Three artefacts carry the frame to the floor. None of them is a policy. All of them are derived from the policies — with clause references intact — so the defensibility travels with the simplicity.
One card per recurring decision moment. The station card of this model: everything a decision-maker needs, on one surface, at the point of decision. Here is one drawn from Ironbark’s People lane — chosen because it looks green and turns red, which is exactly the kind of trap a card exists to catch:
A Decision Card — laminate-grade clarity with the clause references still attached.
The scientist gets the answer; the auditor gets the trail.
The People card above is the worked anatomy. The grammar carries unchanged into the other three lanes — what changes is the check and, crucially, the route: who a decision travels to when it isn’t yours, and by what mechanism. Illustrative drafts, for red-penning:
Methods & quality governance group via validation protocol submission; accreditation scope variation if applicable. Meets monthly — intake closes one week prior.
Ethics amendment or new application, plus governance sign-off via the research governance office. Committee cycle applies — build it into the collaboration timeline.
Finance system requisition → procurement plan if required → contract brief to the financial delegate. The system carries the approval; the brief carries the reasoning.
Two phone calls tell you who to ask. But escalation isn’t always a conversation — and pretending it is loses briefs and surprises committees. When a decision isn’t yours, the card names the mechanism, so routing a decision is as designed as making one. Four routes cover the territory:
The decision moves up a level — by the standard mechanism, not a hallway chat: a form, a system step, or a one-page brief / minute. The card names which, and what attaches to it. The system carries the approval; the brief carries the reasoning.
Some decisions belong to a governance group, not a person — methods & quality, registration & scope, ethics & research governance. The card names the group, its intake (protocol, amendment, submission) and its rhythm — because a committee is a delegate with a meeting cycle.
Misconduct, public interest disclosures, procurement above threshold: the pathway is prescribed and the card simply says stop, and hand it to the pathway owner. Improvising here is the one thing the frame exists to prevent.
The calls don’t replace the mechanism — they help you take it. Call one knows the form and the intake date; call two owns the queue. Ten seconds on the card, two minutes on the phone, and the decision is travelling properly.
| Lane | Up usually means | The mechanisms the cards will name |
|---|---|---|
| PeopleDelegate-routed | A higher HR delegate under the schedule | HR / recruitment system approval steps · delegate brief or minute · workforce endorsement with a documented trail |
| CommercialDelegate-routed | A financial delegate under the financial delegations | Finance system requisition · procurement plan and threshold gates · contract brief to the delegate |
| TechnicalCommittee-routed | A governance group with technical authority | Methods & quality committee via validation protocol · registration & scope processes · accreditation scope variations |
| ResearchCommittee-routed | Ethics and research governance | Ethics application or amendment · governance sign-off via the research office · data & sample agreements |
One card per role, not per decision. A pocket summary of my tier, my greens, my ambers, my reds, and my two phone calls. It’s the artefact that makes a new Laboratory Director safe in week one instead of month six.
The build tool that produces the other two. In a working session, technical leaders name their recurring decision moments — the real ones, in their own words — and rank them by frequency and consequence. The top fifteen to twenty become the first card set. This is deliberately not an HR desktop exercise: the moments must come from the people who live them, or the cards will answer questions nobody is asking.
Later iterations extend the same grammar into the research and commercial lanes — where the maps are thinnest and the anxiety is highest — and can grow into a searchable digital version, sketched below. But the map starts as butcher’s paper and honesty.
The laminate proves the verdicts; the app makes them ambient. Same cards, same lights, same routes — searchable in ten seconds, with the calls one tap away and the record writing itself. A sketch of what the working session’s card set becomes:
The corridor test, passed on a phone — search, verdict, done. No login to a policy library.
Calls dial, forms link, committee intakes show their next closing date.
Ticked checks + timestamp become the one-line record — defensibility as a by-product, not a chore.
When the instrument changes, every card updates centrally. Laminate can drift; this can’t.
Augmented partnering, on your organisation’s hardest governance problem. When you’re ready, it starts with a conversation.
Start the conversation →