fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 102727–102745

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 08:01:07 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:04:31 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 08:10:10 UTC

E.23.CDI:1 - Problem frame

Use this pattern when one named System must become more capable of performing a named Work family and transfer must later be checked in representative Work. The holder can be, for example, a person, team, organization, pair, ensemble, engineering arrangement, operating arrangement, or another collective. In every case, that whole must be independently admitted as the System whose capability is at stake.

First useful move. Keep the opening ordinary. Write two short sentences. Current: name the holder, named Work family, operating envelope, current measures and evidence, the contribution that currently limits performance, and how long that account remains current. Target: name the desired measures or success predicate, representative Work that will test them, intervention and any provider, and trade-offs that must remain protected. Use only values that can change the development decision. If the holder or Work family cannot be named, stop before choosing training, tooling, or another intervention.

What goes wrong if missed. Attendance, an exercise score, a certificate, a published description, or successful provider Work can be mistaken for changed capability. A development programme can then optimize visible activity while the holder still cannot perform the target Work under its real conditions.

What this buys in practice. The project develops the capability that matters for named Work, directs effort at a real limitation, protects important conditions, and tests transfer where the capability will be used. It can stay small: use the two-sentence entry.

Not this pattern when.

  • Use A.2.2 when only a holder’s identity, qualified ability, measures, support or current reliance is current.
  • Use E.23.CAE first when previous performance or failed transfer leaves it unclear whether the live issue is envelope, configuration, applicability selection, access or activation, context-dependent expression, adaptation, enactment, or actual capability change. Its disposition is a premise, not selection of development Work.
  • Use E.22 when one evaluation question is current and no development Method is needed.
  • Use base E.23 for repeated improvement of an arbitrary object version.
  • Use C.32.MWA first only when the target-practice architecture must itself be recovered or compared.
  • Use a population assessment for a distribution or statistic over member capabilities, and C.36 for cultural generation, transmission, recognition, selection, retention, or loss.