Match correction type to error type

When This Fires

• After classifying an error using Classify errors as execution, knowledge, or judgment…'s three-type taxonomy
• When designing corrections and wanting to ensure the intervention matches the error type
• During post-mortem action item design — verify each action matches its error type
• When previous corrections haven't worked — check if they targeted the wrong error type

Common Failure Mode

Applying procedural corrections to all error types: "Let's add a checklist step for this." If the error was a knowledge gap (you didn't know the API had changed), a checklist of the old API steps makes you more efficiently wrong. If the error was a judgment failure (you underestimated complexity), a checklist doesn't improve your estimation ability — it just documents the same flawed judgment.

The Protocol

(1) Classify the error (Classify errors as execution, knowledge, or judgment…): execution, knowledge, or judgment? (2) Select the matching correction class: Execution error → procedural: add a checklist step, automate the error-prone step, redesign the environment to make the right action default. Knowledge error → epistemic: identify the missing information source, subscribe to updates, establish expert consultation for this domain, add a "check for changes" step to the process. Judgment error → calibrational: start tracking predictions in this domain (Decision journal entries need six fields captured before…), add external review before consequential judgments (After irreversible commitments, schedule external reviews…), run pre-mortems for high-stakes decisions. (3) Implement the matched correction. (4) Monitor: does the error recur? If yes → either the classification was wrong (re-diagnose) or the correction within the class needs adjustment. If no → the error-correction match was right.