Linkedin | Framework – Process Explanation Post | AI Writing Assistant

⚡ Quick Start: The Most Important Fields

Focus on these core fields first for the biggest impact on your output quality.

List The Main Components Or Steps (One Per Line)

This is your framework’s structural foundation. How you organize and name these components determines whether readers grasp your methodology or get confused.

Why this works: Clear, sequential components give readers a mental model they can follow and remember. Vague or overlapping components create confusion that no amount of explanation can fix. LinkedIn readers scan quickly–they need immediate structure.

❌ “Analysis, Planning, Strategy, Execution, Review” (overlapping concepts)
✅ “1. Stakeholder Impact Assessment, 2. Resource Availability Analysis, 3. Strategic Alignment Scoring, 4. Risk-Adjusted Prioritization, 5. Implementation Sequencing” (distinct, sequential steps)

Number your components if they follow a sequence. Use descriptive names that hint at what each involves. Aim for 3-7 components–fewer feels incomplete, more becomes overwhelming to process.

💡 Pro Tip: Test each component name by asking: “Would someone unfamiliar with my framework understand what this step addresses?” If not, add clarifying words. “Assessment” alone is vague. “Stakeholder Impact Assessment” is clear.

For Each Component, What Does It Involve?

This required field transforms your framework from outline to substance. Without explanations, you’re just listing buzzwords. With them, you’re teaching a replicable methodology.

Why this works: Explanations prove you’ve thought through each component deeply. They show readers what actually happens in each step, making your framework applicable rather than aspirational. Specificity builds credibility.

Match your explanations to your components one-by-one in the same order. Keep each explanation to 1-2 sentences focusing on what happens and why it matters. Avoid jargon–explain in terms your target audience understands immediately.

⚠ Common Mistake: Don’t write generic explanations like “Analyze the situation” or “Make a decision.” Be specific about what gets analyzed, what criteria drive decisions, what outputs emerge from each step.

What Problem Does Your Framework Solve?

This field determines whether readers care about your framework. No matter how elegant your methodology, if it doesn’t clearly address a problem they face, they’ll scroll past.

Why this works: Problem-focused framing creates immediate relevance. Readers scan LinkedIn thinking “does this help me?” When you articulate their specific challenge, they engage. When you describe generic situations, they move on.

❌ “Helps with strategic planning”
✅ “Helps product teams prioritize features when facing competing stakeholder demands and limited resources”

Be specific about the situation, the constraint, and the outcome challenge. Include the context that makes the problem painful. “Limited resources” is vague. “Competing stakeholder demands and limited resources” captures the tension that creates the problem.

🎯 Strategy & Best Practices: Framework Explanation Posts

🎯 Key Takeaway: Structure your framework with clear, memorable components. Provide concrete application examples. Acknowledge limitations honestly. This combination makes abstract methodologies feel practical and builds credibility through intellectual honesty.

Make Complex Accessible Through Structure

The biggest challenge in framework posts is simplification without oversimplification. You need readers to understand the methodology without losing the nuance that makes it valuable.

Structure is your solution. Break your framework into clear components with descriptive names. Use sequential numbering if steps follow order. Create visual hierarchy through formatting even without actual diagrams.

Think of your framework explanation as teaching someone to cook from a recipe. They need to know ingredients (components), order (sequence), what to do at each step (explanations), and why each step matters (rationale). Missing any piece leaves them unable to replicate your methodology.

💡 Pro Tip: If your framework normally needs a diagram, describe the visual structure in words first. “Think of this as a funnel–we start wide with all options, then progressively narrow through each filter” gives readers a mental model even without seeing the image.

Balance Proprietary Protection With Knowledge Sharing

Many professionals worry about giving away proprietary IP when sharing frameworks. This concern often prevents sharing entirely or results in vague posts that provide no real value.

The solution isn’t to share less–it’s to share strategically. Explain the framework structure and logic clearly. Provide enough detail that readers understand how it works. But keep the specific tools, templates, calculations, or implementation details that require expertise to use effectively.

Share the “what” and “why” generously. Protect the detailed “how” when appropriate. Most readers benefit from understanding the framework conceptually. Those who need implementation support will recognize the value and reach out.

Use Concrete Examples To Prove Framework Value

Abstract frameworks feel theoretical until you ground them with real application examples. Examples transform “interesting idea” into “proven methodology I could actually use.”

