"The build exists — I need to know whether it's actually ready to launch."
Launch, revise before launching, launch a reduced scope, defer, or stop — an explicit launch-readiness decision made on evidence, not optimism.
We review the built product against its definition, its launch conditions, and the risks that matter for this launch — scoped from a focused review of a specific concern up to a pre-launch MVP audit. The review is sized to the decision at stake, and it closes with a decision, not a report.
A fit when: a build exists and launching (or not) is a real decision — whether we built it, you built it, or someone else did.
Not a fit when: nothing has been built yet (start with Define or Build), the question is a certification or compliance sign-off, or the launch decision has already been made and won't be revisited on evidence.
Written findings against explicit review criteria · a readiness assessment · a risk and gap record with severity · prioritized pre-launch actions · the launch-readiness recommendation and its basis.
The review exists to close a decision, not to generate a findings shelf. Scope is explicit — from focused review to full audit — and the recommendation states what would change it.
A bounded review commitment sized to the review scope and the decision at stake — not open-ended QA, and not remediation work.
Launch as planned; revise, then launch; separately authorized launch or remediation support; defer; or stop. The review does not automatically authorize the work it recommends.
Senior product and delivery judgment applied against explicit criteria — with findings, severity calls, and the recommendation's basis inspectable rather than asserted.
Review your launch readiness See if this fits your situation