Pilot Runbook — Interpersonal Line Suite

Status: Draft — awaiting facilitator assignment, clinical backup confirmation, and SME review before pilot launch.

Purpose: Validate the Interpersonal Line module suite (EI-08 through EI-11, with EI-07 as integration capstone) before public release. This pilot tests whether the module sequence, perspective-taking and repair practice safety, trust-building across difference in a diverse cohort, and competency progression hold up with a multi-stage, multi-identity adult cohort.

Who this runbook is for: The pilot facilitator and program lead. It contains everything needed to recruit, screen, orient, and run the pilot — including consent language, data collection templates, safety protocols, and revision trigger criteria.

What this runbook does not cover: Post-pilot revision report compilation and backlog issue creation (separate task), platform infrastructure (hosting, scheduling tools, payment), or legal review of consent forms (required before launch).

Relationship to EI-21 (Emotional Line Pilot): This pilot is the companion to the Emotional Line pilot. While the two pilots are independent, they share the integration capstone module (EI-07: Emotional–Interpersonal Integration) and the EI-20 Safety Addendum. Participants who complete both pilots (sequentially or concurrently) provide the richest data on the full Emotional + Interpersonal curriculum. If running both pilots, consider offering participants the option to continue from the Emotional pilot into the Interpersonal pilot.

1. Pilot Objectives

The pilot must answer five questions:

#	Objective	How validated
1	Module sequence validity: Does the 4-module Interpersonal sequence (Overview → Perspective-Taking → Repair → Cross-Difference Dialogue, capped by Integration) produce coherent developmental progression? Do participants report bottlenecks, gaps, or mis-ordered content?	Module completion rates, qualitative debrief (weeks 4 and 8), practice log patterns
2	L1→L3 progression over 8 weeks: Do participants demonstrate measurable movement through the Interpersonal line's L1-L3 thresholds (perspective accuracy, dialogue quality, repair skill) within the 8-week window?	Pre/post perspective-taking accuracy measure, trust rating shifts, weekly practice log, facilitator observation
3	Perspective-taking and repair practice safety: Do the perspective accuracy verification, Four Horsemen self-audit, and NVC repair drafting practices produce expected benefit without unexpected harm? Are the safety protocols for conflict material reflection adequate?	Safety incident log (especially during EI-10 and EI-11), qualitative debrief
4	Trust-building across difference: Does the cross-difference dialogue practice (EI-11) build measurable trust in a cohort deliberately recruited for identity diversity? Or does it produce harm from identity threat or minority stress?	Trust rating in cohort relationships (pre/post), safety incident log, qualitative debrief on cross-difference experience
5	Practice engagement quality: Which practices produce the strongest self-reported benefit? Which produce resistance, avoidance, or adverse response? Are the modifications and opt-outs for cross-difference dialogue sufficient?	Weekly practice log, safety incident log (opt-outs and modifications), qualitative debrief

2. About the Interpersonal Line Suite

The Interpersonal Line suite consists of four core modules plus an integration capstone shared with the Emotional Line.

Module	ID	Focus	Est. Time
EI-08: Interpersonal Line Overview & Orientation	`interpersonal-line-overview-orientation`	Structural foundation: Kegan's subject–object framework, attachment theory (Bowlby, Ainsworth), Buber's I–Thou / I–It distinction. Map your trust model, conflict style, and perspective-taking range.	~25 min
EI-09: Perspective-Taking & Empathic Accuracy	`perspective-taking-empathic-accuracy`	Perspective platform: affective vs. cognitive vs. compassionate empathy, Epley's findings on perspective-taking overestimation, Zaki's evidence that empathic accuracy is trainable. Perspective Accuracy Verification practice.	~27 min
EI-10: Relational Repair & Conflict Navigation	`relational-repair-conflict-navigation`	Repair mechanics: Gottman's Four Horsemen diagnostic framework, Nonviolent Communication (NVC) repair format, how developmental stage shapes conflict and repair. Four Horsemen self-audit and NVC repair draft. Tier 2 — conflict material reflection.	~37 min
EI-11: Cross-Difference Dialogue & Trust-Building	`cross-difference-dialogue-trust-building`	Contact across difference: structured dialogue across cultural, worldview, identity, and power differences. Recognising when difference itself is the barrier. Curiosity practice without collapsing into argument, withdrawal, or forced agreement. Tier 2 — cross-difference dialogue (live).	~39 min
EI-07: Emotional–Interpersonal Integration	`emotional-interpersonal-integration`	Capstone: 30-day integrated practice design combining perspective-checking, repair awareness, and cross-difference reflection. Retrieval schedule for long-term learning.	~39 min

Cumulative estimated time: Approximately 2.5–2.75 hours of active module work per participant, spread over 8 weeks.

