The Error Framework

Status: stub (v0, 2026-07) — GSCG port pending. The full framework is hosted externally at https://gu-27.github.io/error-framework/ (Gonzaga-branded page authored by the Faculty Director). A GSCG-branded port of the text and the interactive weighting tool into this brain and the internal site is planned. This stub exists so the brain and training portal can reference the framework now. Change-control: HIGH-IMPACT — edit via PR.

What it is

When something goes wrong, GSCG locates error, not failure. Error decomposes across three sources — Evaluator error (unclear expectations, a vague brief, a moving standard), Situational error (constraints and conditions nobody chose), and Actor error (the part the person doing the work owns). Naming all three precisely is what lets each person come back to their own slice and grow from it.

The opening move: in any accountability or feedback conversation, the person raising the issue names their own evaluator error first ("my brief was vague"). This is what makes hard conversations survivable between peers — and it is how Principle 2 (Support Each Other's Growth) gets practiced when the support is critical.

Where it applies at GSCG

• PM ↔ consultant accountability conversations (week 3, not week 9)
• Director one-on-ones and supervision-framework checkpoints (correct-and-support)
• Practice-presentation and review feedback — giving and receiving it
• Post-midpoint and end-of-semester team retros

What it is NOT

Not blame diffusion. "No single party fully owns the problem" is precision, not an excuse — the framework locates accountability exactly; it never dilutes it. Using situational or evaluator error to dodge the actor slice is a misuse, and the training version will say so unmissably.

Relationship to the principles

The Error Framework is the shared mechanism behind Principle 1 (error as growth material) and Principle 2 (critical support that lands). Canonical principles: org/mission-principles.md.