Initial commit with translated description

references/00-core-framework.md

@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
+# Core Framework: Warp-Speed Decisioning
+
+## The 3 Pillars
+
+### 1. Scaffolding
+Rules that automate recurring decisions. Pre-made defaults so you don't re-decide the same things.
+
+**Components:**
+- Design psychology reference (laws, principles)
+- Economics fundamentals (market forces)
+- Accessibility reference (WCAG/POUR)
+- Default typefaces and type scale
+- Icon library choice
+- Design system reference
+- Default design rules
+
+### 2. Decisioning
+Process for making new decisions when scaffolds don't apply.
+
+**Workflow:**
+1. Inform simplicity — gather minimum viable context
+2. Narrow options — eliminate conflicts, prioritize alignment
+3. Weigh information — institutional knowledge → familiarity → research
+4. Arrive at decision — commit and document reasoning
+
+### 3. Crafting
+Checklists for executing decisions consistently.
+
+**Types:**
+- Checklists for new interfaces
+- Checklists for improving fidelity
+- Checklists for visual style
+- Checklists for innovation
+
+---
+
+## The Decisioning Workflow (Detail)
+
+### Step 1: What Does Institutional Knowledge Say?
+
+Institutional knowledge = existing patterns, brand guidelines, tech stack, team capabilities, business constraints.
+
+**Questions:**
+- Does an existing component/pattern solve this?
+- What does our design system prescribe?
+- What are our technical constraints?
+- What has leadership/stakeholders indicated?
+
+**Rule:** Always check internal resources before external inspiration.
+
+### Step 2: What Are Users Familiar With?
+
+User familiarity = conventions from similar products, learned behaviors, competitor patterns.
+
+**Questions:**
+- What do competitors do for this pattern?
+- What's the platform convention (iOS/Android/Web)?
+- What prior experience do users bring?
+- Jakob's Law: Users spend most time on *other* sites
+
+**Rule:** Familiarity reduces cognitive load. Novelty requires justification.
+
+### Step 3: What Does Research Say?
+
+Research = user testing, analytics, academic studies, heuristic evaluation.
+
+**Questions:**
+- Do we have usability data on this pattern?
+- What does instrumentation tell us?
+- Are there published studies on this interaction?
+- Have we tested this with users?
+
+**Rule:** Research trumps opinion, but absence of research ≠ decision paralysis.
+
+### Arriving at a Decision
+
+After weighing all three sources:
+1. If clear winner exists → choose it
+2. If conflict exists → prioritize by macro bet alignment
+3. If uncertainty remains → choose fastest to validate, plan to learn
+
+**Document your reasoning.** Future you (and teammates) will thank you.
+
+---
+
+## Staging Your Bets
+
+### Why Bets Matter
+
+Every design decision is a bet. You're wagering time and resources on an outcome. The question is whether you're betting intentionally or accidentally.
+
+### Macro vs. Micro Bets
+
+**Macro bets** = Company-level strategic bets on how to win the market
+**Micro bets** = Individual design decisions within an interface
+
+**Critical Rule:** Micro bets are only valid when intentionally supporting macro bets.
+
+### The 4 Categories of Macro Bets
+
+| Category | We win by... | Design implications |
+|----------|--------------|---------------------|
+| **Velocity** | Getting features to market faster | Reduce time-to-delivery, reuse components, find metaphors in other markets |
+| **Efficiency** | Managing waste better | Design systems, reuse patterns, reduce WIP |
+| **Accuracy** | Being right more frequently | Stronger research, measure with instrumentation, discovery sprints |
+| **Innovation** | Discovering untapped market potential | Uncover "fog of war" with better discovery, find parallels in other markets |
+
+### How to Stage Your Bets
+
+1. **Analyze your industry** — Level of competition, market maturity, disruption threats
+2. **Analyze competitors** — Leading vs. lagging, their bets, their gaps
+3. **Define customer goals** — Jobs-to-be-done statements
+4. **Name your bets** — Explicit statements of what you're betting on and why
+
+### Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) Format
+
+```
+When [situation],
+I want to [motivation],
+So I can [desired outcome].
+```
+
+**Good JTBD:** "When I get emails, I want to organize them so I don't lose important information."
+
+**Bad JTBD:** "Let me add tags, labels, and folders to my email so I can sort things according to my system."
+
+The difference: Good JTBD focuses on outcome, bad focuses on feature.
+
+---
+
+## Informing Simplicity
+
+Before diving into design:
+
+1. **Define 2-3 primary JTBD** — What are users trying to accomplish?
+2. **Identify your macro bets** — Which category is the company prioritizing?
+3. **Understand your constraints** — Time, team, tech, budget
+4. **Know your competition** — Where are they winning/losing?
+
+**Author's Note:** Do this fast or don't do it at all. Don't get stuck whiteboarding JTBD. Trust your intuition. The goal is informed speed, not perfect analysis.