Your example should show the framework in action on a real problem. Walk through how each component applied to the specific situation. Show the outcome or result that validated the approach.

Anonymize details as needed to protect confidentiality. “A Fortune 500 client” or “when launching our mobile app” provides context without identification. Focus on the pattern and result rather than specific company details.

⚠ Common Mistake: Don’t just say “I’ve used this successfully many times.” That’s a claim without evidence. Show one specific application with enough detail that readers can picture using it themselves.

Address Framework Limitations Proactively

Intellectual honesty strengthens credibility rather than weakening it. Acknowledging when your framework doesn’t apply or where alternative approaches work better shows thoughtful expertise.

Every framework has boundaries. Time constraints, resource requirements, specific contexts where it works best, situations where simpler or different approaches are more appropriate. Sharing these limitations helps readers apply your framework appropriately.

When you acknowledge limitations, you prevent readers from misapplying your framework and getting poor results. You also preempt the internal objections that might stop them from engaging. “This sounds great but probably doesn’t work for my situation” becomes “okay, this is designed for exactly my situation.”

⚠️ Common Mistakes to Avoid

Using Jargon Without Explanation

The curse of expertise makes you forget that terms obvious to you are foreign to others. When you use technical terminology, acronyms, or field-specific language without explanation, you lose readers who could benefit from your framework.

Not every reader needs frameworks dumbed down, but everyone needs jargon explained briefly. “Use the RACI matrix” assumes knowledge. “Use the RACI matrix–a tool for defining who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed for each decision” includes everyone.

Watch for acronyms, technical terms, and insider language. Either replace them with plain language or add brief explanations the first time they appear. Your framework should be accessible to smart people outside your immediate specialty.

Listing Components Without Explaining Relationships

Frameworks aren’t just lists of steps–they’re systems where components relate to each other. When you list components without explaining how they connect or inform each other, readers can’t grasp the methodology’s logic.

Explain the flow. Does each component feed into the next? Do they happen simultaneously? Do later steps loop back to refine earlier ones? Are there decision points where different components become relevant?

Your components might be perfectly designed, but if readers don’t understand why they’re in that order or how they interact, they can’t replicate your framework. Show the system, not just the parts.

⚠ Common Mistake: Avoid presenting your framework as rigid and universal. “Always start with X, then do Y” sounds dogmatic. “Typically start with X to establish foundation, then Y to build on that understanding” shows the logic while leaving room for context.

Making Your Framework Sound Too Simple Or Too Complex

Framework explanations often fail in two opposite directions: oversimplifying until the framework seems obvious and barely worth sharing, or over-complicating until it seems impractical and overwhelming.

The balance comes from focusing on substance over appearance. Don’t make your framework seem more complex than it is to appear sophisticated. Don’t strip out important nuance to seem accessible.

If your framework is relatively simple, lean into that. Simple doesn’t mean simplistic. A clear, straightforward methodology that works beats an elaborate framework nobody can follow. If your framework is necessarily complex, break it down systematically without apologizing for the depth.

Failing To Provide Application Context

Abstract frameworks feel theoretical. Without context about when and how to apply them, readers may find your methodology interesting but not actionable.

Include guidance about appropriate application contexts. What types of problems does this framework address? What situations call for this approach versus alternatives? What resources or prerequisites does implementation require?

When readers understand not just what your framework is but when to use it, they can assess fit for their situations. This increases both immediate value and the likelihood they’ll actually apply your methodology.

Being Vague About Outcomes

Frameworks should enable specific results. When you’re vague about what outcomes your framework produces, readers can’t assess whether it solves their problems or whether implementation is worth the effort.

Don’t just say “improves decision-making” or “increases effectiveness.” Quantify when possible. Specify what changes. “Reduces prioritization time by 60% while improving stakeholder alignment” is concrete. “Makes things better” is meaningless.

If you can’t quantify outcomes, describe them specifically. “Prevents scope creep by creating clear decision criteria” explains the benefit clearly even without numbers.

Sounding Promotional Rather Than Educational

The goal of framework posts is teaching, not selling. When your post reads like a sales pitch for your services rather than genuine knowledge sharing, readers disengage.

Focus on helping readers understand and apply your framework, not on convincing them you’re amazing for developing it. Share generously. Trust that demonstrating systematic thinking through quality explanation positions you better than self-promotion.

