The LCF Intervention Playbook and the Maintenance Kit

facilitator.

Built on the Learning Conversion Framework Jos Arets (2026). The framework is open. The cards, the routes and the rhythm are the craft.

Practice: Vivian Heijnen

A catalog is not a method

Most team interventions start at the wrong end. Someone knows a format, a simulation, a workshop, a team day, and looks for a team to apply it to. The format may be excellent. Whether it fits this team, at this moment, for this failure, nobody has asked. The same intervention is right for one team and wasted on another, and only the situation tells you which.

The second error follows the first. A program ends, the facilitator leaves, and the effect is left to look after itself. It does not. Skills fade Left, a catalog: formats sorted by type, useful only to someone who already knows what this team when nobody uses them, agreements drift when nobody revisits needs. Right, a bundle: a few cards chosen for one team, for the conversion that falters, with one them, and what a team learned leaves with the next roster change. card for the environment around the work.

The Playbook answers the first error, the Maintenance Kit the second. This paper shows how both work. It does not reproduce the library, nor the routing from what you see in the work to the cards that fit. The principle is open; the map is the craft.

What a catalog gives you

What a team needs Formats, sorted by type. Silent on whether this

Two to five interventions that address the one fits this team, and silent on what happens

conversion that actually falters, in an order that after the session.

does no harm, with a measure fixed before the first session.

What this rests on: the Learning Conversion Framework

The Playbook is not a collection of good ideas. It is the working edition of one framework. The Learning Conversion Framework, developed by Jos Arets (2026), describes how learning crosses the levels: from the individual to the team, from the team to reliable performance, and from the team into the organization. Three crossings, which the framework calls conversions, each with its own mechanism, its own

failure mode and its own yardstick.

That is what makes the library orderable and a bundle composable. Every card belongs to one conversion, so the question is never which format is popular, but which crossing is blocked. And because the environment around the work carries all three conversions, every bundle names the condition that would otherwise defeat it.

The framework itself is open and described in the white paper

Learning that crosses the levels

(Arets, 2026), free at tulser.com. The elements underneath it rest on mature research on teams and organizational learning, by Kozlowski, Salas, Marks and Argote among others. The connection between them, the three conversions as one recursive whole, is a proposition of Arets and has not yet been tested as a whole. That is why every program in this Playbook measures in the team’s own numbers.

Teaming Up

Making It Happen

Making It Stick

Capable people become a team that

That capability becomes reliable

What the team learns is stored, found functions: shared mental models, role

performance under load: monitoring,

again, updated and reused, inside the clarity, psychological safety,

backup, closed-loop communication,

team and beyond it. collective efficacy.

coordination.

The anatomy of an intervention card

Every card in the library has the same structure. That is not tidiness for its own sake. The fields are what make a card composable: an advisor sees at a glance which conversion the card serves, what it needs in order to work, what it must not be combined with, and how you would know it worked.

The example on the right is a card that can carry a claim of its own. Structured debriefs are among the few team interventions with a mature meta-analytic base. That is the exception. For most cards the honest statement is narrower: the mechanism is well established in the research on teams, and the card is a disciplined way of putting that mechanism to work. The library says which of the two applies, on every card.

How the cards are organized

The library follows the framework. Each card belongs to one of four families, one per conversion and one for the ground beneath them. Within a family the cards are ordered by the level they work on, individual, team or organization, and by the moment in the work episode they belong to: before, during or after. More than a hundred cards, distilled from a research base of more than 140 interventions, in English and Dutch, with the source and the date on every card.

What the Playbook adds to the cards

The cards are the material. The Playbook is the advisor’s edition: the routes from what you see in the work to the conversion that falters, the team profiles from the LCF Team Scan, and some fifty program plans that turn a card into a working session. Those routes are deliberately not reproduced here.

Teaming Up

Making It Happen

Making It Stick Builds capability before the work

Turns capability into

Carries a lesson beyond the team starts

performance

that learned it Training intact teams together,

Simulation with immediate debrief,

Harvest routines with an owner, cross-training and role rotation,

crew resource management,

communities of practice, boundary team charters, handover routines,

structured after-action reviews,

objects at handovers, the routines making visible who knows what.

guided team self-correction, brief

by which a management team keeps shift-start routines.

asking what no longer fits.

From card to bundle

No team needs the library, and no team should try. A program is a bundle: a small number of cards that together address one conversion, in an order that builds. Six rules govern the composition. They are simple to state and demanding to apply, which is what the training program is for.

