Turn the confirmed map into an SOP candidate
Could someone use this procedure to do the next job?
- Source
- Current Internal package, pages/anw-l18.html (Internal b518c35b; src/hunter-week2/SOURCE.md). Original handoff: Internal PR #125.
- Copy
- Exact Internal source package, vendored without editing its lesson or prompt bytes.
- Prompts
- Prompts are rendered from the current vendored Internal package named in Source. Historical publication: student 50ab8c5c from Internal 0e2885b5; that receipt does not qualify later Outlook changes.
- Checked in the app
- Historical baseline QA: bounded integrated checks passed for fresh preparation, upgrade, supported-model native routing and tracing. This receipt does not qualify later Outlook changes. Ordinary-student and Windows qualification remain unverified.
- Open to students
- Yes.
- Other view
- one part at a time (Wade chose one part at a time; one scroll is kept to compare)
A map describes what happened. An SOP tells someone how to carry out the process next time.
Those are different jobs. If the records show that a check was skipped, copying the records into a numbered list would preserve the mistake. Cipher needs your confirmed map, the evidence behind it, and the decisions about how the process should work.
A draft SOP and your review of whether its instructions are clear and supported.
Until it is written down, the process lives in your head, and every run depends on you. An SOP lets someone else, or a fresh job, do it the same way next time without asking you.
You decide which requirements matter and which uncertainties need resolving. Drafting permission is not approval of the finished procedure.
Before you start
Use the confirmed map from Lesson 1, with its source references and your recorded decisions. If an unresolved question changes whether the process can proceed safely, settle it with the person who decides how this process runs, or define a clear stop for that situation, before treating the draft as usable. That person is usually you. If someone else in your business owns the process, they decide, and you record their answer.
Start or resume this lesson
Use the native aibl-chief-of-staff agent to start Week 2 Module 3 Lesson 2. Read course/workforce/week2/prompts/anw-l18.txt and course/workforce/week2/lessons/anw-l18.md. Ask me who will read the SOP and for one requirement, in my own words, and wait. Do not call Cipher before my go. If the named agent is unavailable, pause and ask Gigawatt to check the installation.
Name what the next person needs
One requirement. One sentence. It should be about what comes back and who has to use it. A good requirement asks for what the next person needs to act.
“Make the procedure clearer” leaves Cipher to guess. Naming the missing information gives it a job it can do. This request belongs in the work order for the drafting job; it does not change an agent’s standing instructions.
For our fictional kickoff, “check the brief” is thin. Who checks it? What are they checking? What should happen if it is not signed?
A useful proposed instruction might say that the kickoff coordinator checks for a signed brief before kickoff and pauses the kickoff if the signature cannot be verified. The coordinator and the pause are proposed details until the person who decides how the process runs confirms them. The requirement for a signed brief is the given rule in this fictional example.
Do this now: Before Chief writes anything, it asks you two things: who will read the SOP, and one requirement it must meet. Answer both in your own words. For the reader, name the person or role who will use the SOP. For the requirement, write one sentence about what that person must get from the SOP to act. Then check whether the confirmed map already answers it before asking for more work.
If you cannot tell what evidence a step needs, the original map offers a useful starting point: for a step marked stated only, identify which kind of record would show it happened and where you would find it. That does not decide anything for you. It tells you what to go and look for.
If you are choosing a new way of working, label it as your proposed change. Do not describe it as something the three examples proved.
Give Cipher a bounded drafting job
Chief writes the drafting job down as a work order at runs/<job>/work-order-sop.md. It names the version of the map you confirmed, the reader and requirement you gave, the reviewed evidence, and any decisions you or the process's owner have stated. Chief shows you the plan and waits for your go before it calls Cipher. The draft should identify its beginning and end: what starts the process, and what counts as finished.
Read Chief’s plan before the draft is written. It should ask for an SOP candidate, a version for review. It should not turn missing owners, deadlines, or permissions into invented rules.
Unknowns can remain visible in a draft. They need to say what is missing and who must answer before the affected step can be used. An instruction to stop and ask the owner may be appropriate if you actually approve it; a vague “handle as needed” does not resolve the question.