QuickStart companion: Participants may benefit from the Interpersonal Line Development QuickStart which provides navigational signposting and three audience profiles with routing to different starting modules. The QuickStart is recommended for participant orientation but not required for pilot participation.

3. Participant Criteria

3.1 Inclusion Criteria

Adults 18 years or older
Able to read and write in English at the level required to complete module content and data collection instruments
Willing to commit to 2–3 hours per week of module work and practice for 8 consecutive weeks
Access to a private space for reflection, journalling, and solo practice
Internet access for module content and data collection submissions
For EI-11 (cross-difference dialogue live practice): willingness to participate in structured dialogue across identity, cultural, or worldview differences — with clear opt-out provisions

3.2 Kegan Stage Diversity Targets

The Interpersonal Line suite is grounded in constructive-developmental theory (Kegan's subject–object framework). Pilot data will be most useful if the cohort represents a spread of relational meaning-making structures. Use Kegan stage language consistent with the Interpersonal Line Stage Map:

Stage band	Target proportion	Description
Institutional (Kegan Stage 3)	30% (4–6 participants)	The self is organised by roles, relationships, and membership in valued communities. Relationships are the context for identity; the self cannot yet take the relationship itself as an object of reflection. Tests whether the foundational modules (EI-08, EI-09) are accessible and whether the safety protocols adequately protect participants whose relational self is still partly embedded in their relationships.
Institutional/Interindividual boundary (Kegan 3→4)	40% (6–8 participants)	The self is beginning to take its own relational patterns as objects of reflection — the transition from "I am my relationships" to "I have relationships." This is the primary growth edge the Interpersonal line targets. Tests whether the module content meets learners at their developmental edge without pushing too far too fast.
Interindividual (Kegan Stage 4)	30% (4–6 participants)	The self can hold multiple relational perspectives simultaneously and coordinate across them. Tests whether the cross-difference dialogue and integration capstone provide genuine challenge rather than redundancy.

Stage assessment: Use the Interpersonal Line Self-Portrait from the EI-08 module as a qualitative stage indicator, supplemented by the Self Line Overview & Psychograph for broader structural assessment. Stage classification is for cohort composition tracking only — it is not shared with participants as a label and does not gate participation.

The issue specifies deliberate recruitment across social identity dimensions, particularly for the cross-difference dialogue practice (EI-11). The pilot's validity depends on testing dialogue across real difference — a homogenous cohort cannot validate this module.

Target (aspirational, not exclusionary):

At least 3 different cultural, racial, or ethnic backgrounds represented in the cohort
Mix of gender identities
Range of socioeconomic backgrounds and educational pathways
If possible, at least one participant who holds a political, religious, or worldview position significantly different from the majority of the cohort

Recruitment note: This diversity is not for stage classification — it is to ensure the cross-difference dialogue module is tested in realistic conditions. A cohort where all participants share the same cultural background, class position, and worldview cannot validate whether trust-building across difference works.

3.4 Clinical Screening Language

Important: The Interpersonal Line suite is educational, not therapeutic. The EI-10 module involves reflecting on interpersonal conflict, which can re-activate relational pain or trauma. The EI-11 module involves structured dialogue across identity differences, which can trigger identity threat or minority stress. These are designed risks — the pilot exists partly to test whether the safety protocols contain them adequately. Participants should be informed of these risks before consenting.

