Why this goal

demowho and where

Not a feature. Sign-in decides both of these; until then, this does.

Demo map
Goals

Why this goal

Less of the company depends on any one customer's decision.

Anil Mehta · Company

Anil wrote this. Everything below is what Corto can show about where it came from and whether it holds up — including what it cannot stand behind.

Where it came from

A goal Corto proposed has a reason it exists. This is that reason, with the record behind it.

No finding sits behind this one. It was written by its owner rather than proposed from the diagnosis, which is not a fault — but it means Corto cannot tell you why it exists, only whether it holds up.

From the interview

Corto asked: Now the question all of this is for. Three years — if everything were in your hands, what is Mehta Auto?

One hundred and fifty crore. Twenty percent export. And a name of our own in components — people should say, if it is a Mehta part there is no tension. And no more of this life that hangs on one customer.

That chain ends at Nobody can end us with one phone call, one of the three destinations.

What Corto read

1

Every record under every number in this goal — where it came from, how it was read, and when it was true.

  • Tally - party-wise sales ledgers, via the read-only agent

    from a filed or system record

    Used for: Top four share of billing: 68% down to 60%

    The record
    Party-wise billing FY26 YTD
    How read
    read-only export from the customer's own accounting system, with their consent
    True as of
    last sync 25 Aug 2026 19:40 · refreshed daily

Why these key results are enough

If every one of them lands, is the goal true? If the answer is no, the goal is measuring the wrong things.

If the top four fall to 60% and one new account outside powertrain is billing, the concentration he named has measurably moved. Nothing else is needed for this goal to be true.

Is it a good goal

5 of 5

SMART, checked against the goal itself. Where Corto asks more than SMART does, it says so — it is not a badge, it is what was actually tested.

  • S

    Specific

    holds

    The goal names a change, and leaves every number to its key results.

    SMART asks a goal to be specific. Corto asks it to be specific WITHOUT a number in it, so the target can move without rewriting what the company is trying to do.

  • M

    Measurable

    holds

    All 2 key results carry a start value, a target, a unit and the record they are read from.

    SMART asks for a number. Corto asks WHERE THE NUMBER COMES FROM — the actual record — because a target nobody can read is not measurable, it is only numeric.

  • A

    Achievable

    holds

    1 initiative is under it, and every key result reads from a record that exists.

    Corto does not judge whether an ambition is realistic — that is the founder's to set. It checks the two things it can see: that somebody is working on it, and that the number can actually be read.

  • R

    Relevant

    holds

    It hangs off the pillar “Earn the second part, not just the first order”.

    SMART asks whether a goal matters. Corto asks WHAT IT SERVES, by name, all the way up to one of the three destinations — so relevance is a chain you can follow rather than an opinion.

  • T

    Time-bound

    holds

    It runs to FY 2026-27, and nothing is scored before that period begins.

What Corto cannot stand behind

1

Read this before you argue with anybody using the rest of the page. A case that states no limit is a sales sheet.

  • What Tally - party-wise sales ledgers, via the read-only agent cannot tell you

    margin by customer, which needs item-level costtonnage or quantityanything outside the sync windowperiods before the ledger was opened

Assembled from records that already existed — the diagnosis, the interview, the derivation registry and the goal itself. Nothing on this page is written about the goal after the fact. The line to the destination