Week-one step 1
Confirm evaluation posture and who owns it
Decide whether your church is exploring self-serve first, guided evaluation first, or migration-first review. Make one person responsible for keeping the next step clear.
TR-2531 first-week launch doc
Your first week in Transparent should reduce confusion, not create fake urgency.
This first-week guide turns the onboarding sequence into a calmer short checklist. It focuses on what a church should understand and decide early, while staying explicit about what should wait for review.
First-week posture
- One clear next step at a time
- No pressure-heavy setup sprint
- Migration and billing questions made explicit early
- High-risk actions held for deliberate approval
First-week checklist
These are the highest-value early decisions for a church evaluating Transparent at launch.
Week-one step 2
Review pricing, trial, and hardship expectations
Make sure the month-to-month posture, two-month trial, and hardship visibility are understood before internal expectations drift.
Week-one step 3
Set access expectations early
Do not use onboarding pressure as a reason to broaden permissions casually. Keep role and security posture explicit from the beginning.
Week-one step 4
Choose migration now versus later deliberately
If migration is part of evaluation, gather exports and questions early. If not, defer it on purpose instead of leaving it fuzzy.
Week-one step 5
Use support paths intentionally
Use help for canonical guidance, the assistant for grounded Q&A, and structured intake when the issue is blocked, sensitive, or account-specific.
Do now versus do later
A calmer onboarding surface should separate immediate understanding from actions that still deserve caution.
Do now
- Pick one evaluation owner
- Read the pricing/trial explanation once before internal discussions spread
- Decide whether migration is immediate, later, or guided
- Keep sensitive billing or hardship questions in restricted intake lanes
Do later or only with explicit review
- Advanced permissions expansion
- Import approval and canonical commit
- Public-facing or publish-affecting actions
- Any billing-affecting action that is still unclear
Current shell boundaries
This keeps the first-week page honest about where guidance stops and later product-state work begins.
What this page is
A short launch checklist that separates immediate evaluation decisions from actions that should wait for explicit review.
What it should not pretend
- This is not a completion tracker or live launch-readiness dashboard.
- It does not replace governed pricing, migration, support, or security articles.
- It should hand off to human review instead of smoothing over trust-sensitive uncertainty.
Next-step recommendations
The doc should still point back into governed guidance instead of leaving follow-up to guesswork.
Recommended next moves
- Keep the first week focused on a few high-value decisions, not maximum configuration depth.
- Escalate when migration, billing, hardship, or access consequences stop being obvious.
Related launch docs
When onboarding should stop pretending
If the real issue is trust-sensitive or blocked, the right move is escalation, not smoother prose.
Need migration judgment?
Use guided evaluation when import timing, data cleanup, or stakeholder alignment is the real blocker.
Request guided evaluation →Need a restricted path?
Use narrower intake for billing, hardship, or other account-sensitive issues.
Open billing intake →Need grounded help first?
Use the help center or support assistant before turning a simple question into a routed case.
Open support assistant →