Do this now: Check the drafting plan and give your go when it matches your intent. Cipher saves the candidate at runs/<job>/process/sop-candidate.md.
You won't see a "draft" label at the top of the candidate. That is on purpose: if you approve it later, the approved SOP is an exact copy of the text Kansa reviewed, and a label would have to be edited out first. Instead, Chief keeps the status in a separate file, runs/<job>/sop/status.md, which says which version this is and that it is still a candidate. It stays a candidate until you decide.
Review five things someone needs to act
Read the candidate from beginning to end, using these five criteria. Source references and unresolved questions matter throughout.
| Criterion | What to check | In the fictional kickoff example |
|---|---|---|
| Sequence | Are the steps in a usable order, with a clear start and finish? | The signed-brief check must happen before kickoff. The SOP must distinguish arranging a meeting from being ready to hold it. |
| Owners | Is a responsible person or role named for each step? | Someone must own verifying the brief. “The team checks” does not tell the next person who acts. |
| Handoffs | Does the next person receive what they need, and know when to take over? | The person leading kickoff needs the verified brief and any unresolved questions, not just a message saying “ready.” |
| Exceptions | Does the SOP explain when to pause, what to do next, and who decides? | If the signature cannot be verified, the procedure must not quietly assume it exists or let an agent waive the requirement. |
| Evidence and uncertainty | Can important rules be traced to a source or an explicit owner decision? Are gaps still visible? | A meeting invitation supports scheduling. It does not, by itself, support a claim that the brief was signed. |
These checks help you judge usefulness, not just presentation. A neat numbered list can still leave the next person unable to act.
Do this now: Choose one step in your draft and walk through all five criteria. Open the source behind one important instruction. Then read the rest of the draft for the same problems. Record the specific passage that needs attention and why.
If your new requirement landed, point to it. If it did not, say so. Then ask: Is this more useful, or only nicer to look at? Could its intended reader act without asking you to explain an essential missing step?
Keep your review separate from the draft
Give Chief your findings in your own words. For the requirement you added, write one sentence: keep it, reword it, or drop it, and why. Dropping an unhelpful addition is a proper result. You still need the essential steps and checks for the process. Chief shows you your review exactly as you gave it and, after your yes, saves it word for word to runs/<job>/sop/owner-review-v<n>.md, where the number matches the candidate version, and points runs/<job>/sop/status.md at it. That way Kansa's independent review in Lesson 3 reads your own words, not a summary of them.
Do not overwrite the confirmed evidence map to make it match the procedure you want. The map is still the record of observed work. The candidate is the proposed way to handle future work.
Do this now: Identify the most important change you want checked or revised, or explain why the candidate already meets your requirement. Have Chief read your saved review back to you from runs/<job>/sop/owner-review-v<n>.md. If you stop here, save the exact unanswered question and the next action as well.
If you get stuck
You have several requirements and can’t choose. Pick the one whose absence bothered you most in the map. Keep your other notes, but work through this one first.
The requirement is nowhere in the draft. Did it go into the work order, or only into your notes? Check what Cipher received before deciding the agent ignored it.
If the draft is too long, read only the handoff after one step. Can you name who receives it, what they receive, and what they can do next? Use that small section to explain what is missing.
If the draft names an owner you do not recognize, check where that assignment came from. Cipher can propose a role; it cannot turn its proposal into your business decision.
If there is no evidence for a rule, distinguish an undocumented existing practice from a proposed new rule. Either may need an explicit decision, but neither should acquire a false source citation.
What you’ll keep
Keep the confirmed map, the drafting work order, the candidate’s version, your requirement, and your review. Keep source-backed statements, owner decisions, and unresolved questions distinguishable.
Before you finish
You can explain the difference between the map and the SOP. You have inspected the five criteria, checked a source reference, and recorded your own judgment. The candidate is still a draft awaiting independent review and your final decision.
Words you now own
- SOP: Written steps for carrying out the process next time.
- Candidate: A draft for review, not yet an approved procedure.
- Requirement: Something the result must provide so its intended reader can act.
- Handoff: What passes to the next person or role so they can do their part.
- Exception: A situation that needs a different step, a pause, or an owner’s decision.
Next: Lesson 3, review, revise, approve, and use the SOP.