QUINTESSENTIALS QE · Knowledge & reasoning

QE Cards / QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH

Authored provisional Card

Complete or Explicitly Renegotiate Commitments

For an acknowledged commitment, track it to completion or explicitly communicate and agree a feasible revision rather than leave it silently unresolved.

ProvisionalNot externally validated

Decision · decision_implication

D1 · Primary view

Track an acknowledged commitment through verified completion or legitimate cancellation. An accepted revision updates the still-active obligation; closing an old version must preserve a linked active successor for any remaining work.

Agree revised terms, keep remaining work active; silence is not closure.

Super rootOptimization & Control
Root familyGovernance
Parent familyCommitment Design
Principle familyFollow-Through

Recording responsibility, completion criteria and current terms makes outstanding work visible. Keep delivery, revision agreement and release from the obligation distinct: accepting new terms changes what remains due; it does not by itself complete the work.

Conditions, method, and complete role fields
Role id
D1
Stack
Decision
Role type
decision_implication
Principle type
Procedural
Classification
Status
classified
Family ref
QEF-D-FOLLOW
Taxonomy version
qe-ontology-0.1.4
Reason
Describes a policy and procedure for completing or explicitly renegotiating commitments, the membership criterion of Follow-Through, not a family for each communication action.
Role summary
Track an acknowledged commitment through verified completion or legitimate cancellation. An accepted revision updates the still-active obligation; closing an old version must preserve a linked active successor for any remaining work.
Compressed role insight
Agree revised terms, keep remaining work active; silence is not closure.
Mechanism or logic
Recording responsibility, completion criteria and current terms makes outstanding work visible. Keep delivery, revision agreement and release from the obligation distinct: accepting new terms changes what remains due; it does not by itself complete the work.
Scope
Shared condition refs
  1. S1
Additional conditions
  1. Condition id
    D-CONTACT
    Kind
    applicability
    Statement
    A legitimate channel exists to clarify the obligation with the affected party or escalate it to a responsible authority.
  2. Condition id
    D-EXCLUDE
    Kind
    boundary
    Statement
    The procedure would require performing an unsafe or prohibited act merely to honor the original promise.
Review
reviewed
Review note
Reviewed as a reusable definition; case satisfaction and empirical support are not established.
Evidence refs
  1. EV-MK-P07-C1
  2. EV-MK-P07-C2
Interpretation cautions
None recorded
Retrieval cues
  1. A promised response or delivery has no recorded resolution.
  2. A task is marked done although the recipient never accepted its revision.
Objective
Beneficiary
The responsible actor and people relying on the commitment
Desired outcome
Avoid silently abandoned obligations by completing them, keeping revised work actively tracked, or recording a legitimate release from the remaining obligation
Constraints
  1. Respect higher-priority duties, safety and applicable obligations.
  2. Do not declare a unilateral revision accepted.
  3. Use the agreed timing or clarify timing; no universal response deadline is prescribed.
Failure mode if misapplied
Blind persistence can honor an obsolete or harmful promise. Closing an accepted postponement without active tracking of remaining work can conceal abandonment; silence or unilateral changes do not establish agreement.
Action protocol
Trigger conditions
  1. An acknowledged commitment is due for action or its completion is threatened.
Steps
  1. Record the commitment, responsible actor, affected party, completion test and agreed timing; clarify missing terms.
  2. Check feasible delivery against conflicting duties and constraints. Perform and verify the agreed action when it remains appropriate.
  3. When delivery is threatened, notify the affected party promptly through a legitimate channel and state the obstacle and feasible proposed revision.
  4. Record acceptance, rejection or no response separately. Rejection or no response leaves the obligation open and unresolved under its existing terms unless a legitimate release applies; clarify or escalate rather than claim agreement. A proposed deadline does not establish acceptance; silence is not consent.
  5. When a revision is accepted, update the terms, responsible actor, completion test and timing on the active obligation. Alternatively, mark the old version superseded only after creating and linking an active successor that carries all remaining work. Acceptance of a postponed deadline is not delivery, and closing the negotiation does not close the obligation.
  6. Mark completed only after verifying the applicable completion test. Record legitimate cancellation or discharge separately, including who or what authorized the release and which remaining duties it covers; any unreleased work stays active. Superseded is a record-version status, not proof of completion or cancellation.
  7. Review due and revised commitments until their remaining work is completed or legitimately released. Check that every superseded record links to the continuing record and that revised dates stay in the active follow-up process; investigate repeated misses rather than hide them in a checklist.
Review signals
  1. Signal
    Commitments remain open after the stated completion time.
    Interpretation
    There may be missed work, unclear criteria or an unresolved revision.
    Decision use
    Confirm the status with the affected party instead of marking the item done.
  2. Signal
    Revisions are repeatedly proposed without acknowledgment.
    Interpretation
    The tracking system may be recording intent rather than agreement.
    Decision use
    Escalate or clarify through the legitimate channel; do not fabricate acceptance.
  3. Signal
    A revision is accepted or an old record is closed, but remaining work has no active record with current terms.
    Interpretation
    Agreement or record supersession may have been mistaken for delivery.
    Decision use
    Restore active tracking of all remaining work, on the current record or a linked successor; do not report it as completed.
Limitations
  1. A written record cannot prove delivery or acceptance by itself.
  2. This method does not resolve the substantive priority of conflicting legal, ethical or organizational duties.
  3. Closing a revision discussion or superseding an old record does not discharge remaining work. This procedure records legitimate releases but does not decide who has legal or organizational authority to grant one.

