Technical Qualification (FTQ)

"Lebih baik menolak deal yang tidak fit di awal, daripada gagal deliver di akhir."

Kapan & Untuk Siapa

Tujuan & Outcome

Definisi Istilah

Konten Utama

1. Posisi FTQ dalam Presales Flow

FTQ adalah "gerbang" antara Discovery dan Solution Design. Tanpa FTQ yang baik, tim berisiko menginvestasikan waktu untuk mendesain solusi yang tidak bisa diimplementasikan.

2. FTQ Assessment Framework — 5 Dimensi

Setiap opportunity dinilai berdasarkan 5 dimensi teknis:

Dimensi 1: Functional Fit

Pertanyaan kunci: Apakah solusi kita bisa memenuhi kebutuhan fungsional klien?

Scoring:

Dimensi 2: Technology Stack Compatibility

Pertanyaan kunci: Apakah teknologi kita kompatibel dengan environment klien?

Compatibility Matrix Template:

Dimensi 3: Integration Complexity

Pertanyaan kunci: Seberapa kompleks integrasi dengan sistem existing?

Assessment Checklist per Sistem:

• Apakah API tersedia dan terdokumentasi?
• Versi API? Apakah masih actively maintained?
• Authentication method (API key, OAuth, certificate)?
• Data format (JSON, XML, CSV, proprietary)?
• Volume data dan frequency of exchange?
• Error handling dan retry mechanism?
• Siapa PIC teknis di sisi klien?

Dimensi 4: Infrastructure & Security Constraints

Pertanyaan kunci: Apakah ada constraint infrastruktur atau keamanan yang mempengaruhi implementasi?

Red Flags:

• Klien minta deployment di infrastruktur yang tidak kita support
• Compliance requirement yang kita belum punya sertifikasinya
• Air-gapped environment tanpa internet access
• Data sovereignty yang bertentangan dengan arsitektur kita

Dimensi 5: Resource & Skill Availability

Pertanyaan kunci: Apakah Divistant punya resources dan skills yang dibutuhkan?

3. FTQ Scoring Model

Aggregate Score per Dimensi:

Decision Matrix:

4. Technical Go/No-Go Decision

Go/No-Go Authority:

No-Go Technical Reasons (legitimate):

• Core requirement tidak bisa dipenuhi dan tidak ada workaround
• Integration dengan legacy tanpa API dan vendor tidak kooperatif
• Compliance requirement yang kita belum bisa penuhi
• Timeline teknis jauh melebihi ekspektasi klien
• Skill gap yang tidak bisa di-bridge dalam timeline project

Communicating No-Go ke Sales:

Komunikasikan secara konstruktif, bukan hanya "tidak bisa":

== FTQ RESULT: NO-GO ==
Opportunity: [nama]
FTQ Score: [score] / 100

Alasan Utama:
1. [Dimensi] — [penjelasan gap]
2. [Dimensi] — [penjelasan gap]

Alternatif yang Bisa Diexplore:
- [Opsi 1: misalnya partner referral]
- [Opsi 2: misalnya reduced scope yang bisa kita handle]
- [Opsi 3: misalnya timeline berbeda]

Recommendation: [apa yang disarankan]

5. FTQ Report Structure

1. Summary — FTQ result (Fit/Conditional/Weak/No-Fit), overall score, key findings
2. Functional Fit Analysis — Requirement mapping, gaps, workarounds
3. Technology Assessment — Compatibility matrix, issues identified
4. Integration Analysis — Systems involved, complexity assessment, risks
5. Infrastructure & Security Review — Constraints, compliance gaps
6. Resource Assessment — Skills available, gaps, mitigation
7. Risk Register — All identified risks with severity and mitigation
8. Recommendation — Go/No-Go with clear reasoning

Risk Register Format:

6. BizOps CRM Integration

Tracking FTQ di Opportunity:

== FTQ ASSESSMENT ==
Date: [tanggal]
Assessed by: [nama SA]
Overall Score: [score] / 100
Result: [Fit / Conditional / Weak / No-Fit]

Dimension Scores:
- Functional Fit: [score] / 100
- Technology Compatibility: [score] / 100
- Integration Complexity: [score] / 100
- Infra & Security: [score] / 100
- Resource Availability: [score] / 100

Key Risks: [top 3 risks]
Decision: [Go / Conditional Go / No-Go]
Approved by: [nama approver, jika escalation]

Template & Aset

📘 Know (Untuk dipelajari)

• Technical Assessment Methodologies (TOGAF ADM Phase C)
• Integration Patterns (Enterprise Integration Patterns — Hohpe & Woolf)
• Indonesian compliance landscape (UU PDP, OJK, Kominfo regulations)

📊 Show (Untuk digunakan)

• FTQ Scorecard Template — Spreadsheet untuk scoring 5 dimensi
• Compatibility Matrix Template — Template untuk technology stack assessment
• Integration Complexity Worksheet — Checklist per sistem yang akan diintegrasikan
• FTQ Report Template — Template dokumen FTQ lengkap
• Risk Register Template — Template risk tracking

📤 Share (Untuk internal)

• FTQ Report (internal document, tidak dikirim ke klien)
• Risk Register (input untuk Solution Design dan Effort Estimation)
• No-Go Communication (untuk Sales team)

Skenario Umum

Skenario 1: FIT — ERP Implementation untuk Manufaktur

Situasi: Klien manufaktur menengah butuh ERP untuk finance, inventory, dan production. Standard use case.

