Recommended next action

Action

ACT-1 — Facilitate one bounded stewarded review of the goal, priority UDEs, and conversion-constraint hypothesis.

Why it is next

The supplied CRT explicitly calls itself provisional and says its UDEs and causal arrows must be tested against lived evidence. The supplied PRT places “decide how the trees get updated” and “validate and revise the trees enough for provisional use” before throughput definition and the conversion pathway.

Building the conversion architecture immediately would act on RC-1 as if it were confirmed. ACT-1 is the smallest safe action that can distinguish between the current model and plausible rivals.

Constraint addressed

It does not yet elevate RC-1 directly. It protects the work on RC-1 by testing whether it is the actual constraint and addresses RC-0, the lack of trusted model governance.

Obstacle removed

OBS-1 — The goal, UDEs, and arrows lack lived group validation.

Expected immediate effect

TR-1 — A dated model records:

• confirmed, disputed, and still-provisional entities;
• supporting or missing evidence;
• disposed and unresolved objections;
• a named steward and decision rule;
• the next review date;
• whether RC-1 remains the constraint hypothesis.

Downstream effects

TR-1 achieves IO-1, which enables an accepted mixed-method throughput definition, then a consent-based entry experiment, recurring practice, stewardship development, pocket formation, and mature replication.

Preconditions

• Affected participants and decision authority are identified.
• The current model is circulated before the session.
• “Good enough for provisional use” is defined.
• Minority reports and disputed status are preserved.

Completion evidence

• Each reviewed item has an explicit disposition.
• At least the goal, top three UDEs, RC-1, and the key causal chain are reviewed.
• A steward, revision process, and next review date are recorded.
• Evidence gaps and rival constraint hypotheses are assigned or intentionally deferred.

Risks and containment

• Endless deliberation: time-box the session and scope.
• False consensus: preserve objections and disputed statuses.
• Author dominance: use transparent criteria and an accountable facilitator.
• Premature commitment: retain “provisional use” until lived tests exist.

What becomes possible afterward

If RC-1 survives review, ACT-2 and ACT-3 can operationalize throughput and test one entry path. If it does not, the group avoids investing in the wrong operating architecture.

Confidence

High that this is the earliest dependency in the supplied model; medium that the group has the authority and participants needed to run it now.

Do not start yet

1. Do not build a full multi-stage conversion system yet. The constraint and participant response are unvalidated.
2. Do not attach incentives to adoption-event metrics yet. The FRT predicts reductive optimization.
3. Do not distribute a replication library yet. No pattern has demonstrated maturity in the supplied evidence.

Evidence that would overturn this recommendation

• A recent, representative group decision already confirms the goal, UDEs, constraint, and governance protocol.
• Operational data shows a different constraint such as facilitator capacity, funding, safeguarding, or demand.
• No relevant group or decision authority exists to validate the model.