# Development frameworks and activity design

This file is the evidence base the skill draws on when generating development
activities. Every activity in the output must be traceable to one of these
frameworks and must carry a single composite framework tag (see
`activity_tag_conventions.md`). Activities must be specific and behavioral.
Generic suggestions ("read a book on leadership", "attend a course on
communication") are not acceptable.

---

## 1. The 70/20/10 model (experience, exposure, education)

The organizing backbone for sequencing development. Most durable growth comes
from challenging on-the-job experience, supported by social learning, and
underpinned by a smaller amount of formal learning.

- **70 (on the job):** real work, stretch assignments, scope changes, leading a
  piece of work, deliberately practising a behavior in a live setting. This is
  where the majority of activities should sit.
- **20 (social learning):** coaching, mentoring, peer feedback, shadowing,
  observing a role model, structured debriefs with a manager.
- **10 (formal learning):** targeted courses, reading paired with application,
  structured frameworks, workshops. Formal learning is only credible when paired
  with a behavioral application step.

Sequencing rule: lead every priority with a 70 activity. A priority built only
from 20 and 10 activities is under-specified and should be reworked.

---

## 2. Deliberate practice

Skill is built by repeated, effortful practice of a specific behavior, with
immediate feedback and progressive refinement, not by exposure alone.

Design rules for a deliberate-practice activity:
- Name the single behavior being practised (one, not a cluster).
- Specify the cadence (how often, over what window).
- Specify the feedback loop (who observes, how the person reviews their own
  performance).
- Build in progressive difficulty across the time horizon.

Example (specific, behavioral): "In your next four team meetings, practise
summarising the opposing view before stating your own. Ask one trusted colleague
to note, each time, whether you did it and how it landed. Review the notes
weekly."

---

## 3. Behavioral experiments

A structured way to test a new behavior and learn from the result, drawn from
evidence-based behavior-change practice. Useful when the person holds an
assumption that limits a behavior ("if I delegate this, it will go wrong").

Structure every behavioral experiment as:
1. **Belief / prediction:** what the person currently expects will happen.
2. **The experiment:** the specific, time-boxed action they will take instead.
3. **What to observe:** the concrete signals they will watch for.
4. **Review:** when they will compare the result against the prediction.

Example: "Prediction: if you let your senior analyst run the client meeting
solo, quality will drop. Experiment: hand them the next two meetings, brief them
beforehand, and sit out. Observe: client response, decisions made, what you would
have done differently. Review at the end of the fortnight."

---

## 4. Reflection practices

Structured reflection converts experience into learning. Reflection activities
must specify a prompt and a cadence; "reflect on your leadership" is not
acceptable.

Patterns:
- **After-action review:** what did I intend, what happened, what explains the
  gap, what will I do differently. Tied to a specific recurring event.
- **Reflective journaling against a prompt:** a single recurring question tied to
  the development priority, captured briefly and regularly.
- **Feedback synthesis:** periodically gathering a small amount of targeted
  feedback and extracting one behavioral adjustment.

---

## 5. Strengths-based framing (cross-cutting)

All development content is framed around building on what the profile shows as a
strength and deploying it more deliberately, or developing an area to complement
an existing strength. No deficit language. Never frame a person or a team as
lacking, weak, deficient, or failing.

- Reframe "low on X" as "has room to develop X" or "is more naturally oriented
  to Y than X".
- Anchor each priority in a strength the person can use as leverage.
- The goal of a development priority is growth, never remediation of a deficiency.

---

## 6. Team development (team mode only)

For team mode, the frameworks above still apply, but the unit of analysis is the
team. Additional structure:

- **Collective strengths:** patterns the team shares or has well covered across
  members. Framed as assets to deploy deliberately.
- **Friction points:** describe interaction patterns and gaps in the team's
  collective makeup, never an individual's deficiency. Frame as "the team has
  less natural coverage of X" rather than naming a person as the problem.
- **Complementary pairings:** constructive, additive pairings that combine
  different orientations to mutual benefit. Always framed as both parties gaining.
- **Facilitation:** the team session is structured (agenda, discussion prompts,
  exercises) and designed so no individual is singled out negatively in front of
  the group.

See `team_mode_guardrails.md` for the confidentiality and framing rules that
govern how individuals may be referred to in team output.

---

## 7. Integration with the coaching science (expanded edition)

This file covers the activity-design frameworks. The deep practitioner edition also
draws on:
- `coaching_evidence_base.md` for the cited effectiveness and mechanism research
  (working alliance, goal-setting theory, implementation intentions, Immunity to
  Change, psychological safety) and the boundary conditions that govern good
  practice.
- `coaching_models.md` for session structures (GROW, CLEAR), solution-focused
  technique, and the Immunity to Change four-column method at full strength.
- `powerful_questions_bank.md` for tailored questioning.
- `session_arc_templates.md` and `team_coaching_frameworks.md` for the
  session/facilitation arc.

When writing activities, attach an if-then implementation intention (Gollwitzer) and
a feedback loop wherever the activity is a discrete behavior, since goal-setting
theory shows goals need feedback to work and implementation intentions close the
intention-behavior gap.
