Artrellion · Policy · Carbon & Climate · Release Arsenal · Personalisation Standard
ArtrellionAdvocacy Infrastructure for the Data-Driven Era
Home / Carbon & Climate / Methodology / Personalisation Standard

Personalisation standard

Every outreach document on this network carries a person + organisation + alignment analysis. No exceptions. No generic transmittal.

The standard

Every outreach document produced on this network — letter to an editor, brief to a think tank, pack for a Congressional committee, pitch to an executive agency, proposal to a registry, integration whitepaper to a verification body, or outreach to an exchange — must be accompanied by three analyses before it is cleared for transmittal:

  1. Person analysis. The specific named human receiving the document. Role. Recent work. Communication preferences. Signals they care about. Past positions that inform how this document will land.
  2. Organization analysis. The recipient's organisation. Current positions. Active initiatives. Institutional pressures. Where this document fits or does not fit the organisation's current agenda.
  3. Alignment analysis. How this specific person in this specific role at this specific organisation benefits from proof-pack-equivalent disclosure right now. Why it is in their interest. What the ask is and why it is tractable for them.
The test: A recipient opening the document should — within the first paragraph of the cover letter — see that this was made for them specifically, and that the content provides them benefit. Not a form letter with their name swapped in. Not a pitch. A document that demonstrates the sender understands the recipient's role and interests and has tailored the substance to both.

Why this matters

Generic outreach fails on three counts. First, it signals sender laziness, which degrades the sender's credibility on everything else in the document. Second, it misses the specific alignment that would have made the document persuasive. Third, it consumes the recipient's attention without delivering anything for them, which is the opposite of the reciprocity that produces a response.

Specifically for this network: Trellison, Artrellion, and LedgerWell engage as methodology-first peers, not as vendors. A methodology-first peer takes the time to understand the recipient's published work, the organisation's stated positions, and the specific point of alignment. That is what a peer does. Anything less positions the sender as a vendor, which is the wrong frame for this engagement.

Data model — carbon_outreach_targets

Every outreach target has a record in the MongoDB carbon_outreach_targets collection with the following schema:

{
  "target_id": "slug-of-recipient",
  "category": "editor | think_tank | congressional | executive | industry_association | ...",
  "outreach_path": "/carbon-climate/...",  // the draft document
  "site_id": "artrellion | trellison | ledgerwell",
  "person": {
    "name": "Specific named human",
    "role": "Exact title",
    "organization": "Formal organisation name",
    "recent_work": "What they have published / decided / said in the last 6-12 months",
    "signals": ["What they care about","Framing preferences","Public positions"]
  },
  "organization": {
    "positions": "What the organisation has publicly said on this topic",
    "initiatives": "What they are actively doing",
    "pressures": "What is driving their decision-making now"
  },
  "alignment": {
    "specific_benefit": "Why this document serves this specific recipient",
    "timing": "Why now is the right moment for them",
    "ask": "The specific request tailored to their authority"
  },
  "status": "draft | researched | personalized | approved | sent",
  "pending_personalization": false  // if true, the draft is generic and cannot be sent
}

Process

  1. Draft. Generic draft prepared using the recipient-category template. Status: draft. pending_personalization: true.
  2. Research. Person + organization + alignment analysis conducted via Gemini grounded search, LinkedIn, organisational sites, and recent publications. Status: researched.
  3. Personalize. The draft is rewritten with specific references to the person's recent work, the organisation's active initiatives, and the precise alignment. Status: personalized. pending_personalization: false.
  4. Approve. Governance review confirms accuracy of the person and organisation analyses, factual claims, and appropriateness of tone. Status: approved.
  5. Send. Transmittal via the recipient-preferred channel. Status: sent with a sent-at timestamp and channel record.

Hard rule. A document with pending_personalization: true cannot be transmitted. It is a draft. The personalization analysis is the minimum-viable precondition for transmission.

Worked examples

The following outreach drafts have been through a first pass of person + organization + alignment analysis with real named recipients:

All remaining outreach drafts are flagged pending_personalization: true. They are visible with a warning banner at the top of the page, and are filtered out of the release-ready queue until a target record is populated.

The co-dependence network

Trellison Institute

Research and methodology.

Carbon portfolio →

Artrellion

Policy and stakeholder engagement.

Release arsenal →

LedgerWell

Operational verification.

Business cases →