FTQ Assessment:

• Functional Fit: 90/100 — ERPNext covers semua modul yang dibutuhkan
• Technology: 85/100 — Cloud deployment, PostgreSQL, standard stack
• Integration: 80/100 — Hanya 2 sistem (payment gateway + warehouse scanner)
• Infra & Security: 85/100 — Cloud OK, no special compliance
• Resource: 90/100 — Tim experienced di manufacturing ERP
• Total: 86/100 — FIT

Action: Proceed langsung ke Solution Design. Tidak perlu escalation.

Skenario 2: CONDITIONAL FIT — Banking Integration

Situasi: Bank regional butuh integrasi 5 sistem core banking dengan portal digital baru.

FTQ Assessment:

• Functional Fit: 75/100 — Custom development diperlukan untuk beberapa fitur banking-specific
• Technology: 70/100 — Beberapa sistem masih COBOL-based
• Integration: 55/100 — 5 sistem, 2 tanpa API modern, SOAP-only
• Infra & Security: 65/100 — On-premise required, OJK compliance needs assessment
• Resource: 70/100 — Banking domain experience ada, tapi COBOL expertise perlu partner
• Total: 67/100 — CONDITIONAL FIT

Action: Proceed dengan caveats. Documented risks: COBOL integration (perlu partner), OJK compliance (perlu assessment tambahan). Estimate extended 30%.

Skenario 3: NO FIT — AI/ML Platform Request

Situasi: Klien fintech minta custom AI/ML platform untuk fraud detection.

FTQ Assessment:

• Functional Fit: 25/100 — Di luar core expertise Divistant
• Technology: 30/100 — Butuh TensorFlow/PyTorch expertise yang tidak ada
• Integration: 50/100 — Standard API, tapi real-time requirement challenging
• Infra & Security: 60/100 — GPU infrastructure bukan area expertise
• Resource: 20/100 — Tidak ada ML engineers di tim
• Total: 33/100 — NO FIT

Action: No-Go. Communicate ke Sales dengan alternatif: (a) Refer ke partner AI, (b) Kita handle integration layer saja, (c) Scope down ke non-ML components.

Skenario 4: WEAK FIT yang Di-override — Strategic Account

Situasi: BUMN strategis butuh custom portal. FTQ score 48 karena compliance complexity.

FTQ Assessment: Score 48/100 — Weak Fit (compliance gap: belum punya sertifikasi tertentu)

Escalation:

1. SA present FTQ findings ke Technical Lead + Sales Director
2. Discussion: compliance gap bisa di-address dalam 3 bulan? Partner bisa cover?
3. MD decision: Proceed karena strategic value, dengan condition:
   • Hire compliance consultant
   • Partner untuk specific compliance area
   • Extended timeline +2 bulan
   • Higher contingency budget (30%)

Action: Proceed dengan override. All conditions documented di FTQ Report.

Checklist

FTQ Assessment Checklist

Input Gathering:

• Discovery findings reviewed (functional requirements, technical landscape)
• Client technology stack documented
• Integration systems identified dengan API availability status
• Infrastructure constraints identified (cloud, on-premise, hybrid)
• Compliance requirements listed
• Client timeline documented

Assessment:

• Functional fit scored — requirements vs capabilities mapped
• Technology compatibility scored — compatibility matrix completed
• Integration complexity scored — per-system assessment done
• Infrastructure & security scored — constraints evaluated
• Resource availability scored — skills and capacity checked
• Overall weighted score calculated

Output:

• FTQ Report written
• Risk register populated
• Go/No-Go recommendation documented
• Escalation done (jika Weak/No Fit)
• FTQ result logged di BizOps CRM Notes
• Solution Design team briefed on key findings and risks

Tanggung Jawab (RACI)

Legenda: R = Responsible, A = Accountable, C = Consulted, I = Informed

Referensi

• Internal: Discovery Process, Solution Design, Service Catalog
• Framework: TOGAF ADM (Architecture Development Method), Enterprise Integration Patterns
• Standard: ISO 25010 (Software Quality Model), ISO 27001 (Information Security), UU PDP No. 27/2022
• Tools: BizOps CRM (Opportunity tracking), FTQ Scorecard (spreadsheet)