{
  "object_name": "Decision Communication Protocol",
  "object_slug": "decision-communication-protocol",
  "version": "1.0",
  "last_reviewed": "2026-06-24",
  "owner": "LPM / Lapemo",
  "object_type": "LPM Knowledge Object",
  "primary_layers": [
    "Decision Architecture",
    "Communication Architecture",
    "Information Ecology",
    "Governance Architecture",
    "AI Amplification"
  ],
  "connected_objects": [
    "Decision Rights Model",
    "Decision Rights Matrix",
    "Decision Log",
    "Evidence Checklist",
    "Escalation Map",
    "Ownership Map",
    "Meeting Architecture",
    "AI Initiative Owner Register"
  ],
  "purpose": "Define how decisions are communicated, confirmed, stored, superseded, escalated, and made safe for AI-assisted distribution.",
  "intended_audience": [
    "Executives",
    "Transformation leaders",
    "Product leaders",
    "Governance leaders",
    "Communications owners",
    "Program leaders",
    "AI initiative owners",
    "Risk and control partners"
  ],
  "required_fields": [
    {
      "name": "Decision ID",
      "definition": "Unique identifier that connects the communication to the decision log, matrix, evidence pack, and downstream work items",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Decision title",
      "definition": "Plain-language decision name that people can recognize in search, dashboards, and communication channels",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Decision status",
      "definition": "Draft, recommendation, final, approved, rejected, escalated, exception, superseded, reversed, expired, or under review",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Communication type",
      "definition": "Decision announcement, change notice, supersession notice, escalation notice, exception notice, implementation notice, or learning notice",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Decision maker / authority",
      "definition": "Person, role, council, control body, or executive with the right to make or approve the decision",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Communication owner",
      "definition": "Person accountable for message clarity, routing, evidence links, confirmation tracking, and system-of-record update",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Affected audience",
      "definition": "Teams, functions, roles, vendors, customers, systems, AI agents, control groups, or executives affected by the decision",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Audience obligation",
      "definition": "Inform only, acknowledge, execute, stop, review, approve, challenge, escalate, or update system of record",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Message summary",
      "definition": "One-sentence explanation of what was decided and why it matters",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "What changed",
      "definition": "Specific change in policy, priority, scope, ownership, system behavior, workflow, control, risk posture, or execution plan",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Why now",
      "definition": "Trigger, evidence, incident, strategic change, dependency, regulatory need, AI signal, or governance event that caused the decision",
      "required": "Recommended"
    },
    {
      "name": "Evidence link",
      "definition": "Evidence checklist, dashboard, report, data source, model evaluation, risk record, customer signal, or meeting artifact supporting the decision",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Action required",
      "definition": "What recipients must do, by when, and where completion is captured",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Effective date",
      "definition": "Date the decision becomes active, including staged rollout or transition rules",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Expiration / review date",
      "definition": "Date the decision should be reviewed, renewed, superseded, or retired",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "System of record",
      "definition": "Decision log, Jira, ServiceNow, Confluence, SharePoint, GRC, CRM, HRIS, data catalog, model registry, or Lapemo object",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Distribution channel",
      "definition": "Executive memo, Teams, Slack, email, meeting readout, portal, in-app alert, policy notice, vendor notice, or customer communication",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Confirmation method",
      "definition": "Read receipt, acknowledgement, workflow status, control attestation, owner update, implementation evidence, or exception response",
      "required": "Required for material decisions"
    },
    {
      "name": "Escalation path",
      "definition": "Where unresolved questions, conflicts, blocked implementation, risk objections, or ownership gaps are routed",
