Trustworthy Branch Decisions: Signal Check Assistant

This workflow acts like a calm, slightly skeptical advisor that helps you turn messy branch signals into decision-ready calls—without “cleaning” the story into fiction. It starts by attempting a knowledge-based answer (great for your house definitions like what counts as a branch visit or how attribution is set up), then routes the user into a practical decision menu.

It’s designed for the moment right before a confident meeting goes off the rails: someone has a shiny number, everyone nods, and the organization confidently optimizes the wrong thing. This flow forces a quick sanity-check: Should we trust this metric, treat it as directional, or escalate for review?

• Uses the Knowledge Assistant first for consistent definitions (then falls back to routing when the KB can’t confidently answer).
• One decision menu with five concrete “decision-shaped” paths (trust, dirty signal, automation vs judgment, comparing branches, signal culture).
• Built-in guardrails that call out the most common failure modes: coverage gaps, changed tracking, selection bias, and attribution drift.
• Optional escalation to a human team when the risk is high or the data is “too clean.”

1. User Input starts the conversation when someone asks a question about branch performance, conversations, or attribution.
2. Knowledge Assistant tries to answer using your existing Knowledge Base (definitions, policies, known quirks, metric owners). If it can’t, it routes forward.
3. Pick a decision check shows a button menu to choose the type of sanity-check needed.
4. If the user selects Which branch numbers deserve trust?, the workflow returns a checklist for what’s “decision-grade” vs. polished noise.
5. If the user selects How to spot dirty signal fast, the workflow returns a rapid triage playbook (the stuff that breaks first).
6. If the user selects Automation vs human judgment, the workflow explains where automation is safe—and where humans must stay in the loop.
7. If the user selects Comparing branches & attribution, the workflow flags what teams repeatedly misread when ranking branches.
8. If the user selects Build a signal culture (not slide culture), the workflow gives lightweight operating rules that keep decisions moving.
9. If the user selects Escalate for review, the workflow hands off to a human team for deeper investigation.

• Calypso Knowledge Base (recommended): add or confirm core metric definitions (e.g., branch visit, qualified conversation, attribution window, source of truth).
• Routing destination for escalations: a department such as Analytics Operations should exist in your Calypso setup.
• No external credentials are required for this workflow.