Operating Context

Optional — this changes examples, not the diagnosis.

Operating Context
The American Heart Association · Test Flight 2026 Mode: Lab Decision Environment: —
Workflow / Integration Lab
Path: —
—
Reduce uncertainty at the point where approval exists — but real-world workflow absorbs the risk.
Break point: — Operational lens: — Updated: —
—, this lab is not asking you to implement anything.

It helps you see where approval collapses under workflow, handoffs, or operational cost.
The goal is not to fix the system — it’s to name what the system would require in order to say yes safely.
Diagnostic Frame
A single lens. No scoring. No action required.
What must change for this to be real?
This room exists because the Value Chain forced it. Your job is not to fix the system — just name the condition.
Interpretive Insight (Optional)
This is not guidance or instruction. It’s a translation into operational terms.
One operational interpretation of what you’ve described:
—
Lens: — Why adoption stalls: —
Capture
This is not implementation. It’s a condition statement + your field notes as you test what’s true.
Name the operational condition
In your words: what would need to be true for this to be absorbed safely into real workflow?
Suggested format
If ___ is true, the system can say yes safely because ___.
Field notes
Record observations as you test assumptions. These notes help the Lab respond more specifically and help AHA evaluate RVL readiness.
“Save note” stores locally in your browser. “Send to Lab” notifies the program team.
Example · Illustrative Lab Response (for demo purposes)
Assistive lens (AI-supported)
This is a draft interpretation to reduce cognitive load. It is not a decision and not a plan.
Lab Response
Source: Program Team (WoZ) Updated: — Break point: —
What you named (condition)
—
Interpretive read
— (Explain what kind of operational blockage this is: ownership ambiguity, absorption capacity, integration burden, risk holder mismatch, etc.)
One clarifying question
— (Single question that reduces uncertainty fastest)
Suggested test (small, reversible)
— (One tiny experiment / conversation prompt; not an implementation plan)
NPI echo (how this affects narrative usability)
— (What narrative must now do: reduce burden perception, clarify ownership, name risk mitigation, show integration path, etc.)
RVL readiness signals (observed)
  • Condition is specific (not abstract)
  • Owner / workflow attachment is named
  • Testable next question exists
  • Evidence path is plausible
Mode: Assistive Authority: Founder + system
Return to the Value Chain once you can name the operational condition blocking adoption.
Return to the Value Chain