      "required": "Required when material"
    },
    {
      "name": "AI involvement",
      "definition": "None, AI draft, AI summary, AI routing, AI translation, AI audience detection, AI evidence summary, or AI monitoring",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Human review rule",
      "definition": "Required approval before AI-assisted or automated communication is released",
      "required": "Required when AI-assisted"
    },
    {
      "name": "Supersession link",
      "definition": "Prior decision replaced by this one, or future decision that replaces this one",
      "required": "Required when applicable"
    },
    {
      "name": "Retention rule",
      "definition": "How long the message, evidence, confirmations, and decision record are retained",
      "required": "Yes"
    },
    {
      "name": "Version",
      "definition": "Artifact version, owner, last reviewed date, and change history",
      "required": "Yes"
    }
  ],
  "communication_types": [
    {
      "type": "Decision announcement",
      "use_when": "Final decision that changes direction, ownership, scope, priority, policy, process, system behavior, or AI use",
      "minimum_content": "Decision ID, authority, evidence, action required, effective date, system of record"
    },
    {
      "type": "Decision recommendation",
      "use_when": "Proposed direction not yet approved by the final decision maker",
      "minimum_content": "Status label, recommendation owner, evidence, open questions, decision deadline"
    },
    {
      "type": "Change notice",
      "use_when": "Approved change to a previously communicated decision",
      "minimum_content": "What changed, why, affected groups, implementation date, prior decision link"
    },
    {
      "type": "Supersession notice",
      "use_when": "New decision replaces, reverses, or expires an old decision",
      "minimum_content": "Old decision ID, new decision ID, reason, transition instructions, owner"
    },
    {
      "type": "Escalation notice",
      "use_when": "Decision cannot be resolved at current authority tier",
      "minimum_content": "Issue, options, evidence, blocked owner, required decision maker, deadline"
    },
    {
      "type": "Exception notice",
      "use_when": "Approved deviation from policy, standard, decision, control, or operating rule",
      "minimum_content": "Exception owner, risk tier, control owner, expiration date, review trigger"
    },
    {
      "type": "Implementation notice",
      "use_when": "Decision is moving into execution and requires action by teams or systems",
      "minimum_content": "Action owner, due date, work item links, change window, support path"
    },
    {
      "type": "Learning notice",
      "use_when": "Post-decision lesson, postmortem, control update, or operating model adjustment",
      "minimum_content": "Finding, implication, artifact update, owner, review date"
    }
  ],
  "protocol_steps": [
    {
      "step": "1. Classify the decision",
      "requirement": "Determine whether the message is a draft, recommendation, final decision, exception, escalation, change, reversal, or supersession."
    },
    {
      "step": "2. Verify authority",
      "requirement": "Confirm the decision maker has the right to decide under the decision rights model and escalation map."
    },
    {
      "step": "3. Validate evidence",
      "requirement": "Attach the minimum evidence needed to support the decision and flag stale, missing, or low-confidence sources."
    },
    {
      "step": "4. Identify affected audiences",
      "requirement": "Map who must know, who must act, who must approve, who may challenge, and which systems or AI agents are affected."
    },
    {
      "step": "5. Draft the message",
      "requirement": "State what was decided, why, what changed, what action is required, when it takes effect, and where the record lives."
    },
    {
      "step": "6. Review for risk",
      "requirement": "Apply human review for material decisions, workforce impact, customer impact, compliance impact, AI output, or external communication."
    },
    {
      "step": "7. Publish through approved channel",
      "requirement": "Send through the correct channel based on audience, severity, authority, and retention needs."
    },
    {
      "step": "8. Confirm receipt or action",
      "requirement": "Capture acknowledgement, owner update, workflow status, control attestation, or implementation evidence."
    },
    {
      "step": "9. Store the durable record",
      "requirement": "Update the decision log and link evidence, owner, action items, escalation path, and supersession rules."
    },
    {
      "step": "10. Monitor and supersede",
      "requirement": "Track questions, exceptions, implementation drift, new evidence, AI impact, and replacement decisions."
