Example pattern
How making works.
Making Pattern is built on a structural model of the making process. Not a style typology, not a personality framework. A pattern of what every act of making requires, and where your attention falls within it.
Scroll to build the model
The model
Three systems.
Every act of making operates across three systems. A Need: what is wanted or required. Resources: people, skills, tools, time. A Solution: the artifact being built. Making is the process of moving across and between them.
Six activities
Between any two systems, there is a relationship.
There are exactly six directed relationships between these three systems. Not more, not fewer. The structure falls directly from what making is. Each relationship corresponds to a distinct act of making.
Activity 1
Scoping
Resources → Need
"What's feasible given what we have?"
Scoping uses existing resources to read and shape what's needed. A strong Scoper quickly eliminates the impossible and anchors a project in reality. The risk: feasibility becomes a ceiling that caps ambition before it starts.
Activity 2
Specification
Need → Solution
"What should we make to address this need?"
Specification uses the understood need to define the solution in advance. A strong Specifier produces clarity that others can execute against. The risk: the spec is only as good as it is realistic. Some needs are unknown. Available resources change.
Activity 3
Provisioning
Need → Resources
"What capabilities must we develop?"
Provisioning uses the need to build new capacity: recruiting people, acquiring tools, developing skills. A strong Provisioner ensures the team can do what the work demands. The risk: provisioning consumes time and budget. Going over or under eats into delivery.
Activity 4
Delivery
Resources → Solution
"How do we actualize this?"
Delivery uses current resources to make the artifact. A strong Deliverer keeps things moving. Decisions get made, work gets done. The risk: speed without sufficient specification or verification accumulates debt.
Activity 5
Verification
Solution → Resources
"What does the output say about our work?"
Verification uses what was built to assess and improve the process that built it. A strong Verifier turns output into learning. Defects become signals, not failures. The risk: verification loops can delay release indefinitely.
Activity 6
Validation
Solution → Need
"Does the output meet the need?"
Validation brings the built solution back to the original need and sees if it works in context. A strong Validator prevents expensive missteps from ineffective solutions. The risk: validation pressure can override the velocity and freedom that production requires.
Attention
The same model. Different patterns.
Everyone moves through all six activities. What differs is where attention naturally flows. The symbol maps your pattern: edges color according to how much attention each activity captures. High attention flows bold. Low attention fades almost to nothing. Two makers on the same project attend to entirely different parts of the same structure.
The six attention propensities compete for a finite budget. They sum to 100%. Whatever you attend to more, you attend to something else less. That is why your pattern has tradeoffs: not because any activity is bad, but because attention is scarce and the distribution is never even.
Assessment
See your pattern.
The assessment surfaces your underlying attention pattern across all six activities. The result isn't a type or a bucket. It's a ranking that shows how you do making.
Take the Assessment