COR
Standard-Setting Process
Five stages — proposal, draft, public comment, independent implementation verification, and review and publication; the fourth, requiring at least two mutually independent organisations to implement the clause, is the main difference from most standards bodies.
Five Stages
| Phase | Name | Content | Condition for passing |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Proposal | Any class of member may propose, stating the problem situation and where current practice falls short. | The committee finds the problem real and without a recognised solution |
| 2 | Draft | A working group writes the draft, with clauses, criteria and means of verification. | Consensus within the working group |
| 3 | Public comment | The full draft is published; anyone, member or not, may comment. | All comments answered and their handling published |
| 4 | Independent implementation verification | At least two mutually independent organisations implement it and report results. | Two or more independent reports, with no blocking problems |
| 5 | Review and publication | The standards committee reviews and votes. | The threshold set out in the constitution is met |
Why Stage Four Exists
The most common failure of a standards body is publishing a standard that looks complete in the meeting room but that nobody in practice can meet, or can meet only at excessive cost. Requiring at least two independent organisations to implement it exposes that before publication.
Requiring them to be mutually independent guards against two reports coming from the same line of implementation thinking — if two organisations implement it the same way, they will also share the same blind spots.
Public Record of Withdrawn and Revised Clauses
The Council maintains a public record giving the original clause, the reason for withdrawal or revision, and when and from where the problem was found.
The existence of that record is itself part of the governance principles: a standards body that does not record what it got wrong cannot ask anyone else to.