Your framework’s value should be evident through the explanation itself. You don’t need to repeatedly claim it’s revolutionary, proven, or better than alternatives. Let the substance speak.

💼 LinkedIn Best Practices & Tips

Lead With The Problem Your Framework Solves

LinkedIn’s algorithm tests posts with roughly 10% of your network first. Those readers decide whether your post gets broader distribution. Starting with a clear problem statement hooks the readers most likely to engage.

Begin with the pain point, constraint, or challenge your framework addresses. “Struggling to prioritize when every stakeholder says their request is urgent?” immediately resonates with product managers facing this exact situation.

Your framework’s elegant structure matters, but relevance matters more. Lead with relevance, then deliver structure. Readers engage when they recognize their problem in your opening.

💡 Pro Tip: Test your opening by asking: would my target audience recognize themselves in this problem statement within 3 seconds? If not, make it more specific and relatable.

Use Numbers And Specific Results To Build Credibility

Framework posts compete with countless “here’s my methodology” posts on LinkedIn. Specificity differentiates proven frameworks from untested theories.

Include specific results: “Reduced prioritization time from 2 weeks to 3 days” is stronger than “made prioritization faster.” “Used successfully across 40+ implementations” is stronger than “works in many situations.”

Numbers create mental anchors that make your framework memorable. Readers remember “the 5-step framework that cuts decision time by 60%” better than “a framework that helps with decisions.”

Break Up Text With Clear Component Headers

Framework explanations risk becoming walls of text. LinkedIn readers scroll quickly–dense paragraphs get skipped even when content is valuable.

Use formatting to create visual structure. Put component names on separate lines. Use numbering for sequential steps. Add space between components. Make it easy to scan the framework structure before reading detailed explanations.

Think of your post as a teaching document, not a blog article. Scannable structure helps readers grasp your framework quickly, then decide whether to read detailed explanations.

Position As Teaching, Not Telling

The tone of framework posts significantly impacts reception. “Here’s how to do this properly” sounds arrogant. “Here’s an approach I’ve found effective” sounds helpful.

Frame your framework as a methodology you’re sharing to help others, not a prescription everyone must follow. Use phrases like “one approach that works well” or “a framework I’ve refined” rather than “the right way” or “you should always.”

Teaching tone invites engagement and discussion. Prescriptive tone triggers resistance. Your goal is helping readers succeed, not proving you’re right.

Acknowledge Alternative Approaches

Frameworks work well for some situations and less well for others. Acknowledging this reality strengthens rather than weakens your position.

Mention when your framework applies versus when simpler or different approaches are more appropriate. Reference other methodologies in your field. Show awareness that multiple valid approaches exist.

This intellectual humility makes your framework explanation feel balanced and trustworthy. Readers appreciate guidance that helps them choose the right tool rather than insisting one tool solves everything.

💡 Pro Tip: Consider ending with “What frameworks do you use for [problem]?” This invitation to share alternative approaches generates discussion and positions you as curious learner, not rigid expert.

Include A Call To Action That Drives Application

Framework posts should lead to action–either application or discussion. Your closing determines whether readers engage or scroll past.

Invite readers to try your framework and share results. Ask what challenges they face in application. Offer to share additional resources. Request feedback on framework refinement.

“Try this framework and let me know how it goes” is more engaging than “Hope this helps!” The first invites ongoing conversation. The second closes the topic.

📋 Field-by-Field Guide

This comprehensive guide explains each form field, what to include, and how to maximize output quality.

What Is The Name Of Your Framework Or Process?

Give your framework a clear, memorable name that hints at its structure or approach. Good names help readers remember and reference your methodology.

Consider including structure indicators: “3-Phase,” “5-Step,” “RAPID” (acronym). This helps readers immediately understand framework complexity. “The Strategic Alignment Method” is clear but doesn’t indicate structure. “The 3-Phase Strategic Alignment Method” sets expectations.

Avoid overly clever names that require explanation. Your framework name should be self-explanatory or at least suggestive of what it does. “The Smith Framework” tells readers nothing. “The RAPID Decision Framework” suggests speed and decisions.

What Problem Does Your Framework Solve?

Be specific about the challenge or situation your framework addresses. This determines whether readers see your framework as relevant to their problems.

