Legitimacy Diagnostic Protocol (LDP-1.0)

1. Canonical Definition

The Legitimacy Diagnostic Protocol (LDP-1.0) is the diagnostic framework used to assess structural legitimacy through proportional analysis of Truth Fidelity (T), Signal Alignment (P), Structural Coherence (C), Drift (D), and Affective Regulation (A).

Operationalizing the First Law of Moral Proportion, it identifies proportional instability early, including whether dominant exposure is Constraint Failure (KF), Closure Failure (CF), or interface-linked contradiction across coupled systems.

2. Featured Lineage

Donald Campbell — “Convergent and Discriminant Validation” (1959)
Defined criteria for construct-valid measurement. LDP-1.0 applies this by specifying indicator sets for each variable and comparability rules for interpretation.

Karl Weick — Sensemaking in Organizations (1995)
Described how meaning destabilizes when continuity cannot be maintained under pressure. LDP-1.0 adapts this by diagnosing whether proportional stability remains governable under load.

3. Plainly

LDP-1.0 measures whether a system remains reliable for shared interpretation.

It reports which variable conditions are insufficient, whether drift rate is exceeding correction throughput, and which governance failure exposure is dominant.

4. Scientific Role in Meaning System Science

LDP-1.0 translates MSS variables into observable diagnostic conditions for a declared system object.

It supports reconstructability, comparability, and trend measurement by requiring explicit scope, indicator coverage, and evidence access constraints.

5. Relationship to the Variables (T, P, C, D, A)

• T: reconstructable reference and update continuity.

• P: alignment of decision-weight signals, incentives, and authority cues to verified conditions.

• C: integrity of routing, correction, and memory pathways.

• D: drift-rate estimation using β₆ and γ₆ under declared coverage rules.

• A: correction capacity under load, including safety conditions for surfacing contradiction.

6. Relationship to the Physics of Becoming

L = (T × P × C) / D

LDP-1.0 operationalizes each component of the Law and evaluates legitimacy as a structural reliability condition rather than a perception measure.

7. Application in Transformation Science

Used to detect drift-rate conditions, quantify proportional imbalance, distinguish failure exposures, and supply inputs for modeling how stability changes across time under transformation pressure.

8. Application in Transformation Management

Used when leaders require a formal diagnostic for transformation viability, sequencing, and governance design.

When minimum evidence access is insufficient for interpretable outputs, the recommended path is to establish baseline definition, routing, and correction infrastructure using the 3E Standard™ and 3E Method™, then rerun LDP-1.0.

9. Example Failure Modes

• Evidence access is insufficient to reconstruct baselines, degrading fidelity assessment.

• Authority signals and incentives diverge from verified conditions, degrading alignment.

• Correction pathways lack enforceable closure or constraints, increasing drift rate.

• Interfaces introduce incompatible meanings across systems, producing cross-boundary instability.

10. Canonical Cross-References

Transformation Management • Meaning-System Governance • 3E Standard™ • 3E Method™ • Meaning System Science • Interpretive Event • Physics of Becoming • First Law of Moral Proportion • Proportionism • Meaning Topology • Interface • Coupling • Drift Catalysts (β₆) • Coherence Regulators (γ₆) • Closure Failure (CF) • Constraint Failure (KF) • Legitimacy (L) • Truth Fidelity (T) • Signal Alignment (P) • Structural Coherence (C) • Drift (D) • Affective Regulation (A)