Micro-commitments are the floor, not the ceiling — exceed…

When This Fires

• When operationalizing any micro-commitment designed via Micro-commitments must pass three tests
• When hitting the minimum feels like failure rather than success — reframe from ceiling to floor
• When guilt about "only" meeting the minimum threatens consistency
• Complements Design three operating modes for every important process (three operating modes) with the micro-commitment-specific framing

Common Failure Mode

Ceiling framing producing guilt-driven abandonment: "I 'only' wrote 200 words three days in a row — I'm not making real progress." Three consecutive minimum-floor days IS real progress: 600 words you wouldn't have written without the commitment. The alternative (no micro-commitment) produces 0 words, not more words. Judge against zero, not against aspirational output.

The Protocol

(1) After designing a micro-commitment (Micro-commitments must pass three tests), explicitly frame it as a floor: "The minimum is [amount]. Below this, I don't drop. Above this, I welcome." (2) On high-capacity days: exceed the minimum freely. Let momentum carry you past the floor. Don't cap yourself at the minimum. (3) On low-capacity days: hit exactly the minimum and stop. Celebrate the minimum as a success — the chain is unbroken, the system is working. No additional output is required or expected. (4) Never judge a minimum-meeting day negatively. The minimum was specifically designed (Micro-commitments must pass three tests) for your worst days. Hitting it on a bad day means the design is correct. (5) Track floor-meeting consistency, not average output. A month of daily minimums (30 days × minimum) outperforms a month of three heroic days and 27 zero days.