01 / Proof Library

Patterns we see. Outcomes we've delivered.

Anonymized case studies from active and prior engagements. Each pattern is real: firm type, problem, intervention, deliverables, and outcome. No vendor names. No invented case studies. Outcome basis is marked where financial impact is estimated rather than documented.

Evidence standard Every case comes from real delivery work.

Firm type, operating context, and failure pattern are preserved while identifying details are removed.

Outcome basis Documented, observed, and estimated are kept separate.

Operational outcomes are labeled by basis so commercial impact is not overstated.

Commercial use Each case points back to the matching engagement path.

Use these examples to judge fit, not to assume identical economics for your own program.

$500M-$1B Long/Short Equity Manager

Case Study 01 Estimated financial impact

Implementation launched without a data readiness audit. Security master mapping gaps surfaced at UAT Week 6.


The firm entered implementation on a compressed timeline. Data readiness was assumed rather than validated. Security master mapping, the foundational reference data layer for downstream compliance and reporting, had gaps that did not surface until UAT Week 6. Go-live was delayed 8 weeks. Vendor professional services had moved on to the next project.

Full readiness assessment across 7 dimensions. Data mapping audit completed end-to-end. Parallel-run plan designed and signed off by both the trading desk and operations team before rescheduling.

  • Readiness scorecard across 7 implementation dimensions
  • Data gap report with prioritized remediation paths
  • Revised implementation timeline approved by all stakeholders
  • Parallel-run protocol and go/no-go criteria
$2.1M in estimated remediation costs avoided Estimated from avoided rework, delay, and vendor re-engagement exposure.

Best matched engagement: OMS Readiness Diagnostic

Download Case Study PDF →

$1B-$3B Fixed Income Manager

Case Study 02 Observed post-go-live

Compliance rule library built by vendor without buy-side ops input. Rules passed UAT syntactically but failed at operational handoff.


CRD compliance rule library was constructed by vendor professional services with compliance document input only. Rules passed UAT because they evaluated correctly against vendor-scripted test scenarios. At operational handoff, when the firm's compliance team needed exception workflows, escalation paths, and break-resolution procedures, the gaps were immediate. T+1 readiness was 6 weeks away with an unworkable system.

Compliance rule build governance framework implemented mid-project. UAT protocol redesigned to include buy-side operational criteria. Ops team briefed on exception handling before go-live.

  • Rule build standards document using a buy-side-first methodology
  • UAT test case library with operational acceptance criteria
  • Ops runbook for compliance exception handling and escalation
Zero compliance exceptions in the first 90 days post go-live Observed operating result following governance and workflow redesign.

Best matched engagement: Compliance Rule Mapping Audit

Download Case Study PDF →

$300M-$700M Multi-Strategy Manager (Legacy Advent Geneva Migration)

Case Study 03 Estimated financial impact

Reference data mapping underestimated. Parallel run extended from 4 weeks to 14 weeks.


Migration from a legacy OMS to CRD. Reference data mapping was scoped from custodian account count instead of the actual complexity of the firm's data relationships: multi-custodian, multi-fund structure, and legacy instrument identifiers with no clean mapping path into the CRD security master. Parallel run was supposed to be 4 weeks. It ran 14. The implementation team was rebuilding mappings while running production-side parallel operations.

Data mapping framework rebuilt from the firm's actual custodian contracts and instrument records. Parallel-run governance introduced mid-crisis. Cutover criteria defined and locked before the rescheduled go-live date.

  • Data mapping framework with custodian-by-custodian coverage matrix
  • Parallel-run protocol with explicit pass/fail criteria per phase
  • Cutover readiness checklist with pre-flight sign-off for all stakeholders
$800K in estimated cost avoided versus a full re-implementation Estimated from avoided restart costs, extended dual-running, and remediation labor.

Best matched engagement: OMS Readiness Diagnostic

Download Case Study PDF →

$500M-$1.5B Long-Only Equity Manager (Post-Implementation)

Case Study 04 Documented workflow improvement

CRD live, but 60% of order flow processed manually. Automation roadmap never executed. Ops team at capacity.


CRD implementation delivered and signed off. The system worked in demo and UAT. Post go-live, the firm's operations team discovered that 60% of order flow still required manual processing. Orders that should have routed automatically through configured workflows were being handled by hand. The automation roadmap had been deferred during implementation, and the operations team was already at capacity.

Workflow audit across all order-flow paths. Automation prioritized by volume and frequency. Phased rollout executed with the ops team embedded in each phase so the people operating the workflow shaped the fixes.

  • Current-state workflow map with all order-flow paths documented
  • Three-phase automation roadmap prioritized by impact
  • Ops efficiency report with baseline and post-optimization metrics
Manual order flow reduced from 60% to 12% in 90 days Documented workflow baseline and post-optimization operating state.

Best matched engagement: Post-Go-Live Optimization Review

Download Case Study PDF →

Want to understand the PBW difference?

Most vendors offer methodology. PBW offers a practitioner track record: credentials, engagement model, AI workflow governance, and due-diligence documentation before the first call.

See how PBW stands apart from typical implementation vendors → Review AI workflow governance →

Ready to scope your implementation?

The scoping conversation is where every project starts. Thirty minutes establishes whether there is a fit and what the engagement should look like.