Loading Help…
How a jurisdiction team invites a panel of practitioners to verify a ready Seed Role and reaches a recorded, exportable consensus.
A verification round is a structured way for invited practitioners to confirm — relationship by relationship — that a Seed Role is right for their jurisdiction. The round emits a signal, never a write: consensus produces an editorial worklist that the authoring team applies in the Role Builder.
This journey is for round owners (the jurisdiction team running the round) and the panellists they invite. It assumes the role has already been authored to ready — see the Seed Roles journey for that.
One mechanism covers Delphi studies, online workshops and focus groups — the method is a label and a cadence. A round runs through the same seven steps every time.
A panellist casts exactly one verdict per relationship. The unit of verification is the relationship — does this profile belong to this role, this item to this profile — not a flat checklist.
A missing relationship is not a verdict. A panellist who spots one proposes it as a new ballot target, and other panellists then cast verdicts on the proposal in the same round.
Consensus is computed by a deterministic function when the round closes — the same inputs always yield the same outcome, with no model in the loop. For each relationship it looks only at the verdicts that were cast (abstentions are set aside) and applies two thresholds: a quorum, a minimum number of responses, and an agreement threshold, the share that must agree. The defaults are five responses and seventy per cent agreement.
A relationship clears as confirmed or rejected when both thresholds are met. If the quorum is not met it is recorded as no consensus — a common, actionable state, not a failure: the owner can extend the window or re-invite. An adjust outcome is a plurality, never a decision: the worklist shows the full spread of suggested values (for example IRI 3 from five panellists, IRI 4 from four) and the authoring team picks.
Panelists are invited and attributed: every verdict is named internally so the owner and a sponsoring body can see who voted which way and read the reasoning. This is what makes the round auditable.
Public attribution is opt-in. By default a published or shared result shows the aggregate only — "verified by 18 panellists" — and a panellist's name appears publicly only if they have opted in. The internal attributed view and the public aggregate view are kept separate.
Every closed round is preserved as a verification record — a deterministic export of the whole round: the roster, every relationship and its frozen snapshot, every verdict with its comment and timestamp, and the computed consensus with the full distribution.
The attributed and public aggregate views serve different purposes. Access to the attributed record depends on permission; the aggregate view respects the recorded attribution choices.
The record includes a hash for checking whether its contents have changed. A matching hash supports an integrity check; it does not establish the correctness of the panel’s judgements.
A verification round needs a ready Seed Role. Authoring a Seed Role end-to-end is covered in its own journey.