    }
  ],
  "scale_versions": [
    {
      "scale": "500+ employees",
      "profile": "Scaling company",
      "primary_job": "Prevent founder-led, hallway, Slack, or meeting-only decisions from becoming operating confusion.",
      "recommended_model": "Create a simple decision announcement standard, one decision log, named communication owner, and required effective-date/action-owner fields.",
      "failure_pattern": "Decisions announced in meetings but not documented; teams receive different versions; chat becomes source of truth; executives override without supersession.",
      "minimum_implementation": "Decision ID, decision maker, affected teams, action owner, effective date, decision log link, Teams/Slack/email announcement, review date."
    },
    {
      "scale": "5,000+ employees",
      "profile": "Scaled enterprise",
      "primary_job": "Coordinate decisions across functions, platforms, governance groups, vendors, and transformation programs.",
      "recommended_model": "Use defined communication types, audience obligations, approval rules, escalation paths, and system-of-record mappings for material decisions.",
      "failure_pattern": "Functions interpret decisions differently; governance decisions do not reach delivery teams; system changes are communicated separately from business decisions.",
      "minimum_implementation": "Authority tier, communication type, risk tier, evidence pack, affected functions, official channels, acknowledgement method, supersession link, control owner review."
    },
    {
      "scale": "10,000+ employees",
      "profile": "Enterprise ecosystem",
      "primary_job": "Control decision communication across geographies, business units, regulatory domains, AI systems, external partners, and agents.",
      "recommended_model": "Operate decision communication as an enterprise control with role-based routing, human-reviewed AI assistance, audit retention, impact analysis, and decision lineage.",
      "failure_pattern": "Regional/local variants conflict; external/vendor communication diverges from internal direction; AI summaries spread unapproved interpretations; old decisions remain discoverable.",
      "minimum_implementation": "Enterprise decision bulletin, policy/control mapping, legal/regulatory review, external communication routing, role-based distribution, AI review rule, audit trail, multilingual/localization controls."
    }
  ],
  "scoring_logic": [
    {
      "score": "0",
      "description": "Decisions are communicated informally through meetings, chat, or executive side channels with no durable record or clear audience obligation."
    },
    {
      "score": "1",
      "description": "Some decisions are announced, but messages lack authority, evidence, action owners, effective dates, or supersession rules."
    },
    {
      "score": "2",
      "description": "Major decisions are communicated through standard channels, but routing, confirmation, AI use, and system-of-record linkage are inconsistent."
    },
    {
      "score": "3",
      "description": "Material decisions have defined communication types, audience obligations, evidence links, confirmation methods, decision log updates, and escalation paths."
    },
    {
      "score": "4",
      "description": "Decision communication is governed as an enterprise capability with AI-assisted routing, human review controls, supersession lineage, action confirmation, and executive visibility."
    }
  ],
  "validation_rules": [
    "Decision communication cannot be marked final unless a decision ID, decision maker, authority tier, evidence link, effective date, and system of record are present.",
    "Any message using AI assistance must include an AI involvement value and human review rule before publication.",
    "A material decision must define affected audience, audience obligation, action required, and confirmation method.",
    "A superseded, reversed, expired, or changed decision must link to the prior decision and the replacement decision.",
    "External, customer-impacting, workforce-impacting, compliance-impacting, or high-risk AI decisions must require human approval before distribution.",
    "Chat, email, and meeting notes are valid distribution channels but not sufficient systems of record for material decisions.",
    "Every decision message must include an escalation path for questions, blocked implementation, ownership gaps, or risk objections.",
    "Status labels must be visible. Draft, recommendation, final, exception, and superseded messages cannot look the same."
  ],
  "ai_prompts": [
    {
      "name": "Classify communication",
      "instruction": "Classify this decision message as draft, recommendation, final, change notice, supersession notice, escalation notice, exception notice, implementation notice, or learning notice. Explain why."
    },
    {
      "name": "Find missing fields",
      "instruction": "Review this decision communication and identify missing authority, evidence, audience, action, effective date, system-of-record, confirmation, escalation, AI-review, or supersession fields."
