An apprenticeship system has to change as the settlement does: new skills need new tracks, growth needs more masters, and shrinkage makes cross-training more critical. Review it every quarter, plan apprenticeship cohorts several years ahead because training takes years, and do not retire a rarely used but vital skill, such as running a pressure vessel, since a skill nobody practises is a skill the community will not have on the day it is needed.
Part of System Governance
Keeping the apprenticeship system matched to what the community needs as skills, population and technology change.
Four Changes The Carrier Names
The carrier article lists four ways the system must evolve:
- New skills emerge. Someone discovers a new technique or resource: create a new apprenticeship track.
- Skills become obsolete. If a craft is no longer needed, redirect its apprentices.
- The community grows. More people need more masters, so promote capable journeymen.
- The community shrinks. Cross-training becomes even more critical (Cross-Training Program).
It asks for a review every quarter with three questions: what skills does the community need that it does not have, what skills are held by only one person, and where are apprentices stalled and why.
Training Takes Years, So Planning Has To Start Early
The Master-Apprentice Ratio article says to plan apprenticeship cohorts around anticipated needs 3 to 7 years out, because that is the typical duration of a full apprenticeship, and to work backward from the number of practitioners needed to the number of apprentices to accept now. It also warns against accepting more than can be trained to standard, since that produces poorly trained practitioners and slows capacity.
Worked example, using that article’s ratio example of two apprentices per master per three-year term. Suppose the community will need 4 more smiths in 6 years:
- With 1 master teaching 2 at a time: 2 qualified at year 3, and 2 more at year 6, total 4, but only if no one fails and no one else can teach.
- With 2 masters teaching 2 each: 4 qualified at year 3.
- A journeyman from the first cohort who supervises the second, the graduated-responsibility idea in the same article, would let one master reach the target sooner, but the article gives no figure for how much sooner, so this tree gives none.
The point of the arithmetic is the lead time: the decision to train was needed years before the need showed.
Growth, Shrinkage And Thresholds
The corpus offers a few size markers, none of them tested rules. The Division of Labor article places apprenticeship as practical at around 25-50 people, with 8-12 dedicated roles. The Essential Positions article says communities above 30 people need named, accountable owners for the essential functions. The Guilds article says a guild is premature with a single practitioner and becomes useful at two to three. These are guides to when to formalise, and a settlement should check them against its own situation.
Do Not Retire A Rare Skill By Counting How Often It Is Used
A craft that is no longer needed daily is not necessarily one the community can drop. Surgery, running a pressure vessel, structural judgement and water-system repair are used rarely and matter enormously when they are needed. Two safeguards apply:
- Keep a minimum: at least two people who have passed the test, and recertification on the schedule in Competency Testing, since skills degrade without practice.
- If the skill is truly retired, archive it: a written procedure, the vessel’s log, and one person who can still demonstrate. The Knowledge Preservation article records how Roman concrete and Damascus steel were lost when their last holders died, and the lesson is that the cost of keeping a record is far lower than the cost of re-deriving a technique.
What You Need
- The quarterly review, with the three questions.
- A forecast of the community’s needs 3-7 years ahead, kept in the registry.
- A list of rare-but-vital skills with a minimum number of holders.
- Records of past demand (Record Keeping).
Method: The Quarterly Review
Step 1: Count the holders of every vital skill, and the apprentices in training.
Step 2: Identify single-holder skills and start cover.
Step 3: Look at stalled apprentices. Is the problem the master, the apprentice or the assessment?
Step 4: Add or retire tracks with reasons written down.
Step 5: Update the forecast for population change, new technology and aging masters.
Step 6: Decide the next cohort, within the ratio limits.
Step 7: Report to the assembly, so the cost is visible.
Common Mistakes
- Reacting only when a skill is lost.
- Accepting more apprentices than masters can teach.
- Retiring a rare skill because it is rare.
- Letting the quarterly review become routine. Ask the questions every time.
- Treating size thresholds as laws.
What’s Next
- Learn next: System Architecture — the whole system the review adjusts
- Combine with: Standards & Quality Control — the standards that change with practice