---
title: "[Cohort / Company / Thesis Name]"
slug: "[cohort-or-company-slug]"
type: "starter-template" # cohort | company | genesis-thesis | pilot | postmortem
status: "draft" # draft | active | selected | parked | killed | graduated
cohort: "[Cohort 0 / Cohort 1 / Genesis Studio / UK Beachhead]"
track: "[Bank Infrastructure / Regulated AI / Embedded SME Finance / UK Landing / Payments / Core Modernization]"
week: "[0-12 or multi-week]"
owner: "[Named owner]"
mentor_pod: "[Mentor pod name]"
last_updated: "YYYY-MM-DD"

summary: "[One-sentence institutional thesis.]"

lineage_primitives:
  - "[Live Oak Bank]"
  - "[nCino]"
  - "[Finxact]"
  - "[Payrailz]"
  - "[Apiture]"
  - "[Canapi]"

primary_buyer: "[Economic buyer]"
primary_blocker: "[Risk / compliance / legal / data / procurement / security / finance]"
uk_relevance: "[Why this matters in the UK market]"
regulatory_posture: "[green | yellow | red | unknown]"
decision: "[keep | narrow | pivot | park | kill | graduate]"
decision_rationale: "[Short decision rationale]"

scorecard:
  buyer_urgency: null
  lineage_fit: null
  regulatory_tractability: null
  data_feasibility: null
  pilot_clarity: null
  integration_realism: null
  capital_logic: null
  defensibility: null
---

# [Cohort / Company / Thesis Name]

## 1. Current Claim

**What do we believe?**

> [Write the core claim in one or two sentences.]

**What would make this false?**

> [Name the failure condition clearly.]

---

## 2. One-Sentence Thesis

> [This company/thesis helps ____ do ____ by ____ so that ____.]

---

## 3. Programme Fit

- **Primary track:** [Bank Infrastructure / Regulated AI / Embedded SME Finance / UK Landing / Payments / Core Modernization]
- **Secondary track:** [Optional]
- **Cohort role:** [Participant / Genesis thesis / Pilot candidate / Post-lab company / Infrastructure primitive]

**Why it belongs in Live Oak Labs.** [Explain why this belongs in the Lab rather than a generic accelerator.]

**Why now.** [Buyer urgency, regulatory shift, AI adoption, UK entry window, capital need.]

---

## 4. Lineage Primitive Map

| Lineage primitive | Extracted capability | Translation into this thesis |
|---|---|---|
| Live Oak Bank | [Small-business banking / lending discipline / bank-as-lab proof] | [How it applies] |
| nCino | [Bank workflow standardization] | [How it applies] |
| Finxact | [Core ledger / account infrastructure] | [How it applies] |
| Payrailz | [Payments / cashflow movement] | [How it applies] |
| Apiture | [Digital banking interface] | [How it applies] |
| Canapi | [Capital formation / bank distribution] | [How it applies] |

**Recombination equation.** [Primitive A] + [Primitive B] + [UK market pressure] = [New company/product/pilot thesis]

---

## 5. Buyer Map

- **Primary buyer:** [Role]
- **Budget owner:** [Role]
- **Operational owner:** [Role]
- **Risk owner:** [Role]
- **Executive sponsor:** [Role]

**Buyer pain.** [Painful, funded problem.]

**Buyer urgency.**
1. [Reason]
2. [Reason]
3. [Reason]

| Blocker | Concern | Required evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Legal | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |
| Compliance | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |
| Data protection | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |
| Procurement | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |
| Security | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |
| Finance | [Concern] | [Evidence needed] |

---

## 6. UK Landing Map

- **UK buyer.** [Who would buy or sponsor this in the UK?]
- **UK market wedge.** [Why the UK is a real operating market, not a branding exercise.]

| Area | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Regulated activity | [Green/yellow/red/unknown] | [Notes] |
| FCA perimeter | [Green/yellow/red/unknown] | [Notes] |
| Sandbox relevance | [None / Digital Sandbox / Regulatory Sandbox / Unknown] | [Notes] |
| Data transfer/storage | [Green/yellow/red/unknown] | [Notes] |
| Operational resilience | [Green/yellow/red/unknown] | [Notes] |
| Consumer/customer impact | [Green/yellow/red/unknown] | [Notes] |

| U.S. framing | UK buyer language |
|---|---|
| [Term] | [UK equivalent] |
| [Term] | [UK equivalent] |

---

## 7. Data Map

| Data type | Needed? | Source | Sensitivity | Permission path |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Customer data | [Yes/no] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high] | [Permission path] |
| Business data | [Yes/no] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high] | [Permission path] |
| Transaction data | [Yes/no] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high] | [Permission path] |
| Model/AI data | [Yes/no] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high] | [Permission path] |
| Audit data | [Yes/no] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high] | [Permission path] |

**Data minimization.** [What can be metadata, category, hash, reference, or evidence pointer instead of raw sensitive data?]