Evidence assessments

  1. Assessment id
    EV-MK-P07-C1
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Source location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C1 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:69; selected columns: Principle, Core meaning. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Inspected material
    supplied_text
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Relation
    inspired_by
    Support status
    inspiration_only
    Rationale
    Extract a bounded shared criterion or claim, not equivalence of complete passages. Use the commitment-completion rule as the seed. Explicit renegotiation and a completion test are QE authoring additions, not source paraphrases.
    Limitations
    1. Unfulfillable commitments may require explicit renegotiation; this is not a rule of unlimited persistence.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
  2. Assessment id
    EV-MK-P07-C2
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Source location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C2 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:70; selected columns: How it shows up in the transcript. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Inspected material
    supplied_text
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Relation
    illustrates
    Support status
    illustration_only
    Rationale
    Retain this contextual practice as an illustration of the card's decision criterion, not its universal prescription. Returning calls and closing follow-up obligations instantiate the completion rule when a commitment exists; do not mint sibling identities for each action.
    Limitations
    1. The account does not specify service deadlines or a complete follow-up system.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.

Narrative anchors

  1. Anchor id
    N-MK-P07-C2
    Kind
    supplied_case
    Summary
    Return calls, answer letters and track customer follow-up.
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Anchor role
    illustration
    Correspondence
    Retain this contextual practice as an illustration of the card's decision criterion, not its universal prescription. Returning calls and closing follow-up obligations instantiate the completion rule when a commitment exists; do not mint sibling identities for each action.
    Limitations
    1. The account does not specify service deadlines or a complete follow-up system.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.

Source interpretation

Supplied expressions and QE transformations are separate from independently verified evidence.