Include three elements: the situation, the constraint or conflict that creates difficulty, and the outcome challenge. “Helps teams prioritize” is incomplete. “Helps product teams prioritize features when facing competing stakeholder demands and limited resources” captures the full problem context.

Avoid vague problems like “improves decision-making” or “increases efficiency.” These could describe anything. Focus on the specific scenario where your framework provides value.

💡 Pro Tip: Test your problem statement by showing it to someone in your target audience. Do they immediately say “yes, that’s exactly my challenge” or do they need clarification? Revise until the problem resonates instantly.

Who Should Use This Framework?

Choose your primary audience carefully. This determines explanation depth, terminology level, and example types throughout your post.

“Same role/level as me” means peer-to-peer sharing–you can use insider terminology and skip basic concepts. “People earlier in career” requires more explanation and accessible language. “Senior leaders and executives” focuses on strategic value over tactical details.

Consider who most needs this framework versus who you want to impress. Teaching junior people often provides more value than impressing peers. Choose based on genuine helpfulness, not ego.

Specify Target Role (If Selected Above)

If you selected “Specific role” in the previous field, name the role here. Be as specific as helps without becoming too narrow.

“Product managers” is clear and specific. “Enterprise B2B SaaS product managers working on platforms with 50+ person engineering teams” is probably too narrow unless your framework specifically addresses that context.

Think about who would search for frameworks related to your topic. Use role names they’d use to describe themselves, not internal company titles that vary across organizations.

List The Main Components Or Steps (One Per Line)

Enter each component or step on a separate line. This creates your framework’s structural backbone–everything else explains or expands on these core elements.

If your framework follows a sequence, number the components. If components are parallel or can happen in any order, use bullets or descriptive names without numbers. The format should match your framework’s actual structure.

Aim for 3-7 components. Three feels light but works for focused frameworks. Seven is about the maximum before readers struggle to remember the structure. Five is often the sweet spot.

Keep component names concise but descriptive. “Analysis” alone is too vague. “Comprehensive multi-stakeholder analysis spanning internal and external factors” is too long. “Stakeholder Impact Analysis” hits the right balance.

For Each Component, What Does It Involve?

Explain what happens in each component, maintaining the same order as your list above. This is required–you cannot skip explanations.

Each explanation should cover: what you do in this component, why this step matters, and what output or understanding emerges. Keep explanations to 2-3 sentences each focused on substance over fluff.

Be specific about activities and outcomes. “Analyze stakeholders” is vague. “Identify all stakeholders affected by the decision and rate potential impact on each group from 1-5” is actionable.

Your explanations should enable someone to attempt your framework based on this information alone. Test by asking: could a smart person in my field follow these explanations to try my framework? If not, add clarity.

⚠ Common Mistake: Don’t just restate your component names in sentence form. “Stakeholder Analysis involves analyzing stakeholders” teaches nothing. Explain what the analysis entails and produces.

Why Is Your Framework Structured This Way?

Optional field that adds intellectual depth by explaining your framework’s underlying logic. Why these specific components? Why this particular order?

This rationale demonstrates systematic thinking that went into framework development. It helps readers understand not just what to do but why the structure works, which aids adaptation to their specific contexts.

Consider explaining: the logic behind component sequencing, why certain elements are included or excluded, how components build on or inform each other, what framework design decisions you made and why.

If your framework follows a natural progression (assess before deciding, plan before executing), that sequencing may be obvious. Focus rationale on less obvious structural choices that reveal your methodology’s sophistication.

Provide A Concrete Example Of Framework In Use

Share a specific application of your framework that shows how it worked in practice. Real examples transform abstract methodologies into tangible, credible approaches readers can picture using.

Your example should: describe the situation and problem, walk through how you applied each framework component, explain key insights or decisions that emerged, and share the outcome or result.

Anonymize details as needed for confidentiality. You can reference “a Fortune 500 financial services client” or “when launching our mobile app” without revealing identifying information. Focus on the application pattern rather than specific company details.

The goal is proving your framework works in real situations, not showcasing impressive clients. A well-told example from a modest situation beats a vague reference to prestigious work.

What Outcomes Or Results Does Your Framework Enable?

Describe what using your framework helps people achieve or avoid. This demonstrates framework value and motivates readers to learn and apply your methodology.

Include both outcome types: positive results enabled (faster decisions, better alignment, higher success rate) and negative results avoided (scope creep, wasted resources, team conflict).