Screening orientation (not exclusion):

Participants currently in active clinical mental health treatment are not excluded but should discuss participation with their clinician, particularly if treatment involves relational trauma, attachment disruption, or identity-related distress.
Participants with a history of interpersonal violence, betrayal trauma, or significant relational harm should be aware that EI-10 involves reflecting on conflict and may surface material related to those experiences.
Participants from marginalised identity groups should be aware that EI-11 involves structured cross-difference dialogue and may activate experiences of discrimination, microaggression, or minority stress.
Participants who have experienced a major relationship rupture, divorce, estrangement, or bereavement within the last 6 months should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

3.5 Exclusion Criteria

Exclude a potential participant if:

They are currently in an abusive or coercive relationship where emotional vulnerability or relational reflection could increase risk.
They are currently experiencing active suicidal ideation, self-harm behaviour, or psychotic symptoms.
They are unable to provide informed consent.
A clinician evaluating their readiness recommends against participation.
They are unwilling or unable to engage with cross-difference content (EI-11) even with opt-out provisions — the module is core to the pilot's validation targets.

3.6 Participant Range

Minimum: 15 participants
Maximum: 20 participants
Drop-off buffer: Recruit 20 to allow for up to 25% attrition

Before participation begins, every participant must receive, read, and sign a consent form covering:

Program description: 8-week educational Interpersonal Line development program. Four core modules plus integration capstone. Not therapy.
Tier 2 risk disclosure: EI-10 involves reflecting on interpersonal conflict which can re-activate relational pain, betrayal, or abandonment experiences. EI-11 involves structured cross-difference dialogue which can activate identity threat, minority stress, or experiences of discrimination. See Section 7 (Safety Protocols).
Voluntary participation: Participants may withdraw at any time without penalty. They may opt out of specific practices (see §4.3) while continuing with module content.
Data collection: What data is collected, how it is stored, who has access, and how it will be used. Participants may participate in the pilot without contributing data to the research report.
Confidentiality: Individual responses are confidential within the research team. Aggregated, de-identified findings will be included in the post-pilot revision report. Limits of confidentiality apply.
Facilitator and clinical backup roles: The facilitator is an educational guide, not a therapist. The clinical backup is available for consultation and referral.
Contact information: How to reach the facilitator, clinical backup, and crisis resources.

⚠️ HUMAN-REQUIRED: The consent form must be reviewed by legal counsel and the clinical backup before use.

4.2 Screening Questions (from EI-20 Safety Addendum)

Each participant completes a screening conversation (15–20 minutes) with the facilitator before the pilot begins.

General readiness questions (all participants):

"What draws you to an interpersonal development program? What relationships in your life might benefit from this work?"
"Have you done relational or interpersonal development work before — therapy, couples work, communication training, dialogue groups? What was helpful or difficult about it?"
"Is there anything going on in your life right now — a relationship crisis, a major transition, significant stress — that might make it hard to engage with relational material over the next 8 weeks?"
"Do you have people in your life you can talk to if something difficult comes up — not necessarily about the program content, but just for support?"

Before conflict material reflection (EI-10):

"The conflict you are thinking of — does it involve someone who has harmed you in a way that still feels present and unresolved?"
"When you think about this conflict, do you notice your body reacting — tension, nausea, racing heart — in a way that is hard to calm down from?"
"Have you ever had a conversation about this conflict that made things worse rather than better?"

Before cross-difference dialogue (EI-11):

"Are there identity-related experiences — related to race, gender, sexuality, ability, class, or religion — that feel too raw or too recent to discuss in a structured exercise?"
"Have you had experiences where conversations about difference left you feeling more isolated, stereotyped, or harmed than before?"
"Do you feel confident that if something difficult comes up, you will be able to name it and step back if needed?"

4.3 Opt-Out Provisions

If the participant…	Alternative
Declines to reflect on a specific conflict in EI-10	Select a lower-stakes conflict; or complete the Four Horsemen theoretical framework and written analysis without a personal conflict example.
Declines live cross-difference dialogue in EI-11	Complete the written cross-difference reflection: identify one relationship where a difference in background, values, or worldview has created distance, and reflect on what it would take to reopen contact.
Experiences identity harm during EI-11	Stop immediately. Debrief with facilitator individually. Do not require the participant to educate the facilitator about their identity experience as a condition of support.

