Pick the one problem to fix before you build
Version 1.1 · Kramaniti Kosh
Intended outcome
A one-page sheet that names the single constraint to address first, with evidence, a named owner and a plain picture of what better looks like, before anyone picks a tool.
Before you begin
- 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
How to use
- 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.
Working template
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.
Demonstration
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.
Quality check
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.
Limits and human review
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.
Edition notes
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.