Business-Case Template
The structure every generated business case follows. It is persona-neutral — the same skeleton serves the country/government umbrella, the agency cases (customs, tax, ports, registry operator), and the organisation cases (trader, logistics, bank); the personalisation prompt injects the persona-specific levers, costs, and figures.
Generated two ways (see the Business Cases overview): Light — paste a persona’s prompt into any frontier model; Full — clone the repo and run Claude over the per-country data.
Conventions
- Simple markdown — the user’s AI converts it to Word/.docx. Headings + plain tables only.
- Target length 4–8 pages.
- Summarise and cite, don’t reproduce — detailed method, model rationale, and scenario narratives live on their own pages; each section links out (the
→references). - Italic [guidance] and
[slots]are replaced during generation.
Verifiable Trade — Business Case for [Name]
Generated [date] · [persona] · indicative figures derived from the published UNVTD methodology (→ References) · editable draft
1. Executive summary
[One paragraph: for [Name], adopting verifiable trade documents + identity could deliver an estimated [$X]/yr in [headline benefit] against an estimated [$Y] implementation cost — payback [Z]. State the single most important reason.]
| Estimate (range) | |
|---|---|
| Annual benefit at maturity | [$X low–high] |
| Implementation cost | [$Y] |
| Payback period | [Z] |
| Adoption scenario | [Conservative / Central / Ambitious] |
2. [Name]‘s profile
[The personalised baseline that sets the denominators: trade volume, sector, and the relevant gaps/rates for this persona — from the attached document, else the country’s Evidence row, else income-band defaults. Cite the source.]
3. Why verifiable trade matters to [Name]
[The 2–3 scenarios most relevant to this persona, the current pains, and the decentralised-model advantage — national identity anchors, no network hubs or transaction fees, one architecture for domestic + cross-border (→ Implementation Model).]
4. Estimated benefits
[Only the value levers this persona owns. One row per lever; short prose for the top 2–3. Every figure is a range; note secondary contributions (e.g. transfer-pricing) qualitatively, counted once under their lever.]
| Lever | Mechanism | Value at maturity [range] | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| [③ Revenue–domestic] | [e-invoicing VAT/CIT compliance] | [$..–..] | (→ methodology) |
| [① Cost of trade] | [faster clearance, less documentary friction] | [$..–..] | (→ methodology) |
5. Estimated implementation cost
[The cost layers this persona bears — register uplift / platform feature / verifier integration / onboarding. Decentralised model: a finite set of one-time uplifts, marginal cost per business/document ≈ 0, no network or transaction fees. The shared ETR control-protocol cost (~$1M, programme-level) is negligible per case.]
| Cost layer | One-time | Recurring | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| [register uplift / platform / verifier] | [$..] | [$../yr] | (→ cost methodology) |
6. Payback & ROI
[Benefit ramp − cost ramp over the adoption curve → payback (headline), with NPV and ROI secondary. State assumptions and the sensitivity from the UNVTD/GRID attribution range (30–60%).]
7. Implementation roadmap
| Phase | Objective | Key activities | Exit criteria |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery | Scope & alignment | Confirm baseline numbers; map systems of record & register readiness; align stakeholders; set governance | Agreed scope + committed partners |
| Alpha — technical pilots | Prove the technology | Register issues verifiable identity (GRID); systems of record issue/verify sample documents as VCs; ETR proof-of-control | Technical proof + standards conformance |
| Beta — business pilots | Prove the value | Real businesses, real trades on selected corridors/sectors; measure realised benefit vs methodology | Validated benefit + adoption playbook |
| Live — scale & operate | Scale & sustain | Production onboarding of platforms & registers; mutual recognition with other jurisdictions; operate & improve | Steady-state adoption ramp |
8. Assumptions, methodology & references
[The key inputs and adoption scenario used, then links so the reader can verify “how these numbers were derived.”]
- Inputs used: [list of reader-supplied / fallback / defaulted values]
- References: Assessment Methodology · Evidence · relevant scenario pages · Implementation Model.
9. Next steps
[Concrete, persona-specific calls to action — e.g. commit to a Discovery workshop, nominate a pilot corridor, engage the national register.]