5. Facilitation Requirements

5.1 Qualified Facilitator

Requirement	Standard
Facilitation experience	≥ 20 hours documented experience facilitating group reflective or developmental work with adults
Cross-cultural dialogue experience	Demonstrated experience facilitating conversations across cultural, racial, gender, or worldview differences. Has completed cultural competency or diversity-informed facilitation training. Can hold multiple truths without minimising harm claims or dismissing structural context.
Interpersonal line knowledge	Has completed the full Interpersonal Line suite or equivalent developmental education in constructive-developmental theory (Kegan), attachment theory, and conflict resolution
AQAL framework familiarity	Working knowledge of the AQAL model sufficient to answer participant questions
Tier 2 safety training	Completed Tier 2 requirements per the Facilitator Qualification Standard
Trauma-informed practice	Able to recognise trauma responses without interpreting them clinically
Power dynamics literacy	Understands how power, privilege, and marginalisation shape group dynamics — particularly relevant for EI-11

5.2 Licensed Clinical Backup

A licensed mental health clinician must be:

Identified by name before the pilot begins
Available for phone consultation within 24 hours of a facilitator request
Available for emergency consultation within 2 hours during EI-10 and EI-11 practice sessions
Informed of the pilot's content, the Tier 2 trigger table for conflict material and cross-difference dialogue, and the facilitator's scope of practice
Ideally has experience with relational trauma, attachment disruption, and identity-related distress

5.3 Facilitator-to-Participant Ratio

Solo facilitation: Maximum 12 participants
With co-facilitator: Maximum 20 participants
For this pilot (15–20): A co-facilitator is required for EI-10 and EI-11 sessions. If possible, the co-facilitator should bring a different cultural or identity perspective to model cross-difference collaboration for participants.

6. Module Sequence & Timeline

6.1 8-Week Schedule

Week	Module	Focus	Facilitator Touchpoint	Time Commitment
1	EI-08: Interpersonal Line Overview & Orientation	Foundation: Kegan's subject–object framework, attachment styles, trust and conflict model mapping	Kickoff session (60 min): Program orientation, consent confirmation, pre-assessment administration (perspective-taking measure, trust rating), Interpersonal Line Self-Portrait walkthrough	~25 min module + 60 min kickoff
2	EI-09: Perspective-Taking & Empathic Accuracy	Perspective platform: three empathy types, perspective accuracy verification, tracking assumption errors	Mid-week check-in (15 min, async or live): How are the perspective checks going? Share one surprise (voluntary).	~27 min module + ~30 min practice across the week
3	EI-10: Relational Repair & Conflict Navigation ⚠️ Tier 2	Repair mechanics: Four Horsemen self-audit, NVC repair draft	Live practice session (75 min): Facilitated Four Horsemen self-audit (solo), NVC repair drafting with optional pair share. Pre-session: review EI-10 screening with each participant.	~37 min module + 75 min facilitated session
4	EI-10 (continued) + Mid-Pilot Debrief	Deepen repair work; Week 4 qualitative debrief	Week 4 debrief session (45 min): Semi-structured group or 1:1 debrief on modules completed so far. Mid-point trust rating.	45 min debrief + optional continued practice
5	EI-11: Cross-Difference Dialogue & Trust-Building ⚠️ Tier 2	Contact across difference: structured dialogue protocols, recognising when difference is the barrier	Live practice session (90 min): Facilitated cross-difference dialogue. Pre-session: pair composition, review of EI-11 screening, explicit ground rules. Post-session: individual check-in with each participant.	~39 min module + 90 min facilitated session
6	EI-11 (continued)	Integration of cross-difference learning; written reflection option	Mid-week check-in (15 min): Processing the dialogue experience. Encourage written cross-difference reflection for those who opted out of live dialogue.	~30 min reflection time
7	EI-07: Emotional–Interpersonal Integration	Capstone: 30-day integrated practice design, retrieval schedule	Mid-week check-in (15 min): Integration plan review. Encourage participants to design their 30-day plan combining perspective-checking, repair awareness, and cross-difference reflection.	~39 min module + practice plan design time
8	Wrap-Up & Post-Assessment	Reflection, post-assessment, closing	Closing session (90 min): Week 8 qualitative debrief (group), post-assessment (perspective-taking measure, trust rating), program feedback, next steps.	90 min closing session

Total facilitator-led session time: Approximately 8.5 hours across 8 weeks.

Total participant time commitment: Approximately 6–8 hours across 8 weeks (modules + practice + sessions).

