A defined first engagement
Family Continuity Diagnostic
One reliable view before the family chooses structures.
Understand who owns, who can act and which resources are accessible. Receive written findings and priorities before choosing documents, structures or funding.
Inside the decision record
Cash is recorded.
Payment authority is unconfirmed.
Follow the fictional decision trail
Review fees are agreed for the scope; later product implementation is separate and may involve provider commissions. Remuneration details
Illustrative findings extract, version 1.3. This fictional example is not a client engagement or outcome. Its action windows do not represent a Diagnostic delivery timetable.
Written findings
What the family receives
Written output 01
Continuity Exposure Map
What is sound, dependent, unclear, misaligned or incomplete across six connected dimensions.
Written output 02
Decision and Dependency Register
Who must decide, act or provide professional confirmation.
Written output 03
Priority Action Sequence
What happens first, who owns it and what depends on it.
The findings record owner priorities and unresolved differences. A separately agreed Written Architecture Review can later connect authorised decisions into an integrated continuity brief.
Follow a fictional finding to completion → Review Practice Standards →
Explore the fictional findings and decision trail
Illustrative diagnostic output
Six dimensions, one connected record
Condensed from the wholly fictional findings extract, version 1.3, page 6. This is not a client result, professional assurance or performance score.
- Ownership
- Ownership choices remain openEconomic participation and exit rights have not been agreed together.
- Control and decision rights
- Decisions still depend on the founderOperating approvals, banking and capital allocation remain centred on one person.
- Continuity liquidity
- Available funding is unconfirmedNo demonstrated source covers equalisation, spouse security, costs and financing constraints.
- Succession and family roles
- Future roles are not yet agreedDifferent roles have not become agreed rights, responsibilities and readiness criteria.
- Governance and documentation
- Records have not been checked togetherCorporate, estate and banking records exist; their combined effect has not been reconciled.
- Implementation dependencies
- Completion has not been confirmedReported activity lacks a shared record of dependencies, owners and completion evidence.
Family intent guides the review. Founder dependence is tested across all six dimensions.
Show the original exposure-map image here
A separate fictional working example
From an open question to a defined action
Question: Can business payments continue during the founder’s absence? Cash exists; alternative signatories’ permissions are only partly evidenced.
Decision
Authorised company decision-makers set delegation and limits, informed by family needs and professional input.
Dependency
Confirm mandates, authorised users, limits and corporate requirements. Ownership alone does not establish banking authority.
Next action
The finance lead obtains records. Counsel or the company secretary confirms corporate requirements; the bank confirms permissions. Sandeep tracks dependencies.
Evidence of completion
Corporate approval, the bank’s written acceptance and a bank-permitted permissions check must be recorded before this action closes.
Still open: The founder’s personal guarantee awaits the lender’s response. Completing the mandate task does not establish its release.
Fictional demonstration, not advice or a reported outcome. Each professional retains responsibility. Read the fuller working example.
Clear professional boundaries
Decisions before structures or instruments
The family decides. Sandeep integrates. Appointed professionals advise and execute within their disciplines.
- No document, structure or financial product is presumed. Any further mandate is separately agreed.
Choice remains with the family
After reviewing the findings, the family may
Act, clarify, proceed, defer or conclude.
Establishing relevance
When a connected review may help
Authority depends on the founder; ownership and control diverge; wealth is difficult to access; documents and advice do not align; or a transition is approaching.
Where these questions overlap, examine the whole position before choosing separate solutions.
What should ownership make possible?
Owners may agree that the enterprise should endure while differing on reinvestment, dependable income, control or future involvement. Delegating tasks can also feel different from passing judgment and authority.
The Diagnostic records relevant owners’ priorities and the decisions they imply. Differences may remain open; the findings identify who must decide and what still needs confirmation.
Questions for the owners
- What should ownership provide: growth, income, control or a different level of involvement?
- Which expectations concern ownership, employment, leadership or family participation?
- What would an owner’s future exit require?
- Which decisions need further information, professional confirmation or authorised approval?
Intentions, apparent agreement and evidenced decisions remain distinct.
Related reading: Family expectations before succession · How governance clarifies decisions · Preparing the next generation for ownership
The engagement
What participation involves
Begin with the decision
Describe the decision, why it matters now and which advisers are involved. Broad circumstances are enough; leave sensitive records out.
Make the scope explicit
Agree the participants, recipients, records, fee and sequence of work before accepting a proposal.
Leave with a usable record
Review the findings, open questions and next actions. Decide whether to proceed; implementation is separately agreed.
What to establish before accepting the proposal
- Participation: the relevant family members, owners and advisers, and who may receive the findings.
- Preparation: the questions, discussions and records needed for the agreed scope. Confirm the sharing method before sending sensitive material.
- Time: the discussion sequence, participant commitments, delivery timetable and dependencies on records or specialist confirmation.
- Commercial terms: the professional fee, payment terms, exclusions and how a change of scope would be agreed.
The fee reflects the questions, holdings, entities, locations, participation and professional confirmations involved. An urgent decision may require a narrower first step.
Other decisions a review can surface
Do the Will, company records, nominations and family intentions align? Does a named successor have the authority, participation and liquidity needed?
These are fictional educational questions, not client findings or legal conclusions. Explore the selected matter patterns →
Personally led
Personally led by Sandeep N. Setty
Family decisions, evidence, specialist advice and implementation remain distinct.
Professional record → Practice method →A private starting point
Does the family have one reliable view before it chooses documents, structures or funding?
Establish whether a defined Diagnostic—or a narrower first step—is appropriate.