# Corporate Value Triad Publication Package
## Readme and publication index

Proposed by Jean Nickson Pijeau
Version 0.1 | October 2026 | Research update October 19 2026
Conceptual framework and pilot materials | Pending empirical validation

## 1 Start here
This collection develops the Corporate Value Triad as a testable account of contribution, visibility, attribution, recognition, influence, and reward. The five papers are complete conceptual working manuscripts. They report no original empirical results, carry no claim of peer review, and establish no priority over existing theories. The protocol, survey, and toolkits are proposals for reviewed research and cautious pilot use.

Read the public brief for an introduction, paper 1 for the model, and the research protocol before collecting data. The references companion maps inspected sources to bounded claims. The executive deck presents the proposal and the decision to commission a reviewed pilot. Every substantive document is available as editable Word and PDF. The deck is editable PowerPoint with a PDF and a separate notes handout. Markdown and CSV files support revision and instrument setup.

## 2 Package index
| Folder | Deliverable | Main use |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 01_Papers | 01_Foundational_Theory | Constructs, contribution, propositions, boundaries |
| 01_Papers | 02_Contribution_Recognition_Gap | Evidence and acknowledgment without a gap score |
| 01_Papers | 03_Value_Attribution | Credit judgments and an information experiment |
| 01_Papers | 04_Builders_Paradox | Operational dependence and development access |
| 01_Papers | 05_Builder_Leader_Transition | Development mechanisms and evaluation |
| 02_Research | 06_Research_Protocol | H1 to H13 with update-label crosswalk, designs, analysis, consent, safeguards |
| 02_Research | 07_Organizational_Diagnostic | Original 24 items plus a separate eight-item attribution extension |
| 03_Toolkits | 08_Leadership_Development_Kit | 90 day program and seven reusable worksheets |
| 03_Toolkits | 09_Management_Audit | Charter, evidence, credit, opportunity, action records |
| 03_Toolkits | 13 Contribution Attribution Assessment | Eight pilot items, independent manager account, history and source review |
| 04_Communication | 10_Public_Brief | Accessible explanation and research limits |
| 04_Communication | 11_Executive_Presentation | Executive deck and speaker notes |
| 05_References | 12_References_and_Evidence | Verified records, claim boundaries, source access |
| 06_Editable_Sources | Markdown, CSV, BibTeX, RIS | Revision, survey setup, evidence and action logs |

Root files include this index in Word, PDF, and Markdown, a browser-readable Start_Here.html, and MANIFEST_SHA256.txt. File stems remain stable across editable and PDF versions. The executive notes handout is also supplied in Markdown. The blank templates contain no completed employee data. Paper 3 includes a generalized participant-reported illustration with no employee names, screenshots, employer identifiers, product details, or distinctive service history. It is not independently verified or a consented empirical case study. External use requires required company confidentiality clearance and appropriate participant permissions, or removal of the illustration; no such clearance is claimed.

## 3 Research status and prohibited inferences
All CVT-specific mechanisms, archetypes, and intervention effects remain proposed. Existing studies support selected background claims, not the entire framework. The literature review is targeted and does not claim systematic coverage. Citation verification checks identity, metadata, and the bounded claim visible in inspected primary records or abstracts. It does not amount to an exhaustive critical appraisal of each full text.

There is no validated CVT total score, no established personality classification, no normative benchmark, and no demonstrated employment-decision validity. The six original survey domains are provisional. The eight supplementary attribution items and mixed-source assessment have no combined score or subscale means. Optional means follow an arbitrary pilot missing-data convention and must not become an employee ranking. Contribution evidence requires independent assessment rather than substitution of a self-report survey score.

The research protocol is not an approved study, registration, or completed power analysis. Before recruitment, a named investigator must complete local contacts, permissions, sampling, measurement, precision simulations, data dates, and independent ethics determination. The consent text must match actual procedures. Generic blanks in activation and worksheet fields are intentional fields for local completion, not missing findings.

## 4 Editing and use
Edit Word files for normal document revision or Markdown files for transparent text changes. Edit slide text and native tables in PowerPoint. The PDF deck is a reading copy and omits speaker notes; use the separate notes handout when presenting. Survey CSVs are instrument definitions and empty templates. Preserve the item IDs, missing-response codes, and version number when piloting. Treat wording changes as a new instrument version.

The evidence log, opportunity log, and audit action register contain empty fields. Do not store identifying employee information in a shared public copy. The research protocol specifies separation of identity keys, consent, analysis data, and employer reporting. Toolkits may be used without scoring people. All practical recommendations remain subject to appropriate local review and judgment.

## 5 Attribution and suggested citations
Framework attribution: Corporate Value Triad, proposed by Jean Nickson Pijeau, version 0.1, October 2026, research update October 19, 2026.

Suggested manuscript citation: Pijeau, J. N. (2026). The Corporate Value Triad: A theory of organizational contribution and influence (Version 0.1, research update October 19) [Conceptual working paper]. Corporate Value Triad publication package. No DOI or public repository has been assigned.

For other papers, substitute the document title and retain version and working-paper status. AI-assisted drafting, source checking, and document production supported preparation of this package. Attribution identifies the proposed framework originator and does not imply that Jean Nickson Pijeau has reviewed, endorsed, or submitted every sentence. Human author review is required before publication. No affiliation, credential, funding, or ethics approval is asserted.

No public reuse license has been selected in this package. Distribution, licensing, and author approval remain decisions for the rights holder. External references retain their own rights. This package supplies citations and original summaries rather than copies of published articles or proprietary questionnaires.

## 6 Publication roadmap
First, obtain author approval of claims and attribution, substantive review by organizational and measurement researchers, and employee feedback on language and burden. Check novelty more broadly and choose an appropriate preprint or working-paper venue. Release conceptual papers with their status visible and a version history.

Second, develop measures through cognitive interviews and independent validation, then register specific studies with completed ethics and precision plans. Publish null and adverse results as well as favorable ones. Keep pilot organizational use separate from employee selection.

Third, revise CVT in light of evidence. A useful mechanism may survive even if the triad does not form distinct profiles. Only claim validated uses after evidence supports the specific measure, population, decision, and context. Keep earlier predictions accessible rather than rewriting them after results.

## 7 Version and change history
The initial version 0.1 package was prepared October 18, 2026. This dated revision retains the requested version 0.1 and October 2026 attribution, while identifying the research update as October 19, 2026. The earlier release remains separate. Cite the update date to distinguish these materials.

The update adds three proposed constructs to papers 1 to 3, a generalized reported illustration and its limits to paper 3, Study E and H9 to H13 to the protocol, and eight supplementary pilot items shared with the new Contribution Attribution Assessment. The leadership kit, management audit, public brief, presentation, source records, references, and index reflect the extension. Papers 4 and 5 retain their substantive arguments.

The original H1 to H8 retain their meanings. Update H7 maps to package H9, update H8 to H10, update H9 to H11, update H10 to H12, and update H11 to H13. The protocol and Hypothesis_Crosswalk.csv preserve both identifiers. The original 24 item IDs and exploratory mean convention remain separate from the eight new items, which have item-level reporting only.

Reference IDs R01 to R18 retain their prior October 18 verification records. R19 to R23 were checked October 19 against primary records or source text, with actual access limitations recorded. The updated register distinguishes dates. No direct empirical validation of the new constructs is claimed, and the targeted literature review does not establish scientific novelty.