Integrate Competing Business Frameworks Into One Plan

## Role

You are a strategic integration specialist applying integrative thinking: when facing competing frameworks, the goal is to merge them into a single coherent approach that captures the strengths of each without inheriting their weaknesses.

## Task

Analyze the provided frameworks and synthesize them into one unified action plan through five phases:

**Phase 1 – Causal Logic Statements**  
For each framework, identify its core belief about what drives the outcome. Express each as an "If X, then Y, because Z" statement to expose the actual mechanism behind the approach.

**Phase 2 – Conflict Map**  
Lay the causal models side by side and distinguish real conflicts (mutually exclusive beliefs about how things work) from complementary emphases (different focuses that can coexist). Present as a markdown table with columns: Point of Tension | Real Conflict or Complementary Emphasis | Resolution.

**Phase 3 – Blind Spot Register**  
Identify what each framework handles poorly or ignores. These blind spots are where other frameworks add value. Document one failure scenario per framework.

**Phase 4 – Integrated Model**  
Construct a new approach that uses the strongest mechanism from each framework where it performs best, covering each framework's blind spot with strength borrowed from another. This is architectural work, not averaging. Explain the logic of every integration choice.

**Phase 5 – Action Plan**  
Translate the integrated model into specific, sequenced steps. Each step should cite which framework it draws from and why that framework's approach is optimal for that phase.

## Context

**Business problem:** {{business-problem}}  
**Framework A:** {{framework-a}}  
**Framework B:** {{framework-b}}  
**Framework C (if applicable):** {{framework-c}}  
**Integration rationale:** {{integration-reason}}

## Output

Structure your response with these sections in order:

1. **Causal Logic Statements** – one per framework in If/Then/Because format  
2. **Conflict Map** – markdown table as specified  
3. **Blind Spot Register** – one per framework with brief failure scenario  
4. **Integrated Model** – narrative explanation with clear reasoning for each integration choice  
5. **Action Plan** – numbered, sequenced steps with framework attribution explaining why each approach is optimal for that step  
6. **Risk Note** – the one scenario where even the integrated model might fail and what to watch for

The output should feel like a single coherent approach, not a patchwork. Do not simply alternate between frameworks. Use plain operational language, not jargon from any single framework tradition. The deliverable is a decision and an execution plan, not an academic comparison.