Quantify when possible: “Reduces prioritization time by 60%” is stronger than “speeds up prioritization.” If you can’t quantify, be specific about qualitative improvements: “Creates documented decision criteria that prevent scope creep” is concrete even without numbers.

Consider multiple outcome dimensions: time savings, quality improvements, risk reduction, stakeholder satisfaction, team alignment. Different readers value different outcomes.

💡 Pro Tip: If you have data from multiple applications, share ranges: “Typically reduces decision time by 40-70% depending on team size and complexity” feels more credible than a single perfect number.

When Should People NOT Use This Framework?

Be honest about limitations or situations where your framework doesn’t apply well. This intellectual honesty builds credibility and helps readers apply your methodology appropriately.

Consider: time or resource requirements that may not fit all situations, contexts where simpler approaches work fine, specific scenarios where alternative methodologies are better suited, prerequisites or conditions needed for effective application.

Frame limitations constructively: “This framework works best for [situation]. For [alternative situation], consider [simpler/different approach].” You’re helping readers choose the right tool, not admitting failure.

Acknowledging limitations prevents misapplication and resulting poor outcomes that could damage your framework’s reputation. It also shows thoughtful expertise rather than dogmatic insistence.

How Did You Develop Or Refine This Framework?

Choose how your framework came to be. This provides context about methodology foundation and your credibility in sharing it.

“Created from scratch based on experience” positions you as original thinker. “Adapted from existing methodology” shows you’ve improved established approaches. “Refined through trial and error” emphasizes practical testing. “Synthesized from multiple approaches” demonstrates integrative thinking.

“Academic research or study” establishes theoretical foundation. “Prefer not to specify” is fine if you want to share the framework without the development story.

Your choice affects how readers perceive framework authority. Original creation suggests innovation. Adaptation suggests improvement. Synthesis suggests integration. Choose what matches reality and supports your positioning goals.

What Makes Your Framework Different Or Unique?

Explain how your framework differs from other approaches or what makes it particularly effective. Focus on genuine advantages rather than promotional claims.

Consider: unique structural elements, specific problems this framework addresses better than alternatives, particular contexts where this approach excels, innovations or refinements you’ve introduced.

Avoid generic claims like “more comprehensive” or “easier to use” without specifics. What exactly makes it more comprehensive? Easier than what specifically and in what way?

This field helps readers understand why they should learn your framework versus sticking with approaches they already know. Provide genuine differentiation, not marketing speak.

What Are Common Questions Or Objections About Your Framework?

List concerns people typically raise about your framework and brief responses. Proactively addressing objections strengthens credibility and helps readers overcome initial skepticism.

Common objections include: “Too time-consuming,” “Too complex for my situation,” “Requires resources I don’t have,” “Won’t work in my context,” “Sounds good but impractical.”

Format as question or concern followed by response. Keep responses brief–you’re addressing objections, not writing detailed defenses. “Too time-consuming – Actually saves time by preventing rework and misaligned decisions” is sufficient.

This demonstrates you’ve applied your framework enough to know common challenges. It also shows confidence–you’re not afraid to acknowledge and address concerns directly.

⚠ Common Mistake: Don’t dismiss objections as misunderstandings. Acknowledge the concern’s validity before explaining how your framework addresses it. “That’s a fair concern–here’s why it’s less of an issue than it appears” is better than “That’s not really a problem.”

How Should The Post End?

Choose your engagement strategy. Different endings drive different types of discussion and interaction with your network.

“Invite readers to try the framework and share results” encourages application and creates opportunities for ongoing dialogue about implementation experiences.

“Ask what frameworks they use for similar challenges” generates comparative discussion and positions your framework as one valuable approach among several.

“Offer to share more detailed resources or templates” drives direct messages and positions you as generous resource with deeper materials available.

“Request feedback on framework refinement” invites collaborative improvement and shows you’re continuing to evolve your methodology.

“Encourage discussion about applications and variations” creates open-ended conversation about how different contexts might adapt your framework.

💬 Frequently Asked Questions

What if my framework is proprietary–how much should I share?

Share the structure, logic, and core components generously. Protect the detailed implementation tools, templates, calculations, or specialized knowledge needed to use it effectively.

Think of it as teaching someone to bake versus giving them your exact recipe. Share that it’s a three-layer cake with specific flavor combinations and techniques. Keep the precise measurements, temperatures, and timing that come from experience.

