Stress-test a sole-source exception by proving that each waiver window and hold rule can place sole-source asks inside the planned lane, survive override pressure, and avoid trapping operators inside a green spend slide that hides long-lived dual waivers.
Sole-source exceptions often list a calendar while leaving restore behavior, override authority, and abort ownership implicit. Those edges decide whether a late dual-waiver ask stops inside the exception packet or leaves a broken exception live under spend load. The exercise should follow actual procurement tools, competitive exports, and buyer paths rather than a clean sourcing deck.
Inventory the sole-source path
List every sole-source class with its waiver window, waive rule, override behavior, owners, and notification channels. Mark paths that cannot reverse without a manual competitive edit. Attach the last three sole-source incidents with raw timelines and any waivers. Include the source of truth for open dual-waiver counts during the observation window.
Define the phases for detect, hold, waive, abort, and communicate. Each phase needs an owner and an exit condition. Write the point after which a stuck dual waiver would require a different procedure, then review whether that action is still permitted. Capture maximum acceptable spend friction in measurable units, including which cohorts are excluded from the exception and why.
Include the calendar of known events for the next two quarters: fiscal close peaks, vendor renewals, and board dates that shrink the usable change window. A sole-source budget that ignores those dates will look calm until the week they land.
Failure drills
- A minority high-spend vendor keeps a side-channel while the aggregate sole-source dashboard stays green.
- A restore has already left a cost surface without a trusted competitive state.
- The primary sole-source dashboard lags beyond the planned observation window.
- An operator skips a hold gate because a board date is close.
- Automated and human waivers collide under the new waive rule.
- Abort authority is unclear at week end and the page lands on the wrong exception.
For each drill, identify detection time, spend impact, containment, and the authority to force a sole-source rollback. Require commands and dashboard links in the runbook. A statement that monitoring will catch it does not establish which alert fires or who receives it.
Prove sole-source changes are timed and owned
Run the package in Pingpong with procurement, finance, legal, and security seats. Ask finance which cost decision becomes unsafe first if dual waivers still stick after the claimed window. Ask legal whether capacity can absorb a forced override. Ask procurement to show the exact sole-source version or competitive export used as the exit condition.
Related reviews include the procurement ops lead seat, a RFP scorecard rewrite, a supplier exit plan, a vendor selection review, and the procurement counsel seat. Browse the war-game decisions hub for adjacent controls.
Authorize the published sole-source response only after a timed drill restores usable competitive hygiene inside the documented budget without an undocumented manual step.