Jerry D. Smith Jr., PsyD | Breakthrough Psychological Solutions, P.L.L.C.
RCA Research Series | White Paper 4 | Version 1.0 | October 28, 2026 | 15 pages | 13 references
A governance system can delegate a decision while making implementation depend on additional permission that the mandate does not specify. Paper 4 examines how these requirements can interrupt the transition from substantive consideration to accountable disposition.
The analysis begins with the mandate in force. It distinguishes legitimate ratification, consultation, and supported intervention from supplementary assent that displaces an established approval sequence. Six propositions address mandate congruence, anticipated permission seeking, informal gatekeeping, intervention explanations, decision windows, and visible responsibility.
The paper is conceptual and methodological. It reports no original participant dataset or prevalence estimate. Constructed cases include beneficial oversight and unresolved evidence. It extends Paper 2 proposition P2E and focuses on delegated judgment and informal influence within the existing RCA framework.
The protocol supplies six nominal handling classes, seven constructed coding exercises, and conventions for versioned mandate and episode records. It is research-development material, separate from the frozen independent-review packet.
Smith, J. D., Jr. (2026). Formal delegation and informal reapproval: How additional permission requirements can interrupt accountable decisions (RCA Research Series, White Paper 4, Version 1.0). Breakthrough Psychological Solutions, P.L.L.C. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23695386
Copyright 2026 Jerry D. Smith Jr. All rights reserved subject to applicable law. This work is made publicly available for reading, downloading, and citation. No additional permission to adapt, reproduce, redistribute, or commercially reuse the work is granted by the repository deposit beyond applicable law. Contact jsmith@psychbreakthrough.com for permissions.
Formal Delegation and Informal Reapproval