# Treat priority categories as ordered labels

Illustrative planning brief; no automatic product import.

Synthetic planning case: An ordered priority field uses urgent=3, normal=2 and deferred=1. A summary averages one urgent and one deferred item, then calls both normal.

## Decision

Keep the two category assignments visible. Their code average of two does not convert the urgent and deferred obligations into two normal items.

## Owned work

- Recover label meanings
  - Owner role: Priority owner
  - Acceptance evidence: Codes one, two and three are category identifiers with an order.
- Retain actual assignments
  - Owner role: Reporting reviewer
  - Acceptance evidence: A remains urgent and B deferred instead of both becoming normal.
- Choose an appropriate summary
  - Owner role: Planning lead
  - Acceptance evidence: Category counts or an explicitly justified decision rule replace the unsupported average interpretation.

## Workflow

1. Recover label meanings. Check: Codes one, two and three are category identifiers with an order.
2. Retain actual assignments. Check: A remains urgent and B deferred instead of both becoming normal.
3. Choose an appropriate summary. Check: Category counts or an explicitly justified decision rule replace the unsupported average interpretation.

## Judgment

Do not infer business value or equal category spacing from database codes.


## Filled manual planning note

Keep the two category assignments visible. Their code average of two does not convert the urgent and deferred obligations into two normal items. (3+1)/2=2 is arithmetic on assigned codes. The category order alone does not establish equal distances, measured benefit or a valid averaging rule. Do not infer business value or equal category spacing from database codes.


## Workflow questions

### Are ordered categories useless?

No. They convey the declared ordering; that alone does not justify numerical distances.

### Can a separate scoring system use numbers?

Yes if its meaning and operations are explicitly justified; this category field does not supply that justification.

## Product connection

Use the owned checks and downloaded brief to discuss this planning decision alongside your TeamBoostAI tasks. Confirm available fields, roles and account features separately. The example is manual; it does not calculate live analytics, create work or run an experiment in the product.

Confirm account availability before adopting this manual outline.

## Original worked case

Synthetic records, manual planning only. No account import or live analytics.

### Inspect the invented case records

Item | Priority label | Stored example code
--- | --- | ---
A | Urgent | 3
B | Deferred | 1
Arithmetic code average | Not an item priority | 2

### Reasoning

(3+1)/2=2 is arithmetic on assigned codes. The category order alone does not establish equal distances, measured benefit or a valid averaging rule.

### Bounded result

Keep the two category assignments visible. Their code average of two does not convert the urgent and deferred obligations into two normal items.

### Distinct decision

This reviews the permitted interpretation of priority category codes, distinct from changing a priority or choosing weights.

### Limits

Do not infer business value or equal category spacing from database codes.

### Definitions and method context

- Original worked-case definitions — Definitions, policy choices, records and calculations are authored for this worksheet. No external standard, statistical validation or live product measurement is claimed.