Continuous

Keep the reason. Review the response.

A separate prepared case follows KYC & Customer Due Diligence for Relationship Managers. Read an earlier frozen decision, inspect its associated program separately, and compare later evidence before a new human decision.

Start here

The question

What has changed since our last decision?

What this answers

You can show what was decided before, what is known now, and the decision recorded next without rewriting the earlier export.

Fictional example Prepared examples. No live product actions.

Salalem National Bank, its people, content, counts, forms, and records are fictional. Interactions reveal prepared examples, not client records. Nothing is saved, assigned, published, or executed by AI. Access and configuration are agreed separately. Training evidence does not establish job proficiency, legal compliance, or causal business impact.

A separate prepared KYC case

The frozen rationale comes first.

The FY26 export preserves a Train decision for Relationship Manager KYC, its rationale, and its date. Open the prior need separately to inspect the associated response as it exists now.

Closed-loop needs analysis

What Salalem connects

The frozen export contains no program link. The prior need's response relation is a separate record; a matching program name alone does not prove a connection.

Salalem National Bank

FY26 frozen export | KYC decision

Fictional example

Record ID: EXPORT-FY26-KYC
Record date: 2026-06-30
Responsible person: Robin | Training administrator
Record status: Frozen export

Earlier decision

Earlier decision: Train; DEC-FY26-KYC-RM | Relationship Manager | KYC & Customer Due Diligence
Frozen rationale: We will address the outstanding KYC requirement through the role program.; Text preserved in EXPORT-FY26-KYC
Decision date: 2026-06-20; Export frozen 2026-06-30 | No program link stored in this export

Open the prior need and response separately

Supporting records

Fictional example

Prior need

NEED-FY26-KYC-RM

REQ-KYC-RM | Relationship Manager | DEC-FY26-KYC-RM

Separate response relation

NEED-FY26-KYC-RM | PROG-RM-01

Linked 2026-06-21 before closure on 2026-06-30

Associated response

Relationship Manager Excellence Program

PROG-RM-01 | Includes ACT-KYC-01 connected to REQ-KYC-RM

This disclosure represents the prior need, not an individual drill-down inside the report summary. Its program link was recorded before closure; the export preserves the earlier rationale and date only.

FY26 and FY27 are fictional planning periods. This is not a later result of the AML decision in the needs-led story.

What this answers

Earlier reasoning preserved, with a separately inspected response relation

Later evidence, the same requirement

Keep the denominator and period visible.

For the same 24 Relationship Managers and REQ-KYC-RM, the later reading has 18 met and 6 not met, compared with 12 met and 12 not met earlier. New Risk Management scope is shown separately.

Needs comparison

What Salalem connects

The comparison preserves the role, requirement, and denominator. Different reading dates and evidence windows are explicit; fewer unmet requirements does not establish that the program caused the change.

Salalem National Bank

KYC | Comparable evidence and new scope

Fictional example

Record ID: COMPARE-FY27-KYC
Record date: 2026-09-14
Responsible person: Robin | Training administrator
Record status: Evidence compared

New review

2026-09-14

Earlier | Same role and requirement: 12 of 24 met; 12 not met | Read 2026-06-15 | Window 2026-04-01 to 2026-06-15
Later | Same role and requirement: 18 of 24 met; 6 not met | Read 2026-09-14 | Window 2026-07-01 to 2026-09-14
Catalog demand persists: 9 people requesting KYC support; Relationship Manager population | 2026-07-01 to 2026-09-14 | May overlap with outstanding learning
New scope | Risk Management: 4 additional people; Outside the 24-person comparison | Not a progress measure

Inspect the comparison basis

Supporting records

Fictional example

Comparable key

Relationship Manager | REQ-KYC-RM

Same 24-person population at both readings | 12 + 12 and 18 + 6 each reconcile to 24

Existing content

PROG-RM-01 | ACT-KYC-01

Reviewed 2026-09-14 | The connected activity still addresses the KYC requirement

Demand source

REQUESTS-KYC-27

9 distinct requesters | Evidence window 2026-07-01 to 2026-09-14

New-scope record

SCOPE-RISK-27

4 Risk Management joiners | Excluded from the like-for-like denominator

Completion, requests, and new scope answer different questions. They do not establish proficiency improvement, causal training effectiveness, or ROI. Optional evaluation results remain aggregate and respect privacy floors.

Prepared comparison, not observed client results. Do not add overlapping sources into a total.

What this answers

A comparable reading without treating wider scope as improvement

A human retains the existing response

Already covered, with a separate program link.

Robin records Already covered for the current KYC need: the existing program addresses the requirement, so the team will follow up with the 6 still outstanding rather than commission duplicate content. Robin then links that program in a separate handoff.

Needs cycles and decisions

What Salalem connects

Recording the decision does not automatically link a program. The new rationale and the separately saved response link complete this human review; the earlier export remains unchanged.

Salalem National Bank

FY27 decision and preserved FY26 export

Fictional example

Record ID: DEC-FY27-KYC-RM
Record date: 2026-09-15
Responsible person: Robin | Training administrator
Record status: Human decision recorded

New review

New recorded decision: Already covered; NEED-FY27-KYC-RM | Robin | 2026-09-15
Recorded rationale: Retain the existing program and follow up with the people still outstanding.; PROG-RM-01 covers REQ-KYC-RM | No duplicate content commissioned
Separate program handoff: NEED-FY27-KYC-RM | PROG-RM-01; LINK-KYC-27 | Saved separately after the decision on 2026-09-15
Earlier export: EXPORT-FY26-KYC; Reopened after the new decision | Earlier rationale and date unchanged

Reopen the unchanged earlier export

Supporting records

Fictional example

Earlier decision

Train

DEC-FY26-KYC-RM | Relationship Manager | KYC & Customer Due Diligence

Frozen rationale

We will address the outstanding KYC requirement through the role program.

Text preserved in EXPORT-FY26-KYC

Decision date

2026-06-20

Export frozen 2026-06-30 | No program link stored in this export

The original Train decision and its date remain in the frozen export. The current Already covered decision lives in the new cycle. Nothing here rewrites history, saves a live decision, or claims causal ROI.

A complete planning loop: earlier reason, separate response, later evidence, new human decision, unchanged export.

What this answers

A new human decision, a verified response relation, and intact earlier reasoning

A complete answer

The next decision keeps its history.

Bring one earlier training decision, its associated response, and later evidence for the same scope. A considered review can retain an existing program; it need not commission another one.

Book a demo

Related scope

What changes

The work becomes a recurring review that preserves the earlier record.

What has changed since our last decision?

All maturity scenarios

The L&D maturity story