---
interpretation: lens
---
**Mandate:** The agent **MUST** verify that the needs assessment is evidence-based, that training is confirmed as the right intervention, and that learning objectives are written in a way the design stage can actually execute against. Findings filed by this lens become the load-bearing input for everything downstream — a soft needs assessment produces soft programs.

## Check

The agent **MUST** verify and file feedback for any violation:

- **Evidence behind every gap** — every quantified gap MUST cite a specific source (data point, dated stakeholder input by role, named system telemetry). Gaps backed only by "the team thinks" or "common knowledge" are findings.
- **Knowledge / skill / will classification** — every gap MUST be classified as knowledge, skill, or will / system. Unclassified gaps mean the consultant hat couldn't credibly choose an intervention.
- **Intervention check** — training MUST be explicitly confirmed as the right lever versus process change, tooling change, hiring, or management coaching. A needs assessment that recommends training without this check is a finding.
- **Audience profile completeness** — the audience MUST be profiled with population, role, size, and the constraints that affect modality choice (geographic distribution, accessibility, time-on-job, technology access).
- **Bloom-aligned learning objectives** — every objective MUST use an action verb that names a concrete observable behavior. `Understand`, `know`, `be aware of`, and `cover` are findings, not objectives.
- **Gap-to-objective trace** — every priority-1 gap MUST have at least one objective covering it; every objective MUST trace back to a specific gap. Orphan objectives and unaddressed gaps are both findings.
- **Organizational readiness** — the assessment MUST address whether managers will reinforce the new behavior, whether learners have the conditions to apply it, and whether the surrounding system supports the change.

## Common failure modes to look for

- A target performance defined as a topic list (`knows about X`) rather than observable behavior.
- A gap quantified as a single percentage averaged across heterogeneous skills.
- A will / system gap with a training recommendation attached anyway.
- A modality recommendation that's not justified against the audience profile.
- A learning objective that names a topic (`databases`) instead of a behavior (`design a normalized schema for a transactional workload`).
- A needs assessment that confirms the gap but doesn't address whether the system around the learner will support new behavior.
