) alongside churn, and set that expectation with the exec team now.

What we're not doing, and why

• Custom report builder (12 weeks), plus dashboards, scheduling and custom PDFs.
• Calder is the only requester of anything in the Reporting theme. Only 19% of accounts use standard reports at all.
• The cost is 30% of H1 capacity. One squad would need all of Q1 plus two weeks of Q2, which pushes about 10 weeks of churn work out of H1.
• The churn threat behind it is unverified (see below).
• Approval chains (6), site-level permissions (4), SSO (3), custom fields, bulk SKU import v2 and bulk edit. These are all Calder-only. The three that have estimates total 13 weeks, with no independent-restaurant demand and no link to the churn reason.
• More suppliers (3 customers), dark mode (2), multi-currency (1). They're unestimated and unconnected to the admin-time problem. I'll revisit them in the H2 planning.

The Calder rows are 14 of the 53 log entries (26%), but they come from one account via its account manager. Counted by customer, they are one voice. The log also has small inconsistencies, such as Customer 553 appearing twice with different ARR, so treat its figures as approximate.

Calder Group

What we know. Their account manager says they "might" leave without the report builder. They haven't said this to Customer Success, and their usage is up 20%, which looks like engagement rather than exit. It's a risk to test, not a requirement.

What we do internally 1. In the first two weeks of January, Customer Success and I meet Calder directly. We ask which decisions they need reports for, what standard reports lack, and whether the ERP export plus raw data in their own tools meets the need. 2. Ask the account manager to give us one ranked list from Calder instead of 14 separate asks. 3. Have engineering size a thin reporting slice (for example, scheduled standard reports). There's no estimate today. It can only be funded from the 6-week buffer, and only if the January conversation shows reporting is a real blocker. 4. Checkpoint at the end of February. If Calder confirms in writing that reporting decides the renewal, I bring the exec team a trade-off. The full builder means dropping the credit-note tail and the ERP export and running with zero buffer, and it still wouldn't ship by May.

What we tell Calder - "We've heard your reporting needs and want to understand them properly. We'd like an hour with your team in January." - "Your ERP export is on our roadmap and is due mid-April, ahead of your May renewal. We'll confirm the format with you first." - "The full report builder isn't in our plan for the first half. We'll tell you by the end of February whether a smaller reporting improvement is feasible."

We make no date commitment for the builder and no promise on SSO, permissions or approval chains. If the ERP export slips, Calder hears it from us before they find out themselves.

Risks to watch

• Parser or matching slips. The buffer absorbs up to six weeks. Beyond that, credit notes and the accounting export move to H2, not receiving.
• Calder's real blocker turns out to be reporting. That is the trade-off decision at the end-of-February checkpoint, made with real information instead of a "might".