Document Type: Framework
Status: Active
Authority: Research Brain
Applies To: Affiliate Brain, Ads Brain, Content Brain, Partnership Brain, AIBS Brain
Parent: Research Brain Canon
Version: v1.0
Last Reviewed: 2026-04-18
Purpose
The Research Brain LEAP Channel Validation Framework defines the structured pre-testing validation process used to determine whether a new channel should be tested.
Many organisations waste resources testing channels prematurely or pursuing trends without sufficient strategic justification.
The LEAP framework ensures MWMS tests channels intentionally and strategically.
It prevents:
shiny-object channel selection
excessive simultaneous testing
resource dilution
unstructured experimentation
misaligned channel expansion
LEAP ensures each new channel is tested with clear reasoning, clear expectations, and clear decision criteria.
Scope
This framework applies to:
Affiliate Brain traffic expansion decisions
Ads Brain channel testing decisions
Content Brain distribution expansion
Partnership Brain collaboration channels
AIBS Brain growth architecture
This framework governs:
channel validation prior to testing
decision discipline for channel expansion
strategic timing of channel testing
evaluation readiness logic
This framework does not govern:
channel prioritisation scoring
experiment design
budget allocation
platform configuration
These remain governed by related frameworks.
Definition
LEAP represents a structured validation sequence applied before testing a new channel.
LEAP ensures new channels are evaluated based on:
strategic timing
growth model balance
expected performance potential
testing readiness clarity
LEAP prevents random expansion into channels lacking strategic justification.
LEAP Structure
L = Long vs Short Term Balance
E = Evaluate Channel Fit
A = Assess Performance Potential
P = Plan Structured Test
Each component must be satisfied before channel testing begins.
L — Long vs Short Term Balance
Channels must be evaluated according to their position within the growth timeline.
Some channels generate immediate results.
Some channels generate delayed results.
Healthy growth systems require balance between:
short-term performance channels
long-term compounding channels
Over-reliance on short-term channels creates volatility.
Over-reliance on long-term channels creates slow feedback cycles.
Questions:
Does this channel produce immediate results?
Does this channel produce delayed compounding value?
Does this channel improve long-term system stability?
Does current channel mix lack short-term or long-term balance?
E — Evaluate Channel Fit
Channels must match:
target audience behaviour
system capabilities
strategic direction
Evaluation factors:
audience presence on channel
channel relevance to offer
channel compatibility with message format
competitive landscape suitability
channel alignment with growth model structure
Channels should not be tested solely due to popularity.
Channel fit must be supported by evidence.
A — Assess Performance Potential
Estimated performance potential must be calculated before testing.
Back-of-envelope estimation is sufficient.
Evaluation variables may include:
estimated cost per click
estimated conversion rate
estimated cost per acquisition
estimated traffic volume
estimated lifetime value impact
estimated resource requirements
Approximate calculations improve decision quality.
Channels with unrealistic economics should not be prioritised.
P — Plan Structured Test
Each channel must have a defined testing structure before launch.
Testing clarity improves learning speed.
Testing plan must define:
test objective
expected success criteria
test duration
resource allocation
decision checkpoint timing
Testing without predefined evaluation criteria produces ambiguous outcomes.
Channels should not be tested indefinitely.
Test structure improves decision discipline.
Channel Testing Readiness Criteria
Channel should only be tested when:
clear hypothesis exists
expected outcome defined
resource allocation confirmed
evaluation timeline defined
growth model alignment confirmed
Channels failing readiness criteria should be deferred.
Channel Testing Limitation Principle
Number of simultaneously tested new channels should be limited.
Excessive concurrent channel testing reduces:
signal clarity
optimisation focus
learning speed
Recommended approach:
test limited number of channels per cycle
replace underperforming channels gradually
Relationship to Channel Prioritisation Framework
Channel Prioritisation Framework determines:
which channels are most promising.
LEAP determines:
whether timing is appropriate for testing.
Both frameworks operate sequentially.
Relationship to Growth Model Architecture
Channel testing must align with growth model structure.
Channel should contribute to at least one:
acquisition mechanism
activation improvement mechanism
retention improvement mechanism
referral improvement mechanism
Channels without structural contribution should not be tested.
Governance Rule
All new channels must pass LEAP validation prior to testing.
Unstructured channel experimentation is not permitted.
Channel expansion must follow structured decision discipline.
Version Control
v1.0
Initial definition of LEAP channel validation structure.