Five-dimension scorecard at equal 20% weight. Composite 46.5/100. The dashed crimson edge between Named-AI-Product Fluency and Evidence Density is the broken edge: the two lowest-Present dimensions share a cause, and one editorial move closes both. Click any pentagon node to read the present-vs-opportunity findings.
The broken edge
Named-AI-Product Fluency (Present 10) — TruData’s public corpus never names Joule, BTP AI Foundation, Generative AI Hub, RISE, or GROW. Every Tier 1 surveyed names at least three.
Evidence Density (Present 5) — nine published case studies. Zero named clients, zero quotes, zero quantified outcomes, zero deployed-user counts, zero dates.
Combined contribution: 16.0 / 40.0 — the two dimensions form the structural drag on the composite. They share a cause, and one move lifts both.
Recovery floor: composite 58.5 — if the broken edge lifts to 28.0, the composite moves from 46.5 to a projected 58.5.
The recovery move
Three named-product audit memos — one per truPath loop (Optimize / Innovate / Operate).
Each anchored to a quantified outcome on a named SAP product (Joule / BTP AI Foundation / RISE).
The work is editorial and disclosure, not engineering. The engagements exist; the products exist; neither has been written as evidence.
Sequencing: Action 01 (name the products) and Action 03 (re-author three case studies) are unlock moves — sequence them first.
WHAT TO LOOK FOR
The dashed line is the repair direction.
Named-AI-Product Fluency scores 37.5 and Evidence Density scores 42.5. The dashed crimson edge between them says these two dimensions share a single editorial cause: TruData has the engagements and TruData has the BTP / AI capability; neither is named. The repair move lifts both at once — name what TruData has done, to which named SAP product, for which named client. Methodology Legibility (55.0), Multishore Concreteness (50.0), and Mid-Market Wedge Specificity (47.5) are 30–60 day production work and stack on top.