Field map
Where Lejacie sits.
Many established fields improve an important part of the same problem. The issue is not that they are wrong or insufficient in their own domains. It is that no single approach, used alone, reliably ensures that consequential expertise remains defensible and becomes usable for a real person in real conditions.
Lejacie
Where expertise meets the moment of useChoose a field.
Safe to Say, Safe to Reach, Safe to Use does not replace these fields. It addresses the transmission and use problem that can sit between them: how can consequential expertise remain trustworthy while becoming usable enough for real-world judgement and action?
Knowledge translation
- What the field contributes
- Examines the movement of knowledge into action: contextual adaptation, adoption, embedding and sustained practice (Graham and colleagues’ Knowledge-to-Action framework).
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Whether the ultimate recipient can understand, judge and act on the expertise reaching them.
Legal design
- What the field contributes
- Applies human-centred design to legal problems, information, services and systems: human-centred legal products, interactions and systems.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Explicit protection of legal, evidentiary, professional and authority boundaries during translation, including the line between legal information and legal advice.
Implementation science
- What the field contributes
- Asks whether a sound intervention is actually adopted, supported and sustained in practice. Frameworks such as EPIS distinguish exploration, preparation, implementation and sustainment.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Attention to barriers, workflow changes, ownership, monitoring and maintenance, applied to the moment a person has to use the information.
Behavioural science
- What the field contributes
- Helps distinguish information failure from action failure. The COM-B model identifies capability, opportunity and motivation as conditions for behaviour.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Where a person understands the information but lacks the opportunity, resources, authority, safety or motivation to act, the problem should not automatically be diagnosed as poor communication. It is escalated as a system finding.
Plain language
- What the field contributes
- Clear, accurate, understandable communication. ISO 24495-1:2023 applies beyond public communication to technical and legislative writing.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Whether the person can recognise relevance, judge appropriate reliance, act, reach help and recover. And the evidence that the problem is structural before it is lexical.
Service design
- What the field contributes
- End-to-end journeys, touchpoints and pathways. The Double Diamond moves through Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- The defensibility and appropriate-reliance needs of information moving through those pathways. A referral is not a handover.
Human factors
- What the field contributes
- How people actually perceive, decide and act under real conditions: attention, working memory, workload, fatigue and error. ISO 9241-210 treats human-centred design as a lifecycle activity.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- The 4:47pm Test: design for the tired person and the professional with three people waiting, not an ideal user. Legal text fails partly because readers cannot hold a nested sentence in working memory.
Public interest technology
- What the field contributes
- Technology designed, deployed and governed for public benefit, including AI governance: reliability, transparency, oversight, appropriate reliance and monitoring.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- Whether an AI-supported answer is safe for a person to receive, use and escalate from. An AI tool cannot be a carrier with authority: the deploying organisation must decide how far it may personalise, before it is built.
Trauma-informed practice
- What the field contributes
- Safety, trust, choice, power and accountability in interactions.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- A practical translation and handover method that does not leave someone to reconstruct the pathway alone.
Cultural responsiveness
- What the field contributes
- Whether information, services and practice fit people’s language, culture, community, history and trust.
- What Lejacie holds together with it
- A framework can be translated into ten languages without becoming accessible to the communities it was meant to serve. Usability is audience-relative: the truth stays the same, how it is carried changes.
What Lejacie adds
Four requirements in one practice method.
- Protect what the expertise is entitled to say.
- Make practical meaning usable for the intended person.
- Connect information to feasible action, reachable help, fallback and recovery.
- Verify, test and maintain both defensibility and real-world use over time.
The claim is not that these fields have overlooked usability, or that professional review has overlooked accuracy. The narrower proposition is that organisations need a method that holds those responsibilities together when expert knowledge is translated for human use.
The whole map
| Field | What it contributes | What Lejacie holds together with it |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge translation | Examines the movement of knowledge into action: contextual adaptation, adoption, embedding and sustained practice (Graham and colleagues’ Knowledge-to-Action framework). | Whether the ultimate recipient can understand, judge and act on the expertise reaching them. |
| Legal design | Applies human-centred design to legal problems, information, services and systems: human-centred legal products, interactions and systems. | Explicit protection of legal, evidentiary, professional and authority boundaries during translation, including the line between legal information and legal advice. |
| Implementation science | Asks whether a sound intervention is actually adopted, supported and sustained in practice. Frameworks such as EPIS distinguish exploration, preparation, implementation and sustainment. | Attention to barriers, workflow changes, ownership, monitoring and maintenance, applied to the moment a person has to use the information. |
| Behavioural science | Helps distinguish information failure from action failure. The COM-B model identifies capability, opportunity and motivation as conditions for behaviour. | Where a person understands the information but lacks the opportunity, resources, authority, safety or motivation to act, the problem should not automatically be diagnosed as poor communication. It is escalated as a system finding. |
| Plain language | Clear, accurate, understandable communication. ISO 24495-1:2023 applies beyond public communication to technical and legislative writing. | Whether the person can recognise relevance, judge appropriate reliance, act, reach help and recover. And the evidence that the problem is structural before it is lexical. |
| Service design | End-to-end journeys, touchpoints and pathways. The Double Diamond moves through Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver. | The defensibility and appropriate-reliance needs of information moving through those pathways. A referral is not a handover. |
| Human factors | How people actually perceive, decide and act under real conditions: attention, working memory, workload, fatigue and error. ISO 9241-210 treats human-centred design as a lifecycle activity. | The 4:47pm Test: design for the tired person and the professional with three people waiting, not an ideal user. Legal text fails partly because readers cannot hold a nested sentence in working memory. |
| Public interest technology | Technology designed, deployed and governed for public benefit, including AI governance: reliability, transparency, oversight, appropriate reliance and monitoring. | Whether an AI-supported answer is safe for a person to receive, use and escalate from. An AI tool cannot be a carrier with authority: the deploying organisation must decide how far it may personalise, before it is built. |
| Trauma-informed practice | Safety, trust, choice, power and accountability in interactions. | A practical translation and handover method that does not leave someone to reconstruct the pathway alone. |
| Cultural responsiveness | Whether information, services and practice fit people’s language, culture, community, history and trust. | A framework can be translated into ten languages without becoming accessible to the communities it was meant to serve. Usability is audience-relative: the truth stays the same, how it is carried changes. |