Most readers benefit from conceptual understanding and appreciate the teaching. Those who need implementation support will recognize value and reach out for deeper engagement.

How technical should my explanation be?

Match your technical depth to your target audience field. If you selected “Same role/level as me,” you can use insider terminology. If targeting broader audiences, explain technical terms briefly on first use.

Test by showing your explanation to someone slightly outside your immediate specialty. Can they follow the logic even if they don’t know every term? If not, add brief clarifications or examples.

The goal is accessibility without oversimplification. Smart people can handle complexity when it’s explained clearly. They can’t handle jargon without context.

Should I include diagrams or visuals in my LinkedIn post?

LinkedIn posts work well with or without visuals. If you have a clear diagram of your framework, include it. But text-only explanations work fine when structured well.

If you normally explain your framework with visuals, describe that visual structure in words: “Think of this as a funnel–we start wide with all options, then progressively narrow through each filter.” This gives readers a mental model even without seeing the diagram.

Visual or text-only, the key is clear structure that readers can follow. Formatting, numbering, and logical flow matter more than images.

💡 Pro Tip: If you create a visual for LinkedIn, make it simple and text-readable on mobile devices. Complex flowcharts get lost on small screens. Clean, simple diagrams with readable text work better.

What if my framework seems too simple to share?

Simple doesn’t mean simplistic. If your framework solves a real problem effectively, it’s worth sharing regardless of complexity level. Many valuable frameworks are deceptively simple–the power comes from knowing when and how to apply them.

Focus on explaining why your simple framework works and when to use it. “This three-step process seems obvious, but most teams skip step two, which is why their results vary” positions simplicity as a strength.

Sometimes the most valuable contribution is taking a complex problem and showing a simple, effective solution. Don’t add complexity just to seem sophisticated.

How do I handle frameworks adapted from others’ work?

Be transparent about origins while explaining your refinements. “Based on [established methodology], I adapted it for [specific context] by [changes you made]” gives proper credit while establishing your contribution.

Adaptation isn’t plagiarism–it’s how methodologies improve. Acknowledge the foundation, explain your innovations or context-specific modifications, and focus on the value of your adapted version for your target situation.

Most readers appreciate transparency about methodology origins. It shows intellectual honesty and awareness of the field’s existing work.

Should I share results or outcomes from using my framework?

Yes, when you have them. Specific results build credibility: “Reduced prioritization time from 2 weeks to 3 days across 15 product teams” is powerful evidence.

If you lack hard data, share qualitative outcomes: “Teams report higher confidence in prioritization decisions and fewer mid-project changes.” Real benefits matter even without quantification.

Be honest about results. Ranges (“typically 40-70% improvement depending on team size”) feel more credible than perfect numbers. If you can’t quantify outcomes, focus on clear qualitative benefits.

How long should my framework explanation post be?

LinkedIn allows substantial text, but reader attention is limited. Aim for comprehensive without exhaustive–roughly 1,500-2,000 characters typically works well.

Cover: the problem solved, framework components with brief explanations, an example or two, and a call to action. Detailed implementation can be offered as follow-up resources.

If your framework needs more space, consider whether you’re explaining structure (good for LinkedIn) versus detailed implementation (better for linked articles or offered resources).

What if I receive questions about implementing my framework?

Respond thoughtfully in comments or offer to continue discussion in direct messages or calls. Questions signal genuine interest and create opportunities for deeper engagement.

Consider whether frequently asked questions should be added to future versions of your framework post. Patterns in questions reveal where your explanation needs clarity or depth.

Some questions may lead to consulting opportunities. Be helpful in public comments, then invite deeper discussion offline for complex implementation questions.

🎯 Ready to create your framework explanation?

You now have comprehensive guidance for explaining frameworks that teach while demonstrating expertise. From structural clarity to intellectual honesty, you understand how to make complex methodologies accessible.

The form offers three modes to match your available time and detail preference. Get It Done captures essential framework structure for quick sharing. Make It Shine adds examples and rationale that strengthen credibility. Perfect It provides complete control over positioning, limitations, and engagement strategy.

Start with your framework’s name and core components–the fields that define your methodology’s structure. Everything else enhances and refines, but those foundation fields create the framework explanation that helps others learn your systematic approach.