---
tool_id: WACK-TOOL-0059
concept_id: WACK-CONCEPT-0014
playbook_content_id: WACK-CONTENT-0139
status: draft
technical_review: pending
artifact_type: working_worksheet
---

# $0 Revenue PCI Decision Record

> Stop one business metric from silently deciding architecture readiness, applicability, validation, assessor judgment, acceptance, and launch authority.

**Expected output:** An attributable pre-launch decision record joining payment capabilities and relationships to five separate PCI decisions, supporting evidence, non-claims, owners, dates, evidence runway, launch gates, and reopening triggers.  
**Working time:** 90 minutes  
**Derived from:** WACK-CONTENT-0139

## Working context

Organization / environment: __________________________________________  
Facilitator / owner: __________________________________________________  
Participants: _________________________________________________________  
Date: ____________________  Review trigger or next date: ______________

## 01 / Find — Inventory facts before revenue

Identify the legal entity, anticipated payment roles, present and production-capable journeys, data and influence paths, components, identities, providers, endpoints, contracts, program relationships, evidence sources, and time-based activities.

- [ ] **What can the payment model do now even though no revenue has been earned?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

- [ ] **Which fact is being hidden by pre-launch, sandbox, stealth, beta, or provider-handled language?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

## 02 / Map — Split the authority lanes

Create separate records for architecture readiness, applicability, validation direction, assessor judgment, compliance acceptance, and launch authorization; join each to its authority, evidence, status, limitations, next action, and trigger.

- [ ] **Who has authority to make or validate this exact proposition?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

- [ ] **Which decision is currently being inferred from another decision rather than recorded?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

## 03 / Explain — Write bounded propositions and non-claims

State subject, population, period, basis, uncertainty, limitation, and what the record expressly does not claim for every lane.

- [ ] **Could a reader mistake readiness for an assessment result or an assessment result for acceptance?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

- [ ] **What written direction exists from the compliance-accepting entity, and what remains unanswered?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

## 04 / Reduce — Remove capability and claim debt

Eliminate unnecessary account-data handling, dormant production paths, live credentials, orphaned providers, unmanaged obligations, premature compliance wording, and operating complexity that has no accountable purpose.

- [ ] **What could be removed before launch instead of governed forever?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

- [ ] **Which promise should be withdrawn until its authority and evidence exist?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

## 05 / Prove — Exercise transaction one

Run a cold-reader reconstruction and a fictional first-transaction transition; show that every affected inventory, control, test, evidence source, decision, and gate reopens and closes through accountable disposition.

- [ ] **Which time-based activities already need evidence runway?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

- [ ] **Can each of the five decisions survive without one person verbally merging them?**

  Notes: ________________________________________________

## Completion check

- [ ] The legal entity, payment role, current and proposed journeys, data states, security influence, components, identities, providers, and public presences are identifiable.
- [ ] Architecture readiness, applicability, validation direction, assessor judgment, compliance acceptance, and launch authority remain separate records.
- [ ] Each decision identifies its authority, bounded proposition, evidence, status, limitations, non-claims, owner, date, next action, and reopening triggers.
- [ ] Compliance-accepting-entity direction is evidenced rather than inferred from an assessor, provider, sales request, revenue number, or SAQ title.
- [ ] Time-based controls identify required cadence, first needed occurrence, evidence source, owner, runway status, and assessment treatment question.
- [ ] Provider deferral is joined to the exact service, integration, customer-controlled configuration, assurance, responsibility, and retained obligation.
- [ ] A first-transaction drill reopens the complete affected architecture, control, testing, evidence, validation, and acceptance population.
- [ ] No readiness record, internal review, provider AOC, sales statement, or workbook is represented as a PCI SSC certificate or formal assessment result.

## Decision and next action

Decision: _____________________________________________________________  
Owner: __________________________  Due date: ___________________________  
Evidence or artifact location: ________________________________________

---

_Working practitioner worksheet pending technical review. It does not determine PCI DSS compliance, replace the standard, or replace instructions from an assessor or compliance-accepting entity. The Cluster of Wack is an independent resource and is not affiliated with or endorsed by PCI SSC._