Mappings and added qualifications
  1. Mapping id
    MAP-MK-P07-C1
    Expression ref
    X-MK-P07-C1
    Target ref
    Kind
    card
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Mapping type
    shared_claim_extraction
    Rationale
    Extract a bounded shared criterion or claim, not equivalence of complete passages. Use the commitment-completion rule as the seed. Explicit renegotiation and a completion test are QE authoring additions, not source paraphrases.
    Qualifications added
    1. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    2. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
    Limitations
    1. Unfulfillable commitments may require explicit renegotiation; this is not a rule of unlimited persistence.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
  2. Mapping id
    MAP-MK-P07-C2
    Expression ref
    X-MK-P07-C2
    Target ref
    Kind
    card
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Mapping type
    scoped_interpretation
    Rationale
    Retain this contextual practice as an illustration of the card's decision criterion, not its universal prescription. Returning calls and closing follow-up obligations instantiate the completion rule when a commitment exists; do not mint sibling identities for each action.
    Qualifications added
    1. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    2. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
    Limitations
    1. The account does not specify service deadlines or a complete follow-up system.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
Referenced source expressions
  1. Expression id
    X-MK-P07-C1
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Wording kind
    qe_paraphrase
    Text
    Complete the commitments you make to other people.
    Location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C1 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:69; selected columns: Principle, Core meaning. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Claim status
    source_paraphrase_not_independently_verified
    Derived from expression ref
    RAW-MK-P07
  2. Expression id
    X-MK-P07-C2
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Wording kind
    qe_paraphrase
    Text
    Return calls, answer letters and track customer follow-up.
    Location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C2 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:70; selected columns: How it shows up in the transcript. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Claim status
    source_paraphrase_not_independently_verified
    Derived from expression ref
    RAW-MK-P07
Source records
  1. Source id
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Kind
    supplied_table_row
    Title
    MK-P07: Be a follow-through person
    Content
    #: 7
    Principle: Be a follow-through person
    Core meaning: Reliability and doing what you say matter enormously.
    How it shows up in the transcript: She emphasized returning calls, answering letters, follow-up lists, and customer follow-through.
    Locator
    data/provenance/supplied-tables.txt section MK-P line 15
    Reported locations
    None recorded
    Inspected material
    supplied_text
    Original source inspected
    False
    Limitations
    1. This record preserves supplied table cells, not independently inspected media or a verified author quotation.
    2. Reported times belong to the whole row; no particular contribution is assigned a finer media location.
    3. Multiple expressions from this row and earlier retellings are not independent corroboration.

Hypothetical applications

Case applicability does not establish execution, outcomes, or permission to act.

