Library / Strategy Principles Framework
Jump to passage
In this reading

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 05:29:54 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 05:30:57 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 05:40:05 UTC

STR.11:5.2 - A filter admits a proposal, not its expenditure

Consider a constructed four-condition filter: this quarter, reduce customer rework, allow checking within two weeks, and avoid irreversible migration for now. The following applications illustrate the difference between fitting that filter and obtaining a resource commitment.

A reversible correction to error-handling information has a supported rework contribution this quarter and a feasible two-week check. It fits the current filter. A branding proposal without a supported rework contribution remains unresolved on that condition; an irreversible migration fails the current filter.

The decision holder can now compare the fitting proposal’s contribution, whole cost and displaced work. Fitting the filter alone supplies no allocation. If the holder selects it, state the bounded work and actual resource decision.

Suppose the responsible body later changes the rule to allow irreversible migration with specified transition protection. That can reopen the migration’s eligibility; the rework, time, checking, feasibility and authorization questions still remain. If the change was merely proposed, actual selection continues under the existing rule. Preserve the earlier comparison’s basis rather than rewriting its observations.