Schedule reviews at intervals shorter than natural…

When This Fires

• When Measure feedback delay in actual time units before… (measure delay) reveals feedback latency that can't be shortened
• When designing review cadences for long-duration initiatives
• When operating in domains where natural feedback is inherently slow (health, strategy, relationships, learning)
• When you're already using leading indicators (Substitute a faster noisy signal for a slower precise one…) but want additional structured checkpoints

Common Failure Mode

Setting forcing functions at the same interval as natural feedback: "We'll review the strategy quarterly, which is when results come in." This provides zero additional checkpoints between natural signals — the forcing function and the natural feedback arrive at the same time. The review interval must be shorter to provide useful early warning.

The Protocol

(1) Identify the natural feedback latency for the activity or initiative. (2) Set the forcing function interval at 1/2 to 1/3 of the natural latency: 6-month feedback → monthly or bi-monthly reviews. 3-month feedback → monthly reviews. 1-month feedback → weekly reviews. (3) At each forcing function, review: are leading indicators (Substitute a faster noisy signal for a slower precise one…) trending as expected? Has the context changed since the last check? Are assumptions still valid? (4) Document the review — even "on track, no changes" is worth recording to maintain the review habit and create a baseline for detecting when drift begins. (5) The forcing function is itself a behavioral agent (Document every agent with five components) with a time-based trigger — apply the same design principles to ensure it fires reliably.