Review a threatened draft-delivery commitment · conditionally_applicable
Application
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-READY
Title
Review a threatened draft-delivery commitment
Kind
hypothetical
Fixture version
qe-canonical-review-0.1.2
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Context summary
A fictional analyst has acknowledged a draft-delivery commitment with an agreed completion test and timing. A delay is possible. The affected colleague can be contacted through the approved tracker, and a responsible manager can receive an escalation. No revision has yet been accepted.
Condition assessments
  1. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    Kind
    card
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Condition id
    S1
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst acknowledged the draft, the completion test and timing; the responsible and affected people are named.
  2. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-CONTACT
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The approved tracker reaches the colleague and provides a legitimate escalation route to the responsible manager.
  3. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-EXCLUDE
    State
    not_satisfied
    Basis
    Reviewing, delivering or seeking revision of this draft does not require an unsafe or prohibited act.
Objective assessments
  1. Objective ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    objective
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst and relying colleague choose to avoid abandoned obligations by keeping remaining work actively tracked, including after an accepted revision, until verified completion or a legitimate release. They respect conflicting duties and safety, never treat a proposal or silence as acceptance, and use agreed timing rather than an invented universal deadline.
Activation assessments
  1. Trigger ref
    Role ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Trigger index
    0
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The acknowledged draft delivery is threatened by a possible delay.
Limitations
  1. Stipulated fictional case, not an observation about the supplied authors or companies.
  2. The result checks declared prerequisites only; it does not establish evidence quality, completed steps, an outcome or authorization.
Derived result
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-READY
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Definition scope review
reviewed
Case applicability
conditionally_applicable
Unknown checks
None recorded
Failed checks
None recorded
Evaluated dimensions
  1. declared_scope
  2. required_role_objectives
  3. action_activation
Meaning
Only explicitly declared obligations in the uses/requires closure are assessed. Missing checks are unknown. Not empirical validation, procedure completion, or action authorization.
Follow: unknown · undetermined
Application
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-UNKNOWN
Title
Follow: unknown
Kind
hypothetical
Fixture version
qe-canonical-review-0.1.2
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Context summary
Baseline scenario: A fictional analyst has acknowledged a draft-delivery commitment with an agreed completion test and timing. A delay is possible. The affected colleague can be contacted through the approved tracker, and a responsible manager can receive an escalation. No revision has yet been accepted.
Variant override: The colleague's tracker access is uncertain and no authorized escalation contact has been confirmed. There is still an acknowledged threatened obligation.
All other baseline stipulations remain unchanged.
Condition assessments
  1. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    Kind
    card
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Condition id
    S1
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst acknowledged the draft, the completion test and timing; the responsible and affected people are named.
  2. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-CONTACT
    State
    unknown
    Basis
    A legitimate channel to the affected party or responsible authority has not been confirmed.
  3. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-EXCLUDE
    State
    not_satisfied
    Basis
    Reviewing, delivering or seeking revision of this draft does not require an unsafe or prohibited act.
Objective assessments
  1. Objective ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    objective
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst and relying colleague choose to avoid abandoned obligations by keeping remaining work actively tracked, including after an accepted revision, until verified completion or a legitimate release. They respect conflicting duties and safety, never treat a proposal or silence as acceptance, and use agreed timing rather than an invented universal deadline.
Activation assessments
  1. Trigger ref
    Role ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Trigger index
    0
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The acknowledged draft delivery is threatened by a possible delay.
Limitations
  1. Stipulated fictional case, not an observation about the supplied authors or companies.
  2. The result checks declared prerequisites only; it does not establish evidence quality, completed steps, an outcome or authorization.
Derived result
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-UNKNOWN
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Definition scope review
reviewed
Case applicability
undetermined
Unknown checks
  1. Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-CONTACT
Failed checks
None recorded
Evaluated dimensions
  1. declared_scope
  2. required_role_objectives
  3. action_activation
Meaning
Only explicitly declared obligations in the uses/requires closure are assessed. Missing checks are unknown. Not empirical validation, procedure completion, or action authorization.
Follow: outside · outside_recorded_conditions
Application
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-OUTSIDE
Title
Follow: outside
Kind
hypothetical
Fixture version
qe-canonical-review-0.1.2
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Context summary
Baseline scenario: A fictional analyst has acknowledged a draft-delivery commitment with an agreed completion test and timing. A delay is possible. The affected colleague can be contacted through the approved tracker, and a responsible manager can receive an escalation. No revision has yet been accepted.