6.2 Between-Week Practice Expectations

Participants are expected to:

Complete the module reading and core practice for each assigned week
Maintain a brief weekly practice log — 5 minutes per entry
Attend scheduled facilitator touchpoints

Participants are not expected to:

Deliver an NVC repair attempt to the actual person (drafting is the skill; delivery is optional and should only happen when relational safety can be reasonably expected)
Complete live cross-difference dialogue with someone outside the cohort (in-cohort dialogue is the practice context)
Complete all reflection prompts

7. Safety Protocols

7.1 General Safety Principles

All Interpersonal Line pilot sessions operate under the same principles as the Emotional Line pilot, drawn from the Emotional & Interpersonal Safety Addendum:

Stop means stop. Any participant can pause or withdraw from any practice at any time without explanation.
Grounding before processing. If a participant shows signs of significant activation, the facilitator stops the practice and guides grounding before any conversation.
Educational, not therapeutic. The facilitator does not interpret, diagnose, or treat.
No "push through" language.
Document everything. All safety incidents, near-misses, opt-outs, and modifications are recorded.

Additional principle for EI-11: The facilitator does not require participants to "work through" identity pain in a group setting. Do not ask a participant to educate the facilitator or the group about their identity experience as a condition of support.

Why Tier 2: The conflict material reflection involves revisiting interpersonal conflict, which can re-activate relational trauma, betrayal, abandonment, or experiences of interpersonal violence.

Before the session:

Review each participant's EI-10 screening answers
Confirm modifications: participants may choose a lower-stakes conflict or complete theoretical analysis without a personal example
Have the grounding protocol printed or displayed

During the session:

Begin with framing: "You are going to reflect on a conflict in your life. Choose one where you have enough distance to look at your own patterns without being overwhelmed by the pain. If at any point the material feels too activating, you can stop, ground, and shift to a different exercise."
Watch for: tearfulness, agitation, or withdrawal during reflection; reports of feeling "back in" the original situation; difficulty distinguishing past conflict from present safety; shame or self-blame disproportionate to the event described.

If a participant activates:

Stop the reflection. Validate without exploring: "It makes sense that this material is activating. You do not need to continue this exercise today."
Guide grounding using the standardised protocol (see §7.5).
Offer written reflection as an alternative.
Document the incident.
If the participant cannot re-orient within 10–15 minutes: contact clinical backup.
If the participant discloses interpersonal violence or abuse: follow institutional safeguarding procedures; do not attempt to process this content in an educational setting.

7.3 Tier 2 Protocol Activation — EI-11 (Cross-Difference Dialogue)

Why Tier 2: Structured dialogue across cultural, racial, gender, or power differences can activate identity threat, minority stress, experiences of discrimination or microaggression, or systemic exclusion.

Before the session:

Review each participant's EI-11 screening answers
Confirm modifications or opt-outs
Pair composition is critical: Consider power dynamics, identity representation, and relational safety when forming pairs or small groups. Avoid isolating a single participant from a marginalised group as the "representative" of that group.
Establish explicit ground rules at the start of the session:
1. "We are here to understand, not to agree. You do not need to change your view."
2. "You do need to stay curious about how the other person's view makes sense from within their life."
3. "Before responding, reflect back what you heard: 'What I hear you saying is...'"
4. "If at any point this feels unsafe or overwhelming, you can pause, step out, or shift to written reflection."
5. "The facilitator is here to monitor for power dynamics, emotional safety, and participation balance — not to adjudicate truth claims."

During the session:

Watch for: a participant becoming guarded, disengaging, or shifting to intellectualised detachment; reports of feeling "unsafe" or "attacked" by the dialogue structure itself; one party dominating while the other withdraws; identity-related pain expressed as anger directed at the facilitator or exercise design.

If a participant activates or reports harm:

Stop the structured dialogue.
Acknowledge the activation without adjudicating its cause.
Offer each person a choice: (a) debrief individually with the facilitator, (b) take a break and return to a simpler exercise, (c) end participation in this module for today.
If a participant reports the exercise caused harm: document the incident without defensiveness. Do not ask the participant to educate the facilitator about their identity experience as a condition of support.
If identity-related distress persists: offer referral to a clinician with demonstrated cultural competence in the relevant identity domain.
Document the incident.

