A worked example
The first row answers the question. The second describes the work without the record of it, which is why it rates Weak.
| Question | Expected evidence | Matched file | Date and context | Remaining gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F3: process of experimentation | Test plans, results, design iterations | Load_Test_Results_v3.xlsx | Tests of prototypes P1 to P3, 50,000 cycles each, 2025 | None for the gripper arm |
| F3, vision system | Same | RD_Project_Plans_2025.pdf | Plan describes three calibration approaches, January 2025 | Trial logs recording each result |
The mapping checklist
- For each question, name the record that answers it, not the folder it is in.
- Note the date the record was made and whether it was made during the work.
- Note the business component the record belongs to.
- Where the record is missing, say whether it exists elsewhere or was never created.
- Where two records conflict, note which one the claim relies on.
Why presence is not enough
Note.An examiner reads the record, not the file list. A ticket export that covers one team answers questions about that team only.