Variant override: The draft is no longer threatened and is not due for action. Its acknowledged terms and legitimate contact channel remain valid.
All other baseline stipulations remain unchanged.
Condition assessments
  1. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    Kind
    card
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Condition id
    S1
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst acknowledged the draft, the completion test and timing; the responsible and affected people are named.
  2. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-CONTACT
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The approved tracker reaches the colleague and provides a legitimate escalation route to the responsible manager.
  3. Condition ref
    Owner ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Condition id
    D-EXCLUDE
    State
    not_satisfied
    Basis
    Reviewing, delivering or seeking revision of this draft does not require an unsafe or prohibited act.
Objective assessments
  1. Objective ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    objective
    State
    satisfied
    Basis
    The analyst and relying colleague choose to avoid abandoned obligations by keeping remaining work actively tracked, including after an accepted revision, until verified completion or a legitimate release. They respect conflicting duties and safety, never treat a proposal or silence as acceptance, and use agreed timing rather than an invented universal deadline.
Activation assessments
  1. Trigger ref
    Role ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Trigger index
    0
    State
    not_satisfied
    Basis
    No current due action or threatened completion activates this particular procedure.
Limitations
  1. Stipulated fictional case, not an observation about the supplied authors or companies.
  2. The result checks declared prerequisites only; it does not establish evidence quality, completed steps, an outcome or authorization.
Derived result
Application id
APP-FOLLOW-OUTSIDE
Entry role ref
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
Kind
role
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Role id
D1
Definition scope review
reviewed
Case applicability
outside_recorded_conditions
Unknown checks
None recorded
Failed checks
  1. Trigger ref
    Role ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Trigger index
    0
Evaluated dimensions
  1. declared_scope
  2. required_role_objectives
  3. action_activation
Meaning
Only explicitly declared obligations in the uses/requires closure are assessed. Missing checks are unknown. Not empirical validation, procedure completion, or action authorization.
Complete assembled Card
Card id
QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
Title
Complete or Explicitly Renegotiate Commitments
Card kind
principle
Canonical principle
For an acknowledged commitment, track it to completion or explicitly communicate and agree a feasible revision rather than leave it silently unresolved.
Primary role ref
D1
Status
Provisional
Version
qe-canonical-batch-001-0.1.1
Evidence status
not_externally_validated
Shared scope
Conditions
  1. Condition id
    S1
    Kind
    applicability
    Statement
    An identifiable commitment has been acknowledged by a responsible actor, with a completion condition that is agreed or can be clarified.
Review
reviewed
Review note
Scope separates the reusable concept from particular organizations and case outcomes.
Stack roles
  1. Role id
    D1
    Stack
    Decision
    Role type
    decision_implication
    Principle type
    Procedural
    Classification
    Status
    classified
    Family ref
    QEF-D-FOLLOW
    Taxonomy version
    qe-ontology-0.1.4
    Reason
    Describes a policy and procedure for completing or explicitly renegotiating commitments, the membership criterion of Follow-Through, not a family for each communication action.
    Role summary
    Track an acknowledged commitment through verified completion or legitimate cancellation. An accepted revision updates the still-active obligation; closing an old version must preserve a linked active successor for any remaining work.
    Compressed role insight
    Agree revised terms, keep remaining work active; silence is not closure.
    Mechanism or logic
    Recording responsibility, completion criteria and current terms makes outstanding work visible. Keep delivery, revision agreement and release from the obligation distinct: accepting new terms changes what remains due; it does not by itself complete the work.
    Scope
    Shared condition refs
    1. S1
    Additional conditions
    1. Condition id
      D-CONTACT
      Kind
      applicability
      Statement
      A legitimate channel exists to clarify the obligation with the affected party or escalate it to a responsible authority.
    2. Condition id
      D-EXCLUDE
      Kind
      boundary
      Statement
      The procedure would require performing an unsafe or prohibited act merely to honor the original promise.
    Review
    reviewed
    Review note
    Reviewed as a reusable definition; case satisfaction and empirical support are not established.
    Evidence refs
    1. EV-MK-P07-C1
    2. EV-MK-P07-C2
    Interpretation cautions
    None recorded
    Retrieval cues
    1. A promised response or delivery has no recorded resolution.
    2. A task is marked done although the recipient never accepted its revision.
    Objective
    Beneficiary
    The responsible actor and people relying on the commitment
    Desired outcome
    Avoid silently abandoned obligations by completing them, keeping revised work actively tracked, or recording a legitimate release from the remaining obligation
    Constraints
    1. Respect higher-priority duties, safety and applicable obligations.
    2. Do not declare a unilateral revision accepted.
    3. Use the agreed timing or clarify timing; no universal response deadline is prescribed.
    Failure mode if misapplied
    Blind persistence can honor an obsolete or harmful promise. Closing an accepted postponement without active tracking of remaining work can conceal abandonment; silence or unilateral changes do not establish agreement.
    Action protocol
    Trigger conditions
    1. An acknowledged commitment is due for action or its completion is threatened.
    Steps
    1. Record the commitment, responsible actor, affected party, completion test and agreed timing; clarify missing terms.
    2. Check feasible delivery against conflicting duties and constraints. Perform and verify the agreed action when it remains appropriate.
    3. When delivery is threatened, notify the affected party promptly through a legitimate channel and state the obstacle and feasible proposed revision.
