Paul reset
18 Sep → 18 Dec 2026 · mid-point 3 Nov · final 18 Dec
Paul Plewman — COO / Provider Network
90-day scorecard (18 Sep → 18 Dec 2026)
Role (one line): Own Currency Transfer’s service-partner / provider network so we close the corridors and products that actually matter now — local receiving, ILS economics, and credit — and make the network a real differentiator.
Comp context: £130k + director + ~10% unexercised options. This scorecard is the standard that package is paid against.
Review: Written mid-point 3 Nov 2026. Final review 18 Dec 2026. Miss on the must-haves → role/comp/exit path opens; no renegotiation of the bar mid-stream.
Out of scope for this scorecard (Stevan owns / parallel): CoinPayments go-live. Paul supports if asked; he does not own the critical path.
Deprioritised (do not use as cover): KRW send, NGN/Africa, HKD local receive (deals lost / not top focus). Activity there doesn’t count toward a pass.
Must-haves (pass/fail)
| # | Outcome | Done when | Owner evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tier map live | Every live + pipeline provider labelled Tier 1 / 2 / 3 with named owner, product/corridor, and status. Signed off by Stevan. | One-pager + Compass (or agreed register) |
| 2 | ES + FR local IBANs | Named provider(s) for Spanish and French local receiving IBANs: commercial terms clear, onboarding started or signed, with a dated go-live path. If a path is dead, written kill + next named option within 10 days. | Term sheet / agreement / kill+next note |
| 3 | ILS economics | Live or near-live ILS solution where CT keeps ≥50% of the economics (IsraTransfer or better-named alternative). Pilot path and pricing sheet clear. Below 50% = not done. | Agreement or priced term sheet showing CT share |
| 4 | Credit suppliers | At least one additional credit supplier in legal or live (Swoop or stronger alternative), with product fit written down (who it’s for, limits, turnaround). Second name in active pipeline. | Pipeline + draft/agreement |
| 5 | Cadence | Weekly 30-min provider review with Stevan (pipeline, blockers, next ask). Cancelled only by Stevan. | Calendar + notes |
Stretch (matters for “COO retained at this package”)
| # | Outcome | Done when |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Second ES or FR IBAN option (redundancy, not duplicate theatre) | Parallel path documented |
| 7 | Second credit supplier past intro into commercial discussion | Notes + next date |
| 8 | Tier-3 CRM ≥80 named contacts (relationship register, not contracts) | Exportable list |
| 9 | Compass capability fields complete for Tier 1 + 2 | Stevan can query without asking Paul |
Explicitly not the job
- Introducer / agent BD (unless Stevan asks)
- Being the default ops fire-fighter as a substitute for provider delivery
- “We’re talking to people” without dated next steps
- Reviving KRW / NGN / HKD as the main story
How we score at 18 Dec
- Keep as-is: Must-haves 1–5 hit; stretch mostly on track.
- Restructure (scope + cash): Must-haves partial; stretch weak. Job becomes provider lead / ops lead at a band that matches output.
- Exit path: Must-haves missed with no credible recovery plan. Continuity plan for ops + network first, then unwind (director / options via adviser).
Source: wiki ct-provider-network-tiered.md (19 May 2026), rewritten 18 Sep 2026 for current priorities (ES/FR IBANs, ILS ≥50% to CT, credit suppliers). CoinPayments parallel under Stevan.
Conversation script — Paul reset
Tone: short, factual, no apology theatre. You’re not asking permission to manage him.
Open (30 seconds)
Paul — I need a straight conversation about the COO seat and the provider network.
I’ve let this drift. In February we said Q2 was the check if new providers weren’t landing. In May we wrote the H2 provider-network OKRs. Neither got turned into a live agreement with you. That’s on me. It stops today.
The gap (1–2 minutes)
What the business needs from this seat is service partners that close coverage gaps and make us different — settlement quality, speed, corridors we can’t do today. Introducers aren’t your job. Ops “safe pair of hands” isn’t enough for this package.
We’re not getting that differentiation. The network still isn’t a reason clients choose us. You’ve been in the business since 2014; you know the gaps as well as I do.
I’m not going to litigate every week of history. I’m going to put a forward standard on the table.
The contract (hand him the one-pager)
This is the next 90 days — 18 Sep to 18 Dec.
Five must-haves: tier map signed off; ES and FR local IBANs progressing to real go-live paths; ILS solution at ≥50% economics to us (IsraTransfer or better); at least one new credit supplier in legal or live (Swoop or stronger) plus a second in pipeline; weekly review with me that you don't cancel.
CoinPayments is my parallel track — not your escape hatch and not your primary scorecard.
Stretch is redundancy on IBAN/credit, Tier-3 CRM to 80, Compass fields for Tier 1+2. KRW, NGN, HKD are not the story.
Mid-point 3 Nov. Final 18 Dec.
If the must-haves land, we keep going. If they’re partial, we restructure the job and the cash to match what we’re actually getting. If they miss with no credible plan, we start an exit path — properly, with continuity for ops and the network first.
I’m not renegotiating the bar in November because it’s hard.
The ask (force a yes/no)
I need you to say clearly: are you taking ownership of this scorecard as the definition of the COO job for the next 90 days?
If yes — we put mid-point and final in the diary today, and the first weekly is next week.
If no — tell me what job you think you’re doing, and we’ll talk about whether that job exists at this company at this pay. I’m not leaving this as a foggy “I’ll try.”
If he fights on friendship / director / seniority
Director and options don’t replace delivery. Friendship doesn’t either. I’m talking to you as CEO about the seat the company is paying for.
We can still work together. What we can’t do is keep the title and the cash without the provider outcomes.
If he agrees but softens (“I’ll do my best”)
Best isn’t the metric. The five must-haves are. Do you accept them as written, or do you want to propose different numbers before we lock — once?
(Only accept changes that keep the bar at COO level. No watering into activity metrics.)
Close
I’ll send this one-pager after this call. You reply in writing that you accept it, or you come back with a counter that still hits the same outcomes. I want that within 48 hours.
First weekly: [date/time]. Mid-point: 3 Nov. Final: 18 Dec.
Thanks — that’s all for now.
After the call (you)
- Email/Slack the scorecard + “confirm acceptance in writing.”
- Book the three calendar holds before you leave the desk.
- Do not re-litigate in Slack threads; point back to the scorecard.