Chapters · 7 of 8

About 16 min · Lesson and activity

Chapter 7 of 80 complete

Protect Human-Owned Decisions

Define a human-owned field boundary and show what a separate advisory output may write.

See the situation

Start with the situation below. Next, we will work through an example together before you try the activity.

Maya · Decision designer

The case

A human-scored assessment somebody wants to automate

A protected human-owned value needs an enforceable write boundary and a separate place for advisory evidence.

Components: Sponsorship, adoption, support burden, commercial position
Scored by: The CSM, by hand
Data available: Adoption measurable, tickets countable, commercial in the CRM
Proposal: A model weighs all of it nightly
Saves: About twenty minutes a week per CSM

Your task

Choose where the system’s recommendation belongs. Check that the human-owned value stays unchanged.

Need a little guidance?

You’re done when: Generated or inferred values stay separate unless the stated authority policy explicitly promotes them.

System convenience should not silently transfer decision authority.

Need a reminder? Reopen the worked example

Watch one example first

A nightly model proposes account-health changes, but the field belongs to the CSM. Its write is blocked; cited model components appear in a separate advisory panel.

Why this follows from the evidence

A label saying “human owned” is not enough: the write path must enforce the boundary. Advisory evidence can help without replacing the human decision.

GTM Lab

Saved locally

Review Policy · 0 of 8 sections started

Saved locally to your browser.

Case evidence

A human-scored assessment somebody wants to automate

Components: Sponsorship, adoption, support burden, commercial position
Scored by: The CSM, by hand
Data available: Adoption measurable, tickets countable, commercial in the CRM
Proposal: A model weighs all of it nightly
Saves: About twenty minutes a week per CSM

The data exists. Adoption is measurable, tickets are countable, the commercial position is in the CRM. A model could produce the number nightly and save every CSM twenty minutes a week.

Review workbench

Keep the human-owned value intact

Choose where the system’s second opinion belongs, then decide whether it cites the CSM’s note. Observe the account-health field before and after.

Owner, value and available evidenceCompare each statement with its source. The labels show the state of this example.

Account health · CSM-owned field

Current assessment: “At risk” · entered by the named CSM.

Source: Account health field and owner record

Supported

Supporting evidence

Adoption trend is stable; support burden rose this month. CSM note: sponsor is on leave; deputy remains engaged.

Source: Product telemetry, support system, and CSM note

Not checked

For this policy, account health is a judgment owned by the CSM. Some evidence is measured in systems; the note about the sponsor and deputy comes from the person who owns the assessment.

Where should the nightly model result go?

How does the advisory view show it used the human’s information?

Field contract · before and proposed behaviorCompare the original state with the proposed change. This preview does not change live records.

Field contract · before and proposed behavior
Item	Before	Proposed	Why
Account health	At risk · entered by CSM	CSM assessment remains unchanged	The write contract reserves this judgment for its named human owner.
Second opinion	No advisory output	No separate advisory suggestion recorded	A separate suggestion can expose agreement or disagreement without replacing the owned value.

Account health: BeforeAt risk · entered by CSM; ProposedCSM assessment remains unchanged; WhyThe write contract reserves this judgment for its named human owner.
Second opinion: BeforeNo advisory output; ProposedNo separate advisory suggestion recorded; WhyA separate suggestion can expose agreement or disagreement without replacing the owned value.

Changes save in this browser as you work.

Optional: inspect the chapter check choices

Work the case · 0 of 3 sections drafted

Decide what the system may never write

Compare these alternatives one section at a time. Check a choice to see its consequence; the draft summary below keeps the proposed changes together.

Step 1 of 3

Automating this is a bad idea, and not because the automated number would be worse. What is the test?

Whether there is enough data to train onWhether the model would be more accurate than the humanDoes the value come from the judgment itself, and is the deciding evidence mostly outside the system?

This is a proposed draft until the chapter check runs. Selecting a choice alone does not complete the chapter.

2c · Proposed

Review record draft

Review record draft · current draftCompare the original state with the proposed change. This preview does not change live records.

Review record draft · current draft
Item	Before	Proposed	Why
Automating this is a bad idea, and not because the automated number would be worse. What is the test?	No saved change in this exercise draft	Not drafted yet	Choose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
What does "advisory" have to mean for it to be worth anything?	No saved change in this exercise draft	Not drafted yet	Choose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
One detail makes advisory systems trusted rather than tolerated. Which?	No saved change in this exercise draft	Not drafted yet	Choose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.

Automating this is a bad idea, and not because the automated number would be worse. What is the test?: BeforeNo saved change in this exercise draft; ProposedNot drafted yet; WhyChoose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
What does "advisory" have to mean for it to be worth anything?: BeforeNo saved change in this exercise draft; ProposedNot drafted yet; WhyChoose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.
One detail makes advisory systems trusted rather than tolerated. Which?: BeforeNo saved change in this exercise draft; ProposedNot drafted yet; WhyChoose a proposal to see what it would add to the draft.

A choice appears here as a proposal, not as evidence that a live system changed.

Your place saves as you go.

Chapter 7 of 80 complete