    4. Record acceptance, rejection or no response separately. Rejection or no response leaves the obligation open and unresolved under its existing terms unless a legitimate release applies; clarify or escalate rather than claim agreement. A proposed deadline does not establish acceptance; silence is not consent.
    5. When a revision is accepted, update the terms, responsible actor, completion test and timing on the active obligation. Alternatively, mark the old version superseded only after creating and linking an active successor that carries all remaining work. Acceptance of a postponed deadline is not delivery, and closing the negotiation does not close the obligation.
    6. Mark completed only after verifying the applicable completion test. Record legitimate cancellation or discharge separately, including who or what authorized the release and which remaining duties it covers; any unreleased work stays active. Superseded is a record-version status, not proof of completion or cancellation.
    7. Review due and revised commitments until their remaining work is completed or legitimately released. Check that every superseded record links to the continuing record and that revised dates stay in the active follow-up process; investigate repeated misses rather than hide them in a checklist.
    Review signals
    1. Signal
      Commitments remain open after the stated completion time.
      Interpretation
      There may be missed work, unclear criteria or an unresolved revision.
      Decision use
      Confirm the status with the affected party instead of marking the item done.
    2. Signal
      Revisions are repeatedly proposed without acknowledgment.
      Interpretation
      The tracking system may be recording intent rather than agreement.
      Decision use
      Escalate or clarify through the legitimate channel; do not fabricate acceptance.
    3. Signal
      A revision is accepted or an old record is closed, but remaining work has no active record with current terms.
      Interpretation
      Agreement or record supersession may have been mistaken for delivery.
      Decision use
      Restore active tracking of all remaining work, on the current record or a linked successor; do not report it as completed.
    Limitations
    1. A written record cannot prove delivery or acceptance by itself.
    2. This method does not resolve the substantive priority of conflicting legal, ethical or organizational duties.
    3. Closing a revision discussion or superseding an old record does not discharge remaining work. This procedure records legitimate releases but does not decide who has legal or organizational authority to grant one.
Bridge relations
None recorded
Bridges
None recorded
Concept relations
None recorded
Source references
  1. SRC-ROW-MK-P07
Evidence assessments
  1. Assessment id
    EV-MK-P07-C1
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Source location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C1 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:69; selected columns: Principle, Core meaning. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Inspected material
    supplied_text
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Relation
    inspired_by
    Support status
    inspiration_only
    Rationale
    Extract a bounded shared criterion or claim, not equivalence of complete passages. Use the commitment-completion rule as the seed. Explicit renegotiation and a completion test are QE authoring additions, not source paraphrases.
    Limitations
    1. Unfulfillable commitments may require explicit renegotiation; this is not a rule of unlimited persistence.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
  2. Assessment id
    EV-MK-P07-C2
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Source location
    QE contribution MK-P07/C2 at data/interpretation/supplied-contributions.md:70; selected columns: How it shows up in the transcript. Reported media locations remain at source-row level.
    Inspected material
    supplied_text
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Relation
    illustrates
    Support status
    illustration_only
    Rationale
    Retain this contextual practice as an illustration of the card's decision criterion, not its universal prescription. Returning calls and closing follow-up obligations instantiate the completion rule when a commitment exists; do not mint sibling identities for each action.
    Limitations
    1. The account does not specify service deadlines or a complete follow-up system.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
Case observations
None recorded
Narrative anchors
  1. Anchor id
    N-MK-P07-C2
    Kind
    supplied_case
    Summary
    Return calls, answer letters and track customer follow-up.
    Source ref
    SRC-ROW-MK-P07
    Target ref
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH/D1
    Kind
    role
    Card id
    QE-FOLLOW-THROUGH
    Role id
    D1
    Field
    role_summary
    Anchor role
    illustration
    Correspondence
    Retain this contextual practice as an illustration of the card's decision criterion, not its universal prescription. Returning calls and closing follow-up obligations instantiate the completion rule when a commitment exists; do not mint sibling identities for each action.
    Limitations
    1. The account does not specify service deadlines or a complete follow-up system.
    2. The supplied cells remain unverified source accounts. This mapping neither attributes the complete authored procedure to the source nor establishes empirical support.
    3. Apply the procedure only to an acknowledged commitment with a clarifiable completion test.
    4. Explicit agreement to revision, recording acceptance separately from silence and conflict handling are QE-added requirements.
Interpretation cautions
  1. A voluntary follow-up contact is not automatically an acknowledged obligation.
  2. Explicit renegotiation, the completion check and exception handling are QE additions, not literal Mary Kay instructions.
  3. Supplied accounts are source material, not independently verified support for this reusable definition or procedure.
Notes
Candidate maintained definition for batch 001. Source paraphrases, authoring additions and case reports have separate lineage; no external validation is asserted. Acceptance repair V02 distinguishes a revised active obligation, a superseded record, verified completion and legitimate cancellation; the source does not supply this record-handling procedure. See docs/QE-CANONICAL-ACCEPTANCE-REPAIRS.md.