How-to guideFree templateAdded 2 Oct 2026

Pick the one problem to fix before you build

Name the single constraint to fix first, with evidence and an owner, before anyone chooses a tool.

Use it when Your team keeps jumping to apps and builds before naming the one delay or handoff that actually limits the work.

Download template

It is a simple text file. Open it in any text editor, or paste it into ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini and ask for help filling it in.

How to use it

Describe one route where value slows down. Stay with what already happens; do not invent tools yet.
Name one constraint with evidence, an owner and what better would look like. Leave blanks visible rather than guessing.
Use the stop rules before any tool shortlist. Money, legal exposure or a customer promise stays with a named human the same day.

What you will need before you start

A short picture of how work moves today for one route that already feels stuck
Someone who can decide what the organisation will focus on first
Agreement that no tool or build choice will be made until this sheet is filled

The template

Fill in the blanks for your business. This is what you get when you download or copy it.

Sheet header

Organisation or team:

Sheet owner:

Date:

Route under review (one route only):

Decision options

Give the sheet exactly one decision. These options choose the constraint, not a build.

Pick this constraint: this is the one limiting point to address first
Need more evidence: the wait is real but the cause is still unclear; set a review date
Not the constraint: another route or wait matters more; record why and park this sheet
Defer: worth another look later; not worth attention now

Constraint statement

Write one sentence that names the limiting point in plain language (decision, handoff, source quality, review or adoption). Do not name a product or vendor here.

Evidence

Where work waits, repeats, restarts or loses context
What people already said or showed (quotes or paraphrases, not invented numbers)
What is still unknown (leave blank rather than guessing)

Owner

Named owner for the next look:

Who else must be involved before a tool shortlist:

Review date:

What better looks like

One sentence that describes a better state in plain terms. Do not name a tool.

Stop rules

Do not shortlist, trial or buy a tool until this sheet has one decision option, evidence, a named owner and a review date.
Do not invent cost, frequency or revenue impact.
Money, legal wording or a promise to a customer stays with a named human owner.
If two people name different constraints, record both views and pick one with a reason, or choose Need more evidence.

See an example

A made-up example, so you can see what a filled-in version looks like.

This is an illustrative scenario, not a client case study or a measured result. Do not reuse its details as facts about your work.

A sample five-person tutoring centre with two locations in Bengaluru runs weekday after-school sessions. The owners keep shortlisting booking apps and WhatsApp bots, but nobody has yet named the one wait that actually slows new enrolments across both sites.

Sample inputs

Demonstration inputs only: one route from parent enquiry to first paid trial class across both locations. People involved: centre owner, front-desk coordinator at location A, senior tutor who covers both sites. No enrolment counts, conversion rates or revenue figures are available.

Example output

Sheet header

[Fact within this demonstration] Route under review: parent enquiry to first paid trial class across two locations. Sheet owner: [Name the centre owner].

Decision option

Decision: Pick this constraint. [Inference] Other frictions exist, but the interviews and notes point to one wait that blocks both locations.

Constraint statement

Trial class slots only get confirmed after the owner checks both location diaries by hand and replies on WhatsApp.

Evidence

[Fact within this demonstration] Front desk at location A writes enquiries in a notebook; location B uses a shared chat. The owner is the only person who says yes to a trial slot at either site. Where work waits: confirmation before the parent is told a time. What is still unknown: [How often parents drop off while waiting; leave blank]. [Inference] Owner confirmation may be the limiting point for new trials. Impact has not been measured.

Owner

Named owner for the next look: [Name the centre owner]. Who else must be involved: [Name the front-desk coordinator and the senior tutor]. Review date: [Two weeks].

What better looks like

Front desk can confirm routine weekday trial slots against a written rule without waiting for the owner on every message.

Stop rules applied

[Recommendation] Write the routine-slot rule and name who may confirm it before shortlisting any booking product or WhatsApp bot. Keep fees, refunds and promises to parents with the named owner. This recommendation is not the centre’s decision.

How to tell it is done well

The sheet has one decision option, one constraint statement, evidence with visible blanks where facts are missing, a named owner and a review date; no tool, cost or frequency was invented before the sheet was filled.

Where a person should decide

The sheet records which constraint you chose to address first; it does not prove cost, frequency or the right tool. A filled sheet is not approval to buy software or to change what customers are promised. Keep consequential actions with the named human owner.

Edit your own copy on this site

About this version

New in Kosh at version 1.1. Provider-neutral Markdown instructions; no installation or platform compatibility is implied. Runtime behaviour has not been verified across AI providers. Reuse terms have not yet been published. Background reading: Pick the Constraint Before You Pick the Build. Choosing the one constraint before any build is part of Kramaniti’s Foundation Strategy audit.

How we write Kosh templates