---

## 8. Product / Company Blueprint

- **Product name.** [Name]
- **Product category.** [Workflow SaaS / bank infrastructure / AI governance / payments / ledger / evidence infrastructure / capital infrastructure]

**Minimum credible product.**
1. [Capability]
2. [Capability]
3. [Capability]
4. [Capability]
5. [Capability]

**What this is not.**
- [Boundary]
- [Boundary]
- [Boundary]

**Formation path.** [Company / product line / partnership / internal tool / dead end] — [Why]

---

## 9. Evidence Captured

| Source | Type | What they said | Impact on thesis |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Name/role] | [Buyer / mentor / legal / technical / investor] | [Evidence] | [Changed what?] |

- **Proven:** [What is proven]
- **Unproven:** [What is still unproven]
- **Rejected:** [What was disproven or killed]

---

## 10. Objection Log

| Objection | Source | Severity | Category | Response | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Objection] | [Source] | [Low/medium/high/fatal] | [Buyer / regulatory / data / security / capital / product] | [Response] | [Open/closed] |

**Strongest objection.** [Write the objection that could kill the thesis.]

**Required answer.** [What evidence, redesign, or decision would answer it?]

---

## 11. Assessment Scorecard

| Dimension | Score (1–5) | Rationale |
|---|---:|---|
| Buyer urgency | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Lineage fit | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Regulatory tractability | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Data feasibility | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Pilot clarity | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Integration realism | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Capital logic | [1-5] | [Rationale] |
| Defensibility | [1-5] | [Rationale] |

**Pass rule.** A thesis should not survive Genesis Selection unless it scores **4 or higher** on buyer urgency, regulatory tractability, pilot clarity, and defensibility.

**Scorecard verdict.** [Advance / narrow / park / kill]

---

## 12. Regulatory Heat Map

| Product layer | Classification | Required review | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Layer] | [Green/yellow/red] | [Reviewer] | [Notes] |

**Claims to avoid.**
- [Claim]
- [Claim]

**Approved language.** [Safe institutional language]

---

## 13. Pilot Architecture

**90-day pilot question.** Can [buyer] prove [outcome] in [workflow] using [product/thesis] within 90 days?

- **Buyer sponsor:** [Role]
- **Workflow owner:** [Role]
- **Risk/compliance reviewer:** [Role]
- **Technical owner:** [Role]
- **Data/privacy reviewer:** [Role]
- **Evidence lead:** [Role]
- **External observer:** [Optional]

**Workflow boundary.** [Define exactly what changes.]

**Pilot data.** [Synthetic, historical, permissioned, or live data path.]

**Success metrics.**
1. [Metric]
2. [Metric]
3. [Metric]

**Failure criteria.**
1. [Criterion]
2. [Criterion]

| Risk | Control | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| [Risk] | [Control] | [Owner] |

---

## 14. Capital and Distribution Logic

| Revenue line | Description | Evidence needed |
|---|---|---|
| [Revenue line] | [Description] | [Evidence] |

| Channel | Why it works | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| [Channel] | [Reason] | [Risk] |

**Strategic investor / acquirer logic.** [Who would care strategically, and why?]

**Capital path.**
- **First instrument:** [Pilot revenue / seed equity / strategic investment / venture studio funding / grant]
- **Capital needed:** [Amount or range]
- **Use of funds:** [Use]
- **Milestone before raising:** [Milestone]

---

## 15. Weekly Artifact Gate

- **Current week.** [0–12]
- **Required artifact.** [Name]

Acceptance standard — the artifact is accepted only if:
1. It can be reviewed without the original meeting context.
2. High-risk claims are marked proven, unproven, or rejected.
3. At least three meaningful objections are captured.
4. The risk register is updated.
5. Next-week dependencies are assigned.

**Artifact status.**
- [ ] Drafted
- [ ] Reviewed by mentor pod
- [ ] Reviewed for UK landing language
- [ ] Risk register updated
- [ ] Decision recorded

---

## 16. Decision

- [ ] Keep
- [ ] Narrow
- [ ] Pivot
- [ ] Park
- [ ] Kill
- [ ] Graduate to pilot
- [ ] Graduate to company formation
- [ ] Graduate to investment review

**Decision rationale.** [Why this decision?]

**Next artifact change.** [The exact section or artifact that changes next.]

| Work item | Owner | Due date |
|---|---|---|
| [Work item] | [Owner] | [Date] |

---

## 17. 30 / 60 / 90 Plan

- **30 days.** [What must be true in 30 days?]
- **60 days.** [What must be true in 60 days?]
- **90 days.** [What must be true in 90 days?]

---

## 18. Post-Mortem Notes

- **What worked.** [Item]
- **What failed.** [Item]
- **What was ambiguous.** [Item]
- **What should not be repeated.** [Item]
- **Cohort inheritance value.** [What should future cohorts inherit from this thesis/company?]

---

## 19. Source / Review Status

- [ ] Proposed construct
- [ ] Internally validated
- [ ] Buyer validated
- [ ] Counsel reviewed
- [ ] Technical reviewer validated
- [ ] Investor reviewed
- [ ] Public-use approved

**Notes.** [Source notes, review caveats, external-use restrictions.]