Ownership
- Project owner and delivery team
- Client stakeholders
- Business unit and commercial visibility
Delivery, Tasks & People
Know who owns the work, who can do it and what needs attention.
Delivery problems are rarely capability problems. They are attribution problems: work that belongs to nobody in particular, a finding everybody assumed somebody else had seen, a staffing decision made from a CV that has not been true for two years.
A Genedar project carries its owner, team, stack, folder and time connection — and the work it generates lands on a named person.
The project is the unit of responsibility
Shape
- Project type and technology stack
- Milestones or recurring-contract lifecycle
- The linked website
Connections
- SharePoint delivery folder
- Harvest project
- The opportunity and contract that authorised it
Work that finds its own owner
Tasks are not a separate board somebody has to remember to open. They can be generated by operational findings, access reviews, expiring assets and overdue commercial follow-up, with source-based priorities bringing urgent operational work to the top.
The source record remains attached, so the assignee receives context rather than a title copied into another system.
A task is where the answer happens, not where it starts
A question asked about a task used to leave the task. It became a mail, the answer landed in one person's inbox, and the work itself never learned what had been agreed.
A task carries an append-only reply thread and its own file attachments, up to 25 MB each, so a question and its answer stay on the work instead of moving to somebody's mailbox. Everyone who can see the task can read the thread, reply and upload; you can delete your own posts, and the other person is notified when you post.
Attaching what the work runs on no longer needs a second role either: a project writer links existing domains, hosting and licenses to their own project without holding the asset editor permission.
Context
The assistant knows what the engagement actually is
An assistant that only knows the fields on a record gives generic advice about a specific client. Chat from a project page and this one starts from that project's briefing instead.
Two things make the answer yours rather than merely plausible. The briefing describes the engagement as it actually stands, and it is treated strictly as reference material the assistant reads, never as instructions it follows. Sales Knowledge holds the rules your agency sells by, maintained in Settings by the people who own them, editable at any time with no release step and with every change audit-logged.
Both the assistant and MCP search those rules and return the one that applies, so a recommendation cites your position rather than an average of the internet's. Where the context stops is deliberate too: a contact's personal notes are never handed to the assistant at all.
The project briefing
- Chat from a project page and the assistant gets that project's briefing as context
- It answers about the engagement, not just the record's fields
- The briefing is reference material only and never acts as instructions
Your own sales rules
- A Sales Knowledge editor in Settings holds the rules a pitch has to respect
- Editable at any time, with no release, and every change audit-logged
- The assistant and MCP search them and return the matching rule, so advice is grounded in yours
What stays private
- A contact's personal notes are deliberately not shared with the assistant
- A deactivated user's consultant profile leaves the directory and staffing search in the same step
- Restoring the user brings the profile back, unless it had already been removed on its own
Claimed skill, or proven experience
Genedar keeps structured skills, languages, certificates and project history, and separates a listed competency from project-proven experience.
Profiles remain editable by the people they describe. Gap detection flags stale records, and branded CV export can be anonymized or tailored for a specific customer.
Bring one project that went sideways.
We will show what the record would have carried: who owned it, which findings became tasks and where the hours went.