CGOV.Preface:2 - Problem and forces - Joining competent contributions into an effective act

A valuation can be sound while the decision participants are ineligible. A majority economic holding can carry a minority of votes. A correctly counted vote can use the wrong denominator. An information right can exist while its holder cannot obtain the information in time. A new charter can describe an arrangement that has not been put into effect.

These failures occur between contributions. A collection of isolated checklists leaves those connections to the practitioner; imposing a complete sequence can make a small matter repeat work that is already sufficient.

The methods must accommodate several tensions. Decisions need timely information, while disclosure can affect confidentiality and other rights. Independent scrutiny needs capability and resources, while another report can add cost without changing the choice. Delegation makes ordinary work possible, while some powers or duties remain with another participant. A changed arrangement can improve one contribution and overload another. Rules may themselves warrant criticism or amendment, while their present effect remains a separate question.

The language keeps inquiry proportional to the decision it can change. Use an existing sufficient account directly. When another inquiry is proposed, ask what attainable result could change the next action and whether that benefit warrants its whole cost. FPF’s C.11.DUA supplies this method. An applicable act, information obligation or consent remains to be performed where the matter actually requires it.