# Action Map — Board Brief
> Kit 26 · Board Brief · deliverable · designed and built by I Wayan Usada — instructional design portfolio · fictional composite

## The goal (proposed, not measured)

Operations items are decided in the board meeting they are brought to, with the cost of the decision on the page.

## What people do instead

Report every indicator and ask for nothing; or lead with a confident cause the analyst's own numbers contradict; or describe the move as win-win and put the cost in an appendix.

## The actions that close the gap

| # | Behaviour | What it looks like | Where the artifact trains it |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | **Select the cards that do a job** | demand, capacity, cost and risk on the page; trend repeats and context left in the pack | five slots; "why is this here?" minutes in the read |
| 2 | **Claim a mechanism and an ask** | what is happening, because, so we ask; every part supported by a card on the page | three-part claim; unsupported or contradicted parts cost minutes or send the item back |
| 3 | **Put the cost on the page** | the money given up, in the brief itself | trade-off line; outcome six weeks later |
| 4 | **Say it in one sentence** | finding, ask and a checkable figure | written opening sentence, shown next to a model |

## What is not a training problem

- A board-pack template that requires every indicator on page one.
- No agenda question: the analyst does not know which decision the board wants to take.
- No feedback after the meeting: nobody tells the analyst why an item was deferred.

## Revision note

The earlier map rewarded a "claim register verdict" from three finished sentences and never scored card selection. Selection, the claim's parts and the cost are now each practised and scored, and the board's fifteen-minute read is built. Nothing has been measured.