Create your Weak Links Decoupling Roadmap using the visual-first priority process.

Process:

Step 1: Gather your scores

• List all weak links with their Pain Signals (Ch 2) and RDS Scores (Ch 3)

• Calculate priority for each: Pain × RDS = Priority Score

• Create a table with all scores for reference

Step 2: Plot on Decision Matrix (visual first)

• Draw the four-quadrant Decision Matrix (Pain on X-axis, RDS on Y-axis)

• Plot each weak link by its Pain and RDS coordinates

• See the landscape: Where are weak links clustered? Which are clearly in upper-right?

• Visual quadrant position is more important than rigid number thresholds

Step 3: Assign to buckets (based on quadrant position)
→ Use visual placement to assign buckets:

• Decouple First: Upper-right quadrant (high pain + high RDS)

• Consider Later: Middle zones (medium pain + medium-to-high RDS)

• Keep Human-Led: Lower-right (high pain + low RDS) or Lower-left (low pain)

→ Rank within each bucket using priority scores

Step 4: Apply symptom checks to "Decouple First" bucket

• For each weak link in "Decouple First," ask: "Is this a SYMPTOM of another weak link in this bucket?"

• If YES: It's a symptom → Skip planning (will resolve when root cause is fixed)

• If NO: It's a root cause → Create full decoupling plan

• This prevents building redundant automations solving the same problem twice

Step 5: Document side benefits (cross-bucket improvements)
→ For each root cause, identify how fixing it improves weak links in OTHER buckets:

• Which symptoms does it eliminate entirely?

• Which "Consider Later" weak links does it improve (reducing their pain signals)?

• Which "Keep Human-Led" work does it lighten the burden on?

→ Quantify the cascade effects (e.g., "Pain likely drops from 5 → 2.5 signals")

Step 6: Define expected impact for #1 priority root cause
→ Current state: Time per instance, scaled time, error rate, speed (calendar days)
→ Target state: Time after decoupling, errors after decoupling, speed improvement
→ What unlocks: New capabilities, freed capacity, revenue potential
→ Be specific with metrics (not "faster," but "Day 5-6 → Day 2-3 = 3 days faster")

Step 7: Set decision points and reassessment triggers
→ Phase 1 (Decouple First): Commit now with specific success milestones (Week 6: shipped, Week 8: measured, Month 3: side benefits validated)
→ Phase 2 (Consider Later): "Reassess in Month 3 after measuring Phase 1 results and side effect impact on these weak links"
→ Don't overcommit to Phase 2 before seeing actual Phase 1 impact—pain scores may drop as side effects

What you'll have:

Decision Matrix visual showing all weak links plotted by Pain (x) and RDS (y)
Quadrant-based bucket assignments:

• Decouple First (upper-right quadrant)

• Consider Later (middle zones)

• Keep Human-Led (lower-right or lower-left)

Priority scores for ranking within buckets (Pain × RDS)

Symptom check results for "Decouple First" weak links:

• Root causes identified (full planning)

• Symptoms flagged (skip planning—resolve automatically)

Side benefits documented:

• Which symptoms eliminated

• Which "Consider Later" weak links improved (with estimated new pain scores)

• Which "Keep Human-Led" work gets lighter burden

Expected impact for #1 priority with specific metrics:

• Time freed (per instance + scaled)

• Error reduction (% before/after)

• Speed improvement (calendar days before/after)

• Capabilities unlocked (new work now possible)

Clear decision points:

• Phase 1: Commit now (root causes in "Decouple First" bucket)

• Phase 2: Reassess Month 3 (after measuring side effects)

• Keep Human-Led: Brief explanation why (judgment work, low pain, etc.)

What this gives you:

Directors get:

"Visual proof of priorities with defensible math. The Decision Matrix shows Priority 81 weak link (Sam's merge) sitting clearly in the upper-right jackpot quadrant—pain 9, RDS 9. Can present to CFO with confidence: 'This scored 2.7× higher than the next priority (30) and sits in the high-pain, high-automation quadrant. The visual and the math both say attack this first.'

Plus: 'Fixing this one root cause eliminates one symptom entirely (formula errors) and improves two other weak links as side effects (Jordan's review, Morgan's deck wait). We're not just fixing one problem—we're fixing 2.5 problems with one decoupling.'"

Team members get:

"Transparency about priorities with visual proof. The screaming weak link (9 signals, upper-right quadrant) gets addressed first—not what's politically convenient or who spoke loudest in the meeting. The symptom check protects us from wasting effort building redundant automations (we're not building separate fixes for the merge AND formula errors—we fix the root cause and the symptom disappears).

And we can see: 'My pain will drop as a side effect.' Jordan knows his error review burden (5 signals now) will likely drop to 2-3 signals after the merge is automated. The roadmap shows him he's not forgotten—his pain improves automatically when we fix the root cause."

Everyone gets:

A clear, defensible attack plan:

• Decouple this now: Priority 81 (upper-right quadrant, root cause) = Sam's merge

• This resolves automatically: Priority 27 (symptom of the merge) = formula error fixing

• Reassess this later: Priority 30 (will likely drop to ~15 after Phase 1 side effects) = Jordan's review

• Keep this human: Priority 20 (lower-right quadrant, judgment work) = Morgan's strategic review

No more debating "what should we fix first?"—the visual shows the quadrants, the math quantifies the priority, the symptom check prevents waste, and the side benefits reveal leverage.