# Allocation engine — framing options for marketing review

## Why this needs a decision

The allocation engine is the product's real differentiator — it auto-fills the roster against credential gating, availability, EFT-normalised equity, supervision rules and rest-period constraints, then surfaces gaps for human review before anything publishes. How we *name* that in public copy is currently inconsistent and unresolved:

- `Lineup-for-Anaesthesia.dc.html` hero lede calls it **"AI-assisted allocations"**
- The same page's value-prop card, two sections down, calls it **"AI-assisted allocation"** in the heading but **"Advanced allocation"** in the body copy
- `Lineup-Home.dc.html`'s specialties card originally said "AI-assisted allocations that are auditable and defensible" — I've defaulted this one to the mechanism-first wording below pending your call, so the homepage isn't asserting a claim that hasn't been signed off

**One data point worth weighing in:** in the Wonthaggi Medical Group quote (`Wonthaggi Medical Group - Proposal Copy.md`), *"AI-assisted allocation & desirability scoring"* is listed as an **Intelligence-tier** (top-tier) feature — not something Essentials or Operations customers get. If the public marketing site leads with "AI-assisted" unqualified, prospects evaluating a lower tier may reasonably expect it's included. Two ways to handle that:
- Keep the public site mechanism-first (Option B below) and let sales introduce the AI/desirability-scoring upsell during the demo, tier-appropriate.
- Or keep "AI-assisted" on the site but scope it visibly to the top tier (adds complexity to a marketing page that doesn't currently mention pricing tiers at all).

## Option A — "AI-assisted" framing

**Anaesthesia hero lede:**
> Specialists, trainees, and sub-specialty credentialling in one live record — with AI-assisted allocations that are auditable, equitable, and defensible.

**Anaesthesia value-prop card:**
> **AI-assisted allocation**
> AI-assisted allocation proposes a fair, compliant roster in seconds — respecting fatigue rules, leave, and supervision. You approve; nothing publishes until you do.

**Home specialties card:**
> The launch edition. Specialists, trainees, credentialling by sub-specialty, and AI-assisted allocations that are auditable and defensible.

*Reads punchier and more "modern SaaS." Risk: (1) invites the obvious follow-up question of what model, what data, what accuracy — questions the copy doesn't answer; (2) may overpromise relative to what ships below the Intelligence tier; (3) "AI" is the kind of term the brand voice guide explicitly asks to be wary of (alongside "innovative," "powerful solution") unless it's doing real work in the sentence.

## Option B — mechanism-first framing (currently applied as the working default)

**Anaesthesia hero lede:**
> Specialists, trainees, and sub-specialty credentialling in one live record — with allocations that stay auditable, equitable, and defensible.

**Anaesthesia value-prop card:**
> **Allocation that shows its work**
> Lineup proposes a fair, compliant roster in seconds — respecting fatigue rules, leave, credentialling, and supervision. You approve; nothing publishes until you do.

**Home specialties card (as currently shipped in the file):**
> The launch edition. Specialists, trainees, and credentialling by sub-specialty, with allocations that stay auditable and defensible.

*More consistent with the brand voice (precise, talks clinical, no hype word doing the selling) and doesn't promise a specific technique. Names the actual constraints instead ("fatigue rules, leave, credentialling, supervision") which is more defensible and more interesting to a clinical director than the word "AI" on its own.*

## What I changed already, pending your call

- `Lineup-Home.dc.html` specialties card: **B applied**
- `Lineup-for-General-Practice.dc.html` (new page): written mechanism-first throughout, no "AI" language, for consistency with the above pending decision
- `Lineup-for-Anaesthesia.dc.html`: **left as-is (Option A, with the internal inconsistency)** — this is the one page where the original positioning docs' language survives untouched, so you have the original text to bring to marketing alongside Option B for comparison

Once marketing has a view, I can apply it consistently across all four pages in one pass.