Human Constraint Audit | Is this worth mapping?

What keeps happening? Write it in one sentence.

No personality label. Use: “When X happens, they/I do Y — or fail to do Y.” The response may be obvious, or it may be avoidance, hesitation, silence, withholding or something that consistently does not happen.

Who is showing the pattern?

Is it genuinely clear what they are expected to do instead?

Yes — the standard and expected response are clear. Partly — there is still some ambiguity. No — clarity is probably still part of the problem.

Does the person know what a better response looks like?

Yes — they can explain it clearly. Partly. No — they still need teaching / clarity.

Have they demonstrated the better response before?

Yes — particularly when the pressure is lower. Sometimes / inconsistently. Not really — capability may still be missing.

What have you already tried?

Select all that genuinely occurred.

Direct feedback / conversation Coaching Training / course / talk Meetings / clearer expectations Incentives / consequences Process / role changes

What happened after those attempts?

It improved, then clearly returned. There was some improvement, but it remains inconsistent. There was little/no improvement in the first place.

Does the old response reliably come back or get stronger under particular pressure?

Yes — there is a clear pressure/trigger pattern. Possibly, but it is not clean yet. No obvious link.

What kinds of pressure are involved? Select any.

Conflict / disagreement Scrutiny / judgement Uncertainty / loss of control Mistakes / failure Visibility / status Relationship / approval risk Time / workload pressure

Describe the moment immediately before the old response appears — or the required response fails to happen.

A specific trigger is more useful than a broad story.

How long has this pattern been materially present?

Several months or longer Several weeks It is relatively new / not enough evidence yet

Could any of these simpler issues still be part of the problem?

Selecting these does not rule Mapping out. It simply tells us what else may need checking first.

Missing technical skill Unclear role / decision rights Broken process / system Insufficient resources / workload Misaligned incentive / consequence Wrong person / poor role fit

How much is this problem currently costing?

High — it materially affects decisions, standards, people or commercial performance. Meaningful — it creates repeated friction or lost performance. Low — more frustrating than consequential right now.

Add your details to see the result.

You will see the fit result on screen. Your answers are also stored so you do not have to start again if you apply for Mapping.

Name

Email

Company

Role

This audit is a business/performance screening tool, not a clinical assessment or diagnosis.

Is this pattern worth mapping?