Step 3.5
Mechanism Analysis
Why is each below-threshold dimension below threshold, and what would tell us early that an intervention is working?
Output
Mechanism Map — causal hypothesis, leading indicator, and evidence anchor for every below-threshold dimension surfaced in Step 3's Gap Analysis
Activities
| # | Activity |
|---|---|
| 1 | For each below-threshold F, S, P, T, and GD from Step 3's Gap Analysis: state the causal mechanism hypothesis in one paragraph — what specific operating reality is producing this score? |
| 2 | For each: identify the leading indicator — the metric that would move first if the mechanism hypothesis is correct and an intervention is applied. The leading indicator is distinct from the dimension score itself; it tells you in weeks rather than quarters whether the intervention is working |
| 3 | For each: anchor the mechanism hypothesis with L1 source(s), preserving Q-tier and Verification Status from Step 3 evidence |
| 4 | Flag any dimension whose mechanism sits in a non-MCM domain (operations, supply chain, finance, HR) as partially out-of-scope for MCM remediation and note the boundary explicitly — MCM-side initiatives in Step 4 will address the marketing/customer/brand component; the non-MCM component requires upstream-domain attention |
| 5 | Compile the Mechanism Map as a structured table linking each below-threshold dimension to its mechanism, leading indicator, evidence confidence, and any boundary flag — the Mechanism Map is the input to Step 4 |
Step 3.5 is the analytical bridge between Step 3's diagnosis and Step 4's action design. Its purpose is to ensure that initiatives generated at Step 4 attack named mechanisms rather than score gaps. Without an explicit mechanism step, the leap from gap to remedy risks treating symptoms rather than causes.