# Record a tie rule before selecting work

Illustrative planning brief; no automatic product import.

Synthetic planning case: Two eligible proofs both score eight under the agreed rubric. A’s receiving materials are ready on day two and B’s on day four. The declared tie rule selects earlier readiness.

## Decision

Choose A under the already-declared readiness tie rule, while retaining that both primary scores are eight. Do not invent a score difference to justify the choice.

## Owned work

- Confirm equal primary results
  - Owner role: Reviewer
  - Acceptance evidence: Both eligible proofs genuinely score eight under the same rubric.
- Check the accepted tie rule
  - Owner role: Decision owner
  - Acceptance evidence: Earlier verified readiness governs this tie.
- Record the reason for order
  - Owner role: Planner
  - Acceptance evidence: A is first because of the tie rule, not a fabricated primary-score improvement.

## Workflow

1. Confirm equal primary results. Check: Both eligible proofs genuinely score eight under the same rubric.
2. Check the accepted tie rule. Check: Earlier verified readiness governs this tie.
3. Record the reason for order. Check: A is first because of the tie rule, not a fabricated primary-score improvement.

## Judgment

A secondary policy does not establish fairness or universal priority. Preserve its local authority and evidence.


## Filled manual planning note

Choose A under the already-declared readiness tie rule, while retaining that both primary scores are eight. Do not invent a score difference to justify the choice. Primary score difference=8−8=0. The secondary ready-day comparison is two versus four under the stated policy, not an additional hidden score. A secondary policy does not establish fairness or universal priority. Preserve its local authority and evidence.


## Working artifact

- Primary scores equal / A and B both have eight / Reopen if rubric or inputs change
- Earlier readiness governs / Accepted secondary rule compares day two and four / Hold if readiness is unconfirmed
- A selected first / Rule application, not changed score / Revisit if A’s input ceases to be ready


## Workflow questions

### Can every tie use readiness?

Only if that is the accepted policy for the decision; other contexts may need another rule.

### What if the ready dates are unconfirmed?

Keep the tie unresolved until the governing secondary evidence is available.

## 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

Proof | Primary score | Ready day | Tie-rule result
--- | --- | --- | ---
A | 8 | 2 | Selected first
B | 8 | 4 | Remains next eligible option

### Reasoning

Primary score difference=8−8=0. The secondary ready-day comparison is two versus four under the stated policy, not an additional hidden score.

### Bounded result

Choose A under the already-declared readiness tie rule, while retaining that both primary scores are eight. Do not invent a score difference to justify the choice.

### Distinct decision

The artifact records a true tie and a declared secondary selection basis.

### Limits

A secondary policy does not establish fairness or universal priority. Preserve its local authority and evidence.

### 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.