Case study·Social housing

Board pack for repairs recovery

From a stitched-together board narrative — to a source-linked recovery pack the executive team can defend

57%
Board-pack preparation time downVersus the prior two board cycles
“The board saw the recovery story and the evidence in the same pack.”
Head of Repairs · UK social housing provider
UK social housing provider·12,000 homes across the leadership reporting pilot·5-week pilot·United Kingdom
Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify
01Pilot envelope
Pilot length5 weeks
First signal5 days
First ROI30 days
Team alongside7 seats · 2 colleagues

5-week leadership reporting pilot; agreed recovery narrative and KPI definitions; the colleague produced drafts for executive review. Power BI, Totalmobile, the complaints system and the TSM export library were joined read-only against the prior two board cycles before drafts landed in the leadership team's SharePoint review folder.

02What it owns
Reports toHead of Repairs, dotted line to the executive sponsor on the recovery narrative and to governance on KPI definitions.
Owns
  • Recovery board pack drafts — every section drafted into a SharePoint review folder for the leadership team to approve before the board sees it
  • KPI evidence trail — every headline figure in the pack linked to the Power BI tile, Totalmobile records and complaints data behind it
  • Recovery risk register — the recovery risks the team is tracking, named-owner per risk, carried forward between cycles instead of being rewritten
  • TSM source line — perception scores quoted in the pack carry the period, sample size and question wording from the underlying export
  • Cycle-on-cycle change log — what moved on each KPI and recovery risk versus the prior board, with source-linked commentary
Does not do
  • Changing KPI definitions — surfaces inconsistencies; governance and the Head of Repairs sign off any change
  • Sending the pack to the board — drafts only; the executive sponsor releases the final version
  • Closing recovery risks — surfaces the evidence; the named risk owner closes
Done looks like

The leadership team reviews a board pack where every recovery claim is linked to the record behind it, the recovery risks carry forward between cycles, and the executive sponsor can defend each KPI in the room without a follow-up paper.

03The team
AI teammates2
MiraDrafts the repairs recovery board pack section by section, maintains the recovery narrative as a working document and pre-fills variance commentary linked to the underlying KPI evidence.
OwenReads Power BI, Totalmobile, the complaints system and the TSM export library, joins each KPI claim in the draft pack to its source records and flags any line the pack cannot defend.
Human team7
  • Executive sponsorLeadership
  • Head of RepairsRepairs leadership
  • Customer leadCustomer experience
  • Finance leadFinance
  • Governance leadGovernance
  • 2 Repairs analystsInsight
  • Communications leadComms
04Connected stack
Power BITotalmobileComplaints systemTSM export libraryExcelSharePointMicrosoft Teams
05What it returned
57%Board-pack preparation time downVersus the prior two board cycles
100%KPI claims source-linkedUp from narrative-only attribution at baseline
TrackedRecovery risks moved from anecdotal to trackedNamed owner and cycle-on-cycle status per risk
  • Day 0
    Co-ordinator sessionExecutive sponsor, Head of Repairs, customer lead, finance and governance align on the recovery narrative, KPI definitions and the first three answerable questions for the pack.
  • Day 5
    First signalOwen completes a read-only pass over the prior two board cycles; the first set of KPI inconsistencies between Power BI, Totalmobile and the complaints system is sized for review.
  • Day 14
    Read-only drafts liveMira drafts the first reviewable pack into the leadership team's SharePoint folder; the analysts correct two KPI definitions and a complaints category mapping.
  • Day 22
    Recovery risk register liveThe recovery risks the team had been carrying as anecdotes are written into a named-owner register and linked to the underlying repairs and complaints data.
  • Day 30
    ROI reviewExecutive sponsor signs off the three baseline metrics and approves the drafted pack as the standing artefact for the next board cycle.
↗Get started

Want this for your team?

Each design-partner pilot starts the same way: one workflow, the minimum useful context, and a first ROI signal measured in days.

Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify