Skip to content

Add ROI framework and three-year NPV worksheet for enterprise Claude seat purchases #76

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
malston merged 4 commits into from
Jun 29, 2026
Merged

Add ROI framework and three-year NPV worksheet for enterprise Claude seat purchases #76

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e0bdbc6
Add ROI framework article for enterprise Claude seat purchases
malston Jun 29, 2026
ffb7168
Add three-year NPV worksheet companion to ROI framework
malston Jun 29, 2026
4ed8aea
Fix payback row and discount-factor precision in NPV worksheet
malston Jun 29, 2026
5708641
fix: address PR review feedback
malston Jun 29, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
137 changes: 137 additions & 0 deletions content/enterprise-rollout/00-overview/roi-framework.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
---
title: "ROI Framework"
weight: 3
---

# ROI Framework

This is a decision framework for a company weighing a per-seat purchase of Claude Enterprise as a broad enterprise AI investment. It gives you a model you can fill with your own numbers, a worked example, and the places the math usually lies.

You do not need to invent a methodology. This composes three established layers: a financial chassis (TCO, NPV, payback), an audit-ready wrapper (Forrester Total Economic Impact), and a measurement layer for the benefit side (DORA and SPACE for engineering, time-and-task studies for everyone else). The point of writing it down once is so the executive summary and the cost-tracking pages can reference the same math instead of each re-deriving it.

## The Equation

```text
ROI = (Risk-adjusted annual benefit - Fully-loaded annual cost) / Fully-loaded annual cost

Payback (months) = Fully-loaded annual cost / (Risk-adjusted annual benefit / 12)
```

Two numbers decide whether the result is honest, and both are covered below: the **value-conversion factor** (does time saved turn into value, or just into more Slack) and the **active-seat ratio** (benefit scales with people who actually use it, not seats you bought).

## Cost Side: Total Cost of Ownership

Per-seat SaaS is simpler to model than token-based API consumption, but the subscription line is not the whole cost. Count all of it, annualized.

| Cost line | What it covers | Notes |
| ----------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Seat subscription | Seats x negotiated per-seat price x 12 | Enterprise pricing is custom (contact sales). Use your quote, not a list price. |
| Integration | SSO/SCIM setup, security review, DPA, connector/MCP build | Mostly year-one. |
| Enablement | Training, internal champions, prompt libraries, office hours | Recurring but tapers after ramp. |
| Administration | License management, governance, usage review | Steady-state platform/IT time. |
| Adoption drag | Temporary output dip while people learn the tool | Model as a benefit reducer in months 1-3, not a cash line. |

For multi-year cases, discount each year's net benefit to present value (NPV) at your company's cost of capital before computing the headline number. A three-year NPV is what a CFO will ask for; a single-year ROI is what an engineering VP will quote.

## Benefit Side: Categories and How to Measure Them

The most common way an enterprise AI business case fails is measuring the wrong return -- counting messages sent or "seats activated" instead of work outcomes. Tie each benefit category to a measurement you can actually pull.

| Benefit | How it shows up | How to measure it |
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| Time reclaimed | Faster drafting, research, summarization, coding | Task-time studies on a sample; for engineers, DORA lead-time-to-change |
| Quality and rework | Fewer defects, fewer revision cycles | DORA change-failure rate; rework hours; defect escape rate |
| Cycle time | Work ships sooner, value lands earlier | Lead time per work item; revenue or savings pulled forward |
| Deflection | Work that no longer needs a person or a vendor | Tickets self-served, research hours not outsourced, contractor spend avoided |
| Optionality | Use cases the tool unlocks later | Forrester TEI calls this "flexibility" -- value it as a real option, not a line item |

For engineering populations, anchor the return on **DORA** (deployment frequency, lead time, change-failure rate, time to restore) and **SPACE** (satisfaction, performance, activity, communication, efficiency). They are outcome-level and hard to game, unlike lines of code or acceptance rate. For non-engineering knowledge work, a before/after time-and-task study on a representative sample is the defensible source.

### The Value-Conversion Factor

Hours saved are not dollars saved. Time only converts to value when it is reallocated to work that produces output, and not all of it is. Apply an explicit conversion factor (commonly 0.4-0.7) so the model states the assumption instead of hiding it.

```text
Time-value benefit =
active users
x hours saved per user per week
x working weeks per year
x loaded hourly cost
x value-conversion factor
```

## Risk Adjustment

Forrester's TEI methodology haircuts optimistic benefits by a confidence factor and is the step that makes a business case survive finance review. Apply a risk multiplier (commonly 0.7-0.85) to the benefit total to account for measurement error, uneven adoption, and benefits that take longer to land than the model assumes. State the multiplier; do not bury it.

If Anthropic's commissioned Forrester TEI study for Claude is used as a reference point, pull the figures from the study itself rather than from memory, and present them as that study's results, not as a guarantee for this deployment.

## Adoption Weighting

Benefit scales with active usage, cost scales with seats purchased. A rollout at 70% active adoption and one at 30% produce wildly different ROI off the same license bill. Model the active-seat ratio explicitly and forecast it rising across the ramp rather than assuming day-one saturation.

```text
Total benefit = per-active-user benefit x active seats
= per-active-user benefit x purchased seats x active-seat ratio
```

This is also the lever you control after purchase. Champion programs, enablement, and right-sizing the seat count to real demand move this number more than any pricing negotiation.

## Worked Example

All figures below are illustrative placeholders to show the mechanics. Replace every one with your negotiated quote and your own measured inputs.

```text
Assumptions (ILLUSTRATIVE -- substitute your own):
Purchased seats ............... 500
Per-seat price ................ $50 / seat / month (use your Enterprise quote)
Active-seat ratio ............. 70% -> 350 active users
Hours saved / active user ..... 2 hours / week
Working weeks ................. 48
Loaded hourly cost ............ $75 / hour
Value-conversion factor ....... 0.6
Risk multiplier ............... 0.75

Annual cost (TCO):
Subscription .... 500 x $50 x 12 ........... $300,000
Integration + enablement + admin .......... $150,000
Total annual cost .......................... $450,000

Annual benefit:
Gross time-value =
350 x 2 x 48 x $75 ....................... $2,520,000
x value-conversion (0.6) ................... $1,512,000
x risk multiplier (0.75) ................... $1,134,000
(quality, cycle-time, deflection counted separately, kept at 0 here)

ROI = (1,134,000 - 450,000) / 450,000 ..... ~152%
Payback = 450,000 / (1,134,000 / 12) ....... ~4.8 months
```

The example deliberately zeroes out quality, cycle-time, and deflection benefits. Those are real but harder to attribute, so a conservative case wins more arguments by leaving them as upside rather than padding the headline.

## Measure a Baseline Before You Buy

Without a before-picture you cannot attribute any delta to the tool, and finance will discount the entire case. Before the purchase or at the start of a pilot:

- Snapshot DORA metrics for the engineering org, or run a task-time study on a representative knowledge-work sample.
- Run the pilot as a cohort with a comparison group where feasible, so a good quarter is not credited to the tool.
- Record the active-seat ratio weekly during the pilot -- it is the single best predictor of full-rollout ROI.

The phased cohort approach in [Cohort Strategy](../../04-phase-2-phased-rollout/cohort-strategy/) is built to produce exactly these measurements.

## Where the Number Lies

- **Seats bought, not seats used.** Cost is committed on purchase; benefit is not. Weight by active seats.
- **Hours saved counted as cash.** Without the value-conversion factor, every model overstates by 40-60%.
- **No baseline.** A delta with nothing to compare against is a guess wearing a number.
- **Attribution to the tool.** A control or comparison group keeps unrelated improvements out of the case.
- **Optimism with no haircut.** Skipping risk adjustment is what gets a business case rejected on second read.

## References

- Forrester Total Economic Impact (TEI) methodology -- benefits, costs, flexibility, and risk-adjustment.
- DORA metrics (Accelerate / State of DevOps research) -- delivery throughput and stability.
- SPACE framework -- multi-dimensional developer productivity measurement.
- [Cost Tracking and Budgets](../../05-phase-3-observability-and-governance/cost-tracking/) -- the token-based cost view for Claude Code on Bedrock.
- [Market Opportunity Analysis](../../01-skill-gaps-and-market-opportunity/market-opportunity/) -- the engagement-level business case.
114 changes: 114 additions & 0 deletions content/enterprise-rollout/00-overview/three-year-npv-worksheet.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
---
title: "Three-Year NPV Worksheet"
weight: 4
---

# Three-Year NPV Worksheet

## Purpose

The [ROI Framework](../roi-framework/) gives the single-year view an engineering VP quotes. This worksheet produces the multi-year, discounted view a CFO asks for: the three-year net present value (NPV) and payback of a Claude Enterprise seat purchase. Fill in your own numbers; the worked example carries the framework's illustrative figures across three years so the two pages reconcile.

Every dollar figure below is an illustrative placeholder. Replace each with your negotiated seat quote and your own measured inputs.

## The Discount Mechanic

A dollar of benefit in Year 3 is worth less than a dollar today. NPV restates every future net cash flow in today's dollars using your cost of capital `r` (weighted-average cost of capital, or the hurdle rate finance hands you).

```text
Discount factor (year t) = 1 / (1 + r)^t

NPV = sum over t of ( net cash flow_t x discount factor_t )

where net cash flow_t = benefit_t - cost_t
```

This worksheet uses end-of-year discounting (each year's net flow is discounted as if it lands on the last day of the year) and puts one-time setup in Year 0 at a discount factor of 1.0. State the convention next to the result so it is not re-derived differently later.

