pcef

name	pcef
description	Unified framework for procedure effectiveness tracking — operational and empirical.
output	{"format":"prose"}

Procedure Effectiveness

Input: $ARGUMENTS

---

Overview

Unified framework for procedure effectiveness tracking. Combines two approaches:

• OPERATIONAL: Usage logging, value ratings, tier assignments, action items
• EMPIRICAL: Correlation analysis, outcome tracking, statistical thresholds

Use operational tracking after each significant procedure use. Use empirical analysis when you have 5+ projects with structured data.

Steps

Step 1: Operational Tracking — Log Usage

After each significant procedure use (>15 minutes):

PROCEDURE USE LOG:
Procedure: [name/abbreviation]
Date: [when]
Context: [what problem/goal]
Duration: [how long]
Output quality: [1-5, where 5 = highly valuable output]
Insight generated: [Y/N — did it reveal something you didn't know?]
Action items produced: [N items]
Would use again for similar problem: [Y/N]
Notes: [anything unusual about this use]

Step 2: Operational Tracking — Rate Value

After logging, assign a value rating:

Rating	Criteria	Description
5 — Essential	Changed the outcome	Without this procedure, result would be significantly worse
4 — Valuable	Improved efficiency or quality	Could have gotten there without it, but slower/messier
3 — Useful	Provided structure	Helped organize thinking, but didn't change direction
2 — Marginal	Added little beyond what you'd do naturally	Procedure was overhead, not value
1 — Wasteful	Consumed time without benefit	Would actively avoid next time

Step 3: Operational Tracking — Assign Tier

Based on accumulated usage data:

Tier	Criteria	Action
A — Core	Average rating ≥ 4, used 5+ times	Maintain, refine, promote
B — Useful	Average rating ≥ 3, used 3+ times	Keep, improve weak areas
C — Situational	Average rating ≥ 3, used 1-2 times	Keep, monitor for more use
D — Underperforming	Average rating < 3	Revise or archive
U — Untested	Never used	Test in next relevant situation

Step 4: Empirical Analysis — Correlate with Outcomes

When you have 5+ completed projects:

1. Gather project data:

   • Project success score (1-5)
   • Which procedures were used
   • How many procedures used
   • Time from start to completion

2. Calculate correlations:

   • Does using procedure X correlate with higher project success?
   • Does using MORE procedures correlate with success (or is there diminishing returns)?
   • Do certain COMBINATIONS of procedures predict success?

3. Statistical thresholds:

   • Correlation ≥ 0.3: Weak positive relationship (investigate)
   • Correlation ≥ 0.5: Moderate positive relationship (likely useful)
   • Correlation ≥ 0.7: Strong positive relationship (definitely useful)
   • Note: With small samples, these should be interpreted cautiously

Step 5: Empirical Analysis — Identify Patterns

Look for:

Pattern	What It Means	Action
Procedure X always precedes success	X is likely valuable	Ensure X is used
Procedure X sometimes helps, sometimes doesn't	Context-dependent	Identify which contexts
Procedure X correlates with FAILURE	X may be misapplied or flawed	Investigate
Procedures X+Y together predict success	Synergy	Use them together
More procedures ≠ more success	Quality over quantity	Focus on high-value procedures
Certain procedures are never used	May be unnecessary	Archive or promote

Step 6: Generate Action Items

From the analysis:

PROCEDURE EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW:
Period: [date range]
Projects analyzed: [N]
Procedures tracked: [N]

Tier assignments:
A (Core): [list]
B (Useful): [list]
C (Situational): [list]
D (Underperforming): [list]
U (Untested): [list]

Key findings:
1. [finding] — action: [what to do]

Revisions needed:
1. [procedure] — issue: [what's wrong] — fix: [how to improve]

Archive candidates:
1. [procedure] — reason: [why it's not working]

Promotion candidates:
1. [procedure] — reason: [why it deserves more use]

When to Use

• Operational: After completing any significant procedure (>15 minutes)
• Empirical: After completing 5+ projects with structured data
• Quarterly procedure review
• When deciding to keep/archive procedures
• When procedure effectiveness is disputed
• → INVOKE: /cppd (cross-project pattern detection) for system-level patterns
• → INVOKE: /prr (procedure review) for individual procedure improvement

Verification

• Usage logged with consistent format
• Value ratings assigned honestly (not inflated)
• Tier assignments based on data (not assumptions)
• Correlations calculated with appropriate caution about sample size
• Action items are specific (not just "improve procedure X")
• Archive/promotion decisions justified