7.4 Near-Miss Reporting

Same protocol as EI-21: near-misses are as important as incidents for post-pilot analysis. They are particularly informative for EI-11 where the boundary between productive discomfort and harm is context-dependent and varies by participant identity.

7.5 Standardised Grounding Protocol

Use the same 3-step protocol as the Emotional Line pilot (drawn from the EI-20 Safety Addendum):

Step 1 — Orienting

"Open your eyes if they are closed. Look around the room."
"Name five things you can see — out loud or silently."

Step 2 — Grounding

"Place both feet flat on the floor. Feel the surface under you."
"Take three slow breaths — in through your nose, out through your mouth, at whatever pace feels settling."
"Place one hand on your chest. Feel the contact."

Step 3 — Containment

"The material that came up is real. You do not need to explain it or resolve it right now."
"You can put this material aside for now and return to it with appropriate support."
"Would you like to stop for today, or shift to a different exercise?"

7.6 Crisis Resources

Same as EI-21: 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, Crisis Text Line (text HOME to 741741), and International crisis resources.

8. Data Collection

8.1 Data Collection Instruments (Overview)

Instrument	What it measures	Cadence	Administered by
Pre/Post Perspective-Taking Accuracy (IRI or equivalent)	Empathic concern, perspective-taking tendency, and personal distress subscales from the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980) or an equivalent validated instrument	Pre-pilot (Week 1) and post-pilot (Week 8)	Facilitator
Trust Rating in Cohort Relationships	Self-reported trust in fellow participants using a simple 1–5 Likert scale for: "I trust that other participants in this cohort will respond to what I share with respect and care" and "I feel safe being honest in this group"	Pre-pilot (Week 1), Week 4 (mid-point), Week 8 (post)	Participant (anonymous)
Weekly Practice Log	Practice type, duration, completion, self-reported benefit (1–5), any adverse response or difficulty	Weekly	Participant (self-report)
Module Completion & Drop-Off Tracker	Which modules each participant completed, partially completed, or skipped; session attendance; program withdrawal	Ongoing, updated weekly	Facilitator
Safety Incident Log	Every incident, near-miss, opt-out, and modification	Ongoing, within 24 hours of each event	Facilitator
Qualitative Debrief — Week 4	Mid-pilot experience: what's working, what's challenging, early patterns. Specific attention to EI-10 experience and anticipatory feelings about EI-11	Week 4	Facilitator
Qualitative Debrief — Week 8	Full pilot experience: module sequence coherence, cross-difference dialogue experience, developmental shifts, trust changes, recommendations	Week 8	Facilitator

8.2 Perspective-Taking Accuracy Measure

Use the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis, 1980) — a 28-item self-report measure with four 7-item subscales:

Perspective-Taking (PT): Tendency to spontaneously adopt the psychological point of view of others
Empathic Concern (EC): Feelings of sympathy and concern for unfortunate others
Fantasy (FS): Tendency to transpose oneself imaginatively into the feelings and actions of fictitious characters
Personal Distress (PD): Self-oriented feelings of personal anxiety and unease in tense interpersonal settings

The PT and EC subscales are the primary measures for this pilot. The PD subscale may help identify participants at higher risk of empathic flooding during EI-10 and EI-11.

Alternative: If the IRI is not feasible (licensing, length, or administration constraints), use Zaki's empathic accuracy paradigm described in EI-09, adapted as a brief self-report instrument with 5–7 items.

8.3 Weekly Practice Log Template

Same format as EI-21 (see Emotional Line pilot runbook, §8.3). Adapt module list to EI-08 through EI-11 and EI-07.

8.4 Safety Incident Log Template

Same format as EI-21 (see Emotional Line pilot runbook, §8.4). Add a field for "Identity dimension relevant" (yes/no/uncertain) for EI-11 incidents.

8.5 Qualitative Debrief Question Bank

Week 4 Debrief (mid-pilot):

"How has your experience of the program been so far? What has been most valuable? Most challenging?"
"How did the conflict reflection exercise (EI-10) feel for you? Was the material manageable, or did it surface more than you expected?"
"Have you noticed any changes in how you approach conflict or difficult conversations in daily life?"
"As we approach the cross-difference dialogue module (EI-11), how are you feeling about it? Any concerns or hopes?"
"Is there anything about the pace, sequence, or content that feels off?"

