Author: John Salter & Associates Consulting Services

John Salter - specialising in the facilitation of risk-based capability reviews; needs-based training; business continuity planning; crisis management exercises; and organisational debriefing. Recognised for “preventing disasters, or where that is not possible, reducing the potential for harm” Ref: Barrister H Selby, Inquest Handbook, 1998. Distracted by golf, camping, fishing, reading, red wine, movies and theatre.

Review and improve the seven A.I. Prompts

These seven prompts have strong underlying intentions: strategic planning, critical thinking, synthesis, expert reasoning, iterative improvement, adaptive learning, and self-critique. Their main weakness is that they leave too much discretion to the model—especially around output structure, evidence standards, prioritisation criteria, and how to handle missing information. Overall improvements To make the prompts more reliable and… Read More

When the Horn Is in the Picture: A Fable About Capability and Blind Spots

If your organisation’s picture of itself has been painted from one vantage point for too long, the Universal Framework offers a structured way to look again – across the same seven domains the animals uncovered together: Strategy \& Direction, Decision-Making Quality, Risk \& Resilience, Execution \& Control, People Leadership, Learning \& Improvement, and Governance \& Accountability. Every engagement, regardless of scope, is assessed against the same E1 (Exists) / E2 (Enabled) / E3 (Executed) evidence logic – so the result reflects what can be demonstrated, not just what is believed. Read More

How capable are you?

Three evidence tests (E1–E3)

For each domain we look for three levels of evidence:

E1 – Exists
Do the core structures and processes exist?
(Policies, frameworks, processes, roles, plans, registers, documented approaches.)
E2 – Enabled
Are they supported and usable?
(Clear owners, resources, training, tools, data, and regular review cycles.)
E3 – Executed
Are they actually used and making a difference?
(Real examples where they shape decisions, behaviours, investments, and outcomes.)
In practical terms, E1/E2 tell you “have we built the system?” and E3 asks “does the system change what happens?”

Maturity scale (N–P–L–F)

Evidence across E1–E3 is then converted into a four‑step maturity rating for each domain:

N – Absent
No meaningful evidence; capability does not meet current needs.
P – Ad hoc
Informal, person‑dependent, inconsistent; pockets of good practice but not reliable.
L – Defined
Documented and repeatable, but weakly enforced; often strong on design, weaker on routine use.
F – Operational
Embedded, consistent, tested, and reviewed; good evidence that it works in practice.y Read More

The Cartographer’s Lantern

In a valley often swallowed by fog, the village of Bellmere chose a new warden each year to keep its people safe from flood, fire, and storm. One autumn, a clever merchant arrived with a polished brass lantern. “This lantern,” he announced, “measures the village’s readiness. Hold it near your granaries, bridges, wells, and watchtowers.… Read More

The road ahead for the Sydney Swans

A comparison which treats Ms Ley’s quoted line “accountability must be extended to anyone who was aware of what was happening and had the power to act” as given and compares it against the well-documented legal/coronial “ought to have known” standard. Read More

How to avoid the normalization of deviance in organizations

Avoiding normalization of deviance means treating every recurring workaround, unexplained anomaly, or missed control as evidence to investigate—not proof that the underlying risk is acceptable. The core discipline is simple: past success must not redefine the standard. NASA’s safety guidance expressly warns against using prior successful outcomes to redefine acceptable performance and calls for evidence-based… Read More

How could a Capability Assessment have helped the Sydney Swans

Given this is a live, real, and highly sensitive situation – an active police investigation into alleged sexual assault, real named individuals, and potential legal action, I’ll reflect on the organisational-capability question responsibly: focusing on the governance/culture/risk lessons in the abstract, grounded in what’s publicly reported, without speculating on guilt, criminal outcomes, or unverified claims.… Read More

How could Candid Cycle have helped the Sydney Swans?

“If this needs explaining tomorrow, it needs challenging tonight.” Candid Cycles could not guarantee that the Sydney Swans avoided an alleged incident, nor should it replace police processes. But it could help a club make its behavioural standards real in high-risk settings—especially away trips, alcohol, group dynamics and team hotels—through reflection, peer challenge, early intervention… Read More

How Could Candid Cycle have helped KPMG?

Candid Cycle could not guarantee that misconduct never occurred, but it could have made it harder to normalise, conceal, and mishandle. Its greatest value would be as a structured, evidenced learning-and-escalation system around sensitive engagements, bid decisions, and whistleblower concerns. KPMG Australia’s crisis reportedly centres on alleged misuse of confidential client material to pursue other… Read More

“Missed it by that much” …

is an old joke from the TV series ‘Get Smart”https://youtube.com/shorts/PmMjifK0L5A?is=tO52zmmDYGT3cxcV This week I missed a connecting flight in Frankfurt. Having come from Australia I needed to clear the new border entry requirements. I appreciate the strategy of needing to check at the first point of entry. I did not appreciate how poorly the integration of… Read More

Alignment of the Universal Framework with the American Productivity & Quality Center’s Process Classification Framework®

Understand whether your organisation is capable, not just compliant Read More