One conversion at a time

Three to five cards

A bundle addresses the conversion that falters now. A

Fewer leaves a mechanism uncovered. More exceeds second conversion waits for the next episode.

what a team can carry next to its work. Bundles that try to do everything do nothing measurable.

Always one card for the environment

Measure fixed before the first session

Every bundle names the condition in the work that will

The team’s own metric, its baseline and the date of otherwise defeat it, and what the team or its leaders

the reading are agreed before anything starts. do about it.

Afterwards is too late.

The team that reverts under pressure

The team performs well on calm days and fragments at peak. What falters is not capability but its enactment, so the bundle addresses Making It Happen and nothing else. Five cards, twelve weeks, most of the dose inside the work.

shift-start briefing

closed-loop drill

backup agreement

structured debrief

the leader clears one obstacle

week 0

week 4 baseline

One bundle over twelve weeks. Four cards work on the conversion, the fifth on the environment around it. The reading is agreed before the first session, and the rhythm of the Maintenance Kit starts where the program ends.

What the team measures

What the leader does Incidents and near misses at peak hours,

Protects the twenty minutes for the debrief and deviations caught in time, recovery time after a

removes one obstacle per week. Without that disruption. Read at baseline and after twelve

card the other four erode within a month. weeks, on dates agreed with the team lead.

Six team profiles, as they appear in the library

Every organization knows these teams. The profiles show how the Playbook works: from something you see in the work, through the conversion that falters, to a program and a yardstick. Which cards make up each bundle, in what order and under what conditions, is in the library.

The newly formed team

The team that reverts under pressure

Capable people, each in their own style. A lot of

Good on a calm day. At peak, everyone for aligning, little taken for granted.

themselves, and afterwards nobody knows quite why. Teaming Up Making It Happen Builds shared mental models, role clarity and a common way of handing over in the first weeks, in

Practices monitoring, backup and closed-loop the real work.

communication under realistic load and debriefs every busy episode on the process. Handover errors, decision lead time, time to the first roster run without help.

Incidents and near misses at peak hours, deviations caught in time, recovery time after a disruption.

The team after an incident

The team that works well but records nothing

Silence in the meeting. Covering oneself. Reports

The knowledge lives in heads. When someone go down while the risk stays the same.

leaves or falls ill, the team stalls. Teaming Up

Making It Stick Restores psychological safety with structured

Sets up routines for storing, retrieving and debriefs without blame and with leaders who

updating, with an owner per agreement and fixed visibly reward speaking up.

review moments. Number and nature of reports, speaking time of

Reuse of recorded agreements, time to an answer non-leaders in meetings, follow-up on

on a practice question, agreements still accurate improvement points.

after a quarter.

Measurement at the level of the promise

Whoever promises team performance measures team performance. That sentence decides more than any other in the Playbook. It rules out

individual competence

attendance and satisfaction as evidence for a team program, and it rules out a survey filled in before the

team performance

pressure came as evidence of what happened under load. It also rules in something L&D rarely claims: the

organizational learning

team’s own operational numbers, read before and

The level error to avoid runs the other way: a stack of certificates offered as proof that a team can

after, on a date agreed in advance.

perform, or a confident survey offered as proof of what happened under load. There is a second reason to measure this way. Each program that records its outcome, in a defined situation with a defined bundle, strengthens the weakest link in every intervention library: the claim that this bundle works for this kind of team. The library is built to learn from its own use.

Why maintenance is part of the design

Learning does not keep. In the meta-analysis by Arthur and colleagues on skill decay, the loss grows with the time a skill goes unused; after more than a year without practice it is large. Argote and colleagues found the same at the level of the organization: knowledge acquired through experience depreciates, and what is not

used or refreshed loses much of its value within a year.

For team learning the problem is sharper, because a team is Schematic, not a measurement. The shape is what the research describes: without use and refreshment the a moving target. Members leave, roles shift, the roster effect decays, and each maintenance moment costs far less than the program that produced it. changes. The shared mental models built in one program have to be rebuilt, at least in part, every time the team’s composition changes.

Most programs treat this as a problem for later. The Playbook treats it as part of the design. A bundle is not finished until it says how the effect will be kept: at what level, in which moments, owned by whom.

An effect that nobody maintains is a memory of an effect.