Week 8 Debrief (post-pilot):

"Looking back over the full 8 weeks, how would you describe your experience?"
"Did the module sequence — Overview → Perspective-Taking → Repair → Cross-Difference Dialogue → Integration — make sense? Were there jumps that felt too large or modules that felt redundant?"
"How was the cross-difference dialogue experience (EI-11)? What did you learn? Was there anything about it that felt unsafe or harmful?"
"Have you noticed changes in your perspective-taking accuracy, conflict navigation, or comfort with difference since the program began? Can you give a specific example?"
"Has your trust in this cohort changed over the 8 weeks? In what direction?"
"If you could change one thing about the Interpersonal Line suite, what would it be?"
"Would you recommend this program to someone at a similar stage of development? Why or why not?"
"Is there anything you wanted from this program that you didn't get?"

9. Revision Triggers

9.1 Automatic Triggers

Trigger	Threshold	Action
Safety incident (Tier 2 activation)	Any activation requiring grounding that does not fully resolve within 10 minutes	Review within 48 hours. Implement corrective action before the next Tier 2 session.
Identity harm (EI-11)	Any participant reports the cross-difference dialogue caused harm related to their identity	Review within 48 hours. Determine whether the practice design, pair composition, ground rules, or facilitation contributed. Consult clinical backup with cultural competence in the relevant domain.
Drop-off rate	>30% of enrolled participants withdraw before Week 8	Review within 1 week. Pay specific attention to whether withdrawals cluster around EI-10 or EI-11.
Pattern of near-misses	≥ 3 near-misses in a single module week	Review within 48 hours.
Trust rating decline	Mean cohort trust rating drops by ≥ 1 point (5-point scale) from Week 1 to Week 4 or Week 8	Review within 1 week. Analyse whether the decline correlates with specific modules or events.

9.2 Pilot Pause Criteria

Same as EI-21, with these additions:

Multiple participants from marginalised groups independently report that the cross-difference dialogue was harmful
A participant reports that the pilot environment replicated dynamics of discrimination or exclusion they experience outside the program
The clinical backup recommends pausing based on incident patterns

9.3 Post-Pilot Decision Gates

Gate	Question	Evidence required
Module sequence validity	Does the 4-module sequence work, or does it need reordering?	Module completion rates, qualitative debrief data, practice log patterns
Perspective-taking effectiveness	Does perspective-taking accuracy measurably improve?	Pre/post IRI or equivalent scores
Safety protocol adequacy for conflict material	Are the EI-10 safety protocols sufficient?	Safety incident log, near-miss log, opt-out patterns during EI-10
Safety protocol adequacy for cross-difference dialogue	Are the EI-11 safety protocols sufficient? Does trust-building across difference work, or does it produce harm?	Safety incident log, trust ratings, qualitative debrief on EI-11 experience
Public release readiness	Is the Interpersonal Line suite ready for public release?	Synthesis of all pilot data against the five objectives

10. Post-Pilot Report Outline

Same structure as the Emotional Line pilot (see EI-21 runbook, Section 10), with these Interpersonal-line-specific additions:

Section 5 (Safety Findings): Separate analysis for EI-10 (conflict material) and EI-11 (cross-difference dialogue). Identity-related incidents must be reported with particular care — patterns may be visible by participant identity without identifying individuals.
Section 6 (Practice Engagement): Specific analysis of cross-difference dialogue participation rates, opt-out rates, and opt-out reasons.
Section 7 (Recommendations): Include recommendations for EI-11 pair composition guidelines, ground rules, and facilitator cultural competency requirements.

Appendix A: Pre-Pilot Checklist

Complete each item before Week 1:

⚠️ HUMAN-REQUIRED: This pilot runbook is a Copilot-generated draft based on the EI-22 specification. Before pilot launch, a human must: (1) review and finalise the consent form with legal counsel, (2) confirm the facilitator, co-facilitator, and clinical backup, (3) verify the perspective-taking instrument is appropriate for the cohort, (4) adapt screening questions for the specific context, (5) verify crisis resource information is current, (6) obtain SME sign-off on the module sequence and Tier 2 safety protocols, and (7) plan EI-11 pair composition with explicit attention to participant safety across identity dimensions.