    },
    {
      "name": "Rewrite for clarity",
      "instruction": "Rewrite this decision communication so recipients clearly understand what was decided, who decided, why, what changed, what action is required, where the record lives, and when it will be reviewed."
    },
    {
      "name": "Detect risk",
      "instruction": "Identify communication risks in this decision message, including unclear authority, weak evidence, ambiguous audience, hidden AI involvement, missing human review, or poor supersession linkage."
    },
    {
      "name": "Create announcement",
      "instruction": "Create a decision announcement from the decision log, evidence checklist, owner map, and escalation map. Use the correct channel and audience obligation."
    },
    {
      "name": "Supersession check",
      "instruction": "Determine whether this decision replaces, reverses, or modifies an earlier decision. If so, create the supersession notice and update required links."
    }
  ],
  "mapping_rules": [
    {
      "connected_object": "Decision Rights Model",
      "rule": "Validate authority, decision tier, role separation, and whether the communication can say final, recommendation, or escalation."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Decision Rights Matrix",
      "rule": "Identify the accountable decision maker, consulted roles, approval roles, and impacted functions."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Decision Log",
      "rule": "Store the durable record and link communication history, evidence, actions, supersession, and review dates."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Evidence Checklist",
      "rule": "Attach evidence sources, freshness, confidence, and human review status to the decision message."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Escalation Map",
      "rule": "Route unresolved objections, blocked implementation, ownership gaps, or risk events to the right authority tier."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Ownership Map",
      "rule": "Identify business owner, execution owner, control owner, data owner, platform owner, and communication owner."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "Meeting Architecture",
      "rule": "Convert meeting outcomes into official decision communication and prevent meeting notes from becoming hidden truth."
    },
    {
      "connected_object": "AI Initiative Owner Register",
      "rule": "Apply to AI initiative decisions, owner changes, model risk, human review requirements, and launch gates."
    }
  ],
  "implementation_controls": [
    {
      "control": "Audience routing",
      "description": "Route by role, function, geography, system, risk tier, ownership, and action obligation instead of blasting all employees."
    },
    {
      "control": "Human approval",
      "description": "Require accountable human review for material, high-risk, AI-assisted, external, compliance, workforce, or customer-impacting messages."
    },
    {
      "control": "Decision lineage",
      "description": "Maintain links between the original decision, message, evidence, implementation actions, exceptions, escalations, and superseding decisions."
    },
    {
      "control": "Searchability",
      "description": "Use decision IDs, titles, tags, owners, dates, and status labels so people and AI can retrieve the correct current decision."
    },
    {
      "control": "Stale communication detection",
      "description": "Flag old decisions, outdated wiki pages, duplicated announcements, and unlinked summaries that conflict with the current decision record."
    },
    {
      "control": "Confirmation tracking",
      "description": "Track acknowledgement, implementation status, exception response, control attestation, and unresolved objections."
    },
    {
      "control": "AI-safe summaries",
      "description": "AI summaries must cite the decision record and cannot introduce new obligations, owners, dates, or interpretations without approval."
    }
  ],
  "render_targets": [
    "DOCX",
    "PDF",
    "Markdown",
    "interactive website form",
    "CSV import template",
    "Lapemo in-app workflow",
    "executive summary",
    "onboarding questionnaire"
  ],
  "automation_notes": {
    "can_ai_update": true,
    "requires_human_approval": true,
    "recommended_triggers": [
      "decision status changes",
      "new superseding decision created",
      "owner is missing",
      "evidence is stale",
      "affected audience changes",
      "AI-assisted message lacks human review",
      "external communication requested",
      "old decision conflicts with active decision"
    ],
    "do_not_auto_publish": [
      "material decisions",
      "external communications",
      "workforce-impacting decisions",
      "high-risk AI decisions",
      "compliance or control decisions"
    ]
  }
}