RULE-G03 — Score language: level language in prose, numbers in data
Authority: CLM-L024 · CLM-L025 | Edition: 1.0 | Status: Active
Rule
MN scores are analytical outputs. In prose — profile descriptions, coaching notes, diagnostic writing, articles — refer to score level using level language, not raw numbers. Numbers belong in maps, data tables, and technical documentation.
Level language: high · low · upper range · lower range · mid-range · strong · mild · moderate
Forbidden in prose: "scored 8.3 on Creative" · "her Creative Nature is 7.6" · "a score of 4 on Interpersonal"
The reason is precision without meaning: a score of 8.3 carries false precision and no interpretive value to a reader who doesn't know the scale's distribution. What carries meaning is the relationship — high relative to what the situation demands, low relative to what a role requires.
OK examples
| ✓ OK |
|---|
| She has a high Creative Nature. |
| His Interpersonal Nature falls in the lower range. |
| A mid-range Healing Nature can still be an asset in the right situation. |
| Her profile shows strong Administrative and Creative Natures. |
| His Protective Nature is mild — enough to engage, not enough to dominate. |
Not-OK examples
| ✗ Forbidden | ✓ Rewrite |
|---|---|
| Her Creative Nature is 8.3. | She has a high Creative Nature. |
| He scored a 4 on Interpersonal. | His Interpersonal Nature falls in the lower range. |
| A 7.6 Healing Nature suggests strong fit. | A high Healing Nature suggests fit with care-oriented roles. |
| Her score of 9 on Protective indicates... | Her high Protective Nature indicates... |
| Scores above 7 on Creative are associated with... | High Creative Natures are associated with... |
Forbidden forms
scored X on [Nature] · her [Nature] is [number] · a score of [number] · [number] on [Nature] · [Nature] score of [number]
Required forms
high [Nature] Nature · low [Nature] Nature · upper range · lower range · mid-range · strong [Nature] Nature · mild [Nature] Nature
Why
This rule is downstream of:
- CLM-L025 — The combinatorial profile space has no preferred direction. Raw scores suggest a scale with an implied good end (high is better, low is worse). Level language can be positioned against situational demand, where a low score is as legitimate as a high one.
- CLM-L024 — Nine Natures as named concepts. Names carry meaning; numbers don't convey the engagement orientation the name signals.
False precision also erodes trust. A practitioner who tells a client "your Healing Nature is 7.6" invites the question "what does that mean?" and has no situational answer. A practitioner who says "you have a high Healing Nature — here's what that means in this situation" is working within the framework's actual explanatory structure.
Common slip
Data-fluent writers (researchers, analysts, HR professionals) default to numerical reporting because it feels objective. In MN prose, precision is carried by the situational frame, not the number. "Her high Creative Nature is an asset in this role's demand for novelty" is more precise, not less, than "her score of 8.1 on Creative."
Exception
Raw scores are acceptable in:
- Map report data tables
- Technical documentation (API responses, schema references)
- Research methodology sections
- Comparisons of score distributions across populations (research register only)
Even in research writing, scores in prose should be accompanied by level language in the same sentence: "a mean Creative Nature score of 7.2 (high range) across this cohort..."