SayPro Table of Contents
Toggle
✅ SayPro Product Alignment Assessment Tool
(Issued by: SayPro Strategy & Innovation Directorate | Version: May 2025)
📘 SECTION A: PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION
| Field | Details |
|---|
| Product / Initiative Title | _________________________________________ |
| Type | ☐ Course ☐ Event ☐ Digital Tool ☐ Service ☐ Physical Product |
| Lead Team / Owner | _________________________________________ |
| Date of Review | ___ / ___ / 2025 |
🎯 SECTION B: STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT CHECK
| Criteria | Description | Aligned? (✓/✗) | Notes / Evidence |
|---|
| SayPro Mission Fit | Does it promote economic empowerment, employability, or dignity? | | |
| SayPro Pillars Fit | Skills, Financial Literacy, Technology, Wellness, Real Estate | | |
| Segment Relevance | Matches needs of a specific SayPro market segment (e.g., Mobile Climbers) | | |
| Geographic Relevance | Applicable in one or more priority countries/regions | | |
| Sustainability / Scalability | Can it grow or be replicated across markets over time? | | |
🧩 SECTION C: USER NEED & DEMAND MATCH
| Question | Evaluation Notes |
|---|
| What specific user need or pain point does this solve? | |
| Is there clear demand or behavior supporting this? (data, feedback, trends) | |
| Does it reflect user language, tools, or cultural context? | |
| What existing product(s) does it complement or compete with internally? | |
💡 SECTION D: INNOVATION & DIFFERENTIATION
| Criteria | Rating (1–5) | Explanation |
|---|
| Unique value proposition | | |
| Use of technology or delivery innovation | | |
| SayPro brand alignment (tone, accessibility, trust) | | |
💰 SECTION E: DELIVERY, REVENUE & IMPACT POTENTIAL
| Dimension | Assessment (Low/Med/High) | Notes |
|---|
| Ease of Delivery | | (technical, logistical, partner-enabled?) |
| Cost to Deliver | | (content, facilitation, platform, support) |
| Revenue / Funding Potential | | (B2C, sponsorship, donor, freemium?) |
| Social Impact Potential | | (inclusion, equity, mobility, safety net) |
📈 SECTION F: RECOMMENDATION SCORECARD
| Category | Weight (%) | Score (1–5) | Weighted Score |
|---|
| Strategic Fit | 25% | ___ | ___ |
| Segment Relevance | 20% | ___ | ___ |
| Demand / Need Fit | 20% | ___ | ___ |
| Innovation | 15% | ___ | ___ |
| Revenue / Impact Potential | 20% | ___ | ___ |
| TOTAL | 100% | — | ___ / 5.0 |
Interpretation Guide:
- 4.0–5.0 = Strong alignment and readiness for investment
- 3.0–3.9 = Moderate fit; needs refinement
- Below 3.0 = Significant redesign required
📌 SECTION G: DECISION & NEXT STEPS
| Final Decision | ☐ Approve ☐ Approve with Revisions ☐ Defer ☐ Reject |
| Follow-Up Actions | (e.g., pilot test, refine user need, develop partner strategy) |
| Assigned Lead | ___________________________________________ |
| Reviewers / Sign-Off | ___________________________________________ |
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.