## Inputs to Gather

| Input | Symbol | Example value | Source |
| -------------------------------- | ------ | --------------- | --------------------------------- |
| Purchased seats | -- | 500 | Procurement |
| Per-seat price / month | -- | $50 | Your Enterprise quote |
| Active-seat ratio by year | -- | 50% / 70% / 80% | Pilot data, ramp forecast |
| Hours saved / active user / week | -- | 2 | Task-time study |
| Loaded hourly cost | -- | $75 | Finance |
| Working weeks / year | -- | 48 | Finance |
| Value-conversion factor | -- | 0.6 | Assumption (state it) |
| Risk multiplier | -- | 0.75 | Forrester TEI-style haircut |
| One-time setup (Year 0) | -- | $120,000 | Integration, SSO, security review |
| Cost of capital | `r` | 10% | Finance |

The risk-adjusted benefit per active user per year is the spine of the model:

```text
Benefit / active user / year =
hours saved/week x working weeks x loaded hourly cost
x value-conversion factor x risk multiplier

Example: 2 x 48 x $75 x 0.6 x 0.75 = $3,240 / active user / year
```

## Year-by-Year Build

Active users = purchased seats x active-seat ratio. Benefit = active users x risk-adjusted benefit per user. Recurring cost = subscription + enablement + admin, with enablement tapering after the ramp.

| Line | Year 0 | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 |
| ------------------------------- | ------------- | ------------ | ------------ | ------------ |
| Active-seat ratio | -- | 50% | 70% | 80% |
| Active users | -- | 250 | 350 | 400 |
| Benefit (active users x $3,240) | $0 | $810,000 | $1,134,000 | $1,296,000 |
| Subscription (500 x $50 x 12) | $0 | $300,000 | $300,000 | $300,000 |
| Enablement + admin | $0 | $110,000 | $90,000 | $80,000 |
| One-time setup | $120,000 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| **Net cash flow** | **-$120,000** | **$400,000** | **$744,000** | **$916,000** |
| Discount factor (r = 10%) | 1.00000 | 0.90909 | 0.82645 | 0.75131 |
| **Present value** | **-$120,000** | **$363,636** | **$614,879** | **$688,200** |

## Headline Results

| Metric | Value | How it is computed |
| ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------- |
| Three-year NPV | ~$1.55M | Sum of the present-value row |
| Undiscounted three-year net | $1.94M | Sum of the net-cash-flow row |
| Three-year ROI (undiscounted) | ~149% | (total benefit - total cost) / total cost |
| Payback (undiscounted) | ~3.6 months into Year 1 | $120,000 setup / ($400,000 / 12) |
| IRR | Large; not the deciding metric here | Spreadsheet `=IRR()` over the net-cash-flow row |

For this cash-flow shape -- a small upfront cost recovered within months -- IRR runs into the hundreds of percent and stops being informative. NPV and payback are the numbers to present.

## Sensitivity

NPV is most sensitive to the two multipliers that scale the benefit line: the active-seat ratio and the value-conversion factor. Both are linear, so a percentage change in either moves total benefit PV by the same percentage. The discount rate moves the result far less over a three-year horizon.

| Change | Three-year NPV |
| --------------------------- | -------------- |
| Base case | ~$1.55M |
| Adoption or conversion -25% | ~$0.88M |
| Adoption or conversion +25% | ~$2.21M |
| Cost of capital 10% -> 15% | ~$1.39M |

The break-even point is the honest headline: realized benefit (adoption x conversion) can fall to about **42% of plan** before three-year NPV reaches zero.

```text
Break-even benefit multiplier = cost PV / benefit PV
= $1.10M / $2.65M
= ~0.42
```

That margin of safety is the argument for the purchase, not the base-case NPV. If you cannot defend hitting 42% of the adoption plan, the inputs are wrong, not the deal.

## How to Use It

1. Copy the input table and replace every value with your quote and your measured numbers.
2. Compute risk-adjusted benefit per active user once, then fill the year-by-year build.
3. Apply discount factors for your own `r` and sum the present-value row for NPV.
4. Run the sensitivity rows by scaling the benefit line and recomputing -- find your own break-even multiplier.
5. Forecast the active-seat ratio from pilot data, not from hope. It is the input that decides the result. See [Cohort Strategy](../../04-phase-2-phased-rollout/cohort-strategy/) for producing that number, and the [ROI Framework](../roi-framework/) for the underlying benefit and cost definitions.

## References

- [ROI Framework](../roi-framework/) -- benefit categories, the value-conversion factor, and risk adjustment.
- [Context Budget Worksheet](../../03-phase-1-platform-engineering/context-budget-worksheet/) -- the companion fill-in worksheet for context, not cost.
- Forrester Total Economic Impact (TEI) methodology -- risk-adjusted NPV for software business cases.
Loading