The Maintenance Kit

The Maintenance Kit is the rhythm that keeps a team’s conversions alive after the program ends. It works on two axes. The team chooses a level: the critical minimum it must keep doing or the effect is gone within a quarter; the basic level, which keeps the effect stable; or the advanced level, at which the team keeps improving its own conversions. And the level is spread over thirteen fixed moments, from the shift start and the weekly board to the quarterly session and the annual review. Each moment has a purpose, a duration, an owner and a card from the library it draws on.

every shift

every week

every month

critical minimum

basic

advanced

Filled means the level keeps that moment, open means it does not. The critical minimum protects the cheapest and most frequent moments, because those are the ones that keep shared mental models current when the roster changes.

Critical minimum

Basic

The few moments a team must keep or lose the

The full rhythm that keeps the effect stable across effect. Chosen when the team is under strain and can

roster changes and busy periods. The default for most carry little. Short, frequent, in the work.

teams after a program.

Access to expertise, inside the AI your organization already uses

The library does not come as a binder or a portal. It runs as the Tulser Expertise Amplifier, an MCP server Tulser delivers itself, connected to the AI assistant your organization already works with, so that an advisor, a team lead or an L&D professional can ask, in their own words, what fits this team, and get the cards, the program plan and the maintenance

moments, with the source on every answer.

That is a design choice with consequences. It covers one theme and it rides on an assistant the organization has already approved, so there is no platform project and no new licence, only a security review of one read-only connection. It also means the library must meet the standards of a governed knowledge base rather than a document collection. Every card carries its source, its version and the date of its last change. Changes are logged. Users read; only the editorial board writes. The library holds no personal data and no data about your teams; what a team records about its own program stays with the team.

The same canon feeds a second instrument. The Performance Consultant AI supports the intake conversation: it helps an advisor find out what is actually going on before anyone proposes a solution. One body of knowledge, two instruments, one for the question and one for the answer.

What this changes on Monday

Start from the situation

Compose, do not pick

Promise what you will measure

Before you name a format, name the

Two to five cards, one conversion,

Agree the team’s own metric and the team, what you see in its work and

half in the work, one for the

reading date with the team lead. the conversion that falters. If you

environment. Write the bundle down

Report that, and only that, as the cannot, the LCF Team Scan can; the

before the first session, with its

result. six profiles are a first check.

measure and its baseline.

Three ways to start

Pick a situation.

Recognize a team in one of the six profiles and use the ready-made program from the library.

Take the LCF Team Scan.

Optional. A diagnosis is an intervention in itself and often unnecessary; use the scan when the picture stays unclear.

Learn to compose.

The training program Evidence-informed team learning solutions teaches an L&D team to work with the Playbook and the Kit on its own cases. tulser.com/leeroplossingen

The framework, the practice, the authors

The framework

The practice The Playbook and the Kit rest on the Learning

Tulser implements the programs with L&D teams Conversion Framework by Jos Arets: three

and their organizations, in the Netherlands and conversions, six elements, one environment. It is

internationally. Vivian Heijnen leads the described in the white paper

Learning that

implementation. j.arets@tulser.com crosses the levels

(Arets, 2026), free at tulser.com.

Selected sources

Albarracín, D., Fayaz-Farkhad, B., & Granados Samayoa, J. A.

Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the (2024). Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as

effectiveness of work groups and teams.

Psychological targets of behavioural change interventions.

Nature Reviews

Science in the Public Interest, 7

(3), 77–124. https://doi.org/ Psychology, 3

(6), 377–392. https://doi.org/10.1038/

10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x s44159-024-00305-0 Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A Arets, J. (2026).

Learning that crosses the levels: The

temporally based framework and taxonomy of team Learning Conversion Framework

[White paper]. Tulser.

processes.

Academy of Management Review, 26 376. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4845785 Argote, L. (2024). Knowledge transfer within organizations: Mechanisms, motivation, and consideration.

Annual Review

Salas, E., Reyes, D. L., & McDaniel, S. H. (2018). The science of of Psychology, 75

, 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-

teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead. psych-022123-105424

American Psychologist, 73

(4), 593–600. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/amp0000334 Argote, L., Beckman, S. L., & Epple, D. (1990). The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial settings.

Management

Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and Science, 36

(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.

individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. 36.2.140

Human Factors, 55

(1), 231–245. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0018720812448394 Arthur, W., Jr., Bennett, W., Jr., Stanush, P. L., & McNelly, T. L. (1998). Factors that influence skill decay and retention: A quantitative review and analysis.

Human Performance, 11