HOUSEHOLD TASK OWNERSHIP — CONVERSATION RECORD
Original RelateWell planning aid. Use for voluntary arrangements; not a contract, diagnostic test or proven relationship intervention.

TASK AGREEMENT
Task and what is outside its scope:
Accepted owner(s) and acceptance date:
Done means — observable outcome:
Trigger or frequency:
Outcome needed by:
Who anticipates the need:
Who identifies workable options:
Who decides within the agreed limits:
Who does the physical task:
Who checks the outcome:
Budget, preferences and decisions requiring consultation:
Information, authorized access and directions:
Capacity, schedule, accessibility and necessary help:
Self-managed cue or reminder:
How an unfinished task is reported:
Backup proposal and how acceptance is checked:
Review date or event:

HANDOFF MESSAGE
What is already done:
What remains and when it matters:
What I can still offer:
The specific help I am asking for:
Accepted change, or still unresolved:

REVIEW
Was the outcome achieved?
Which thinking or doing step stayed with someone else?
Who still had to notice, prompt or monitor?
Was the workload workable alongside other responsibilities?
What will change, and who has agreed?

QUESTIONS — TRY FIRST

1. “You own groceries. Just ask me each time what we need, which shop to use and when to order.” Has all the planning work moved?
My answer and reason:

2. A person agrees to “do laundry” and starts a wash, but both people expected something different about drying and putting away. What field needs clarification?
My answer and reason:

3. An owner realizes a task cannot be finished on time. Is “You’ll have to handle it” an accepted handoff?
My answer and reason:

4. Two people agree to divide a task: one plans within an agreed budget, the other handles physical execution because of access and capacity. Must the division be wrong?
My answer and reason:

5. A recurring reminder is set by the person doing the task. Does ownership require remembering everything without a calendar or tool?
My answer and reason:

6. One agreed task is missed. Does this alone prove deliberate manipulation or a diagnosis?
My answer and reason:

ANSWER NOTES

1. No. Some doing may have moved, while planning remains with the other person.
Agree who checks supplies, finds options, decides within limits and checks the result. Division can be shared, but it should be explicit rather than hidden behind “ownership.”

2. The definition of done and the task’s scope.
Write the agreed outcome and any separately assigned stages. Neither person’s unspoken expectation establishes the agreement.

3. No. State what remains, propose a feasible change and check acceptance.
A handoff is a request for a defined part of the task. The other person’s silence or presence does not automatically assign it to them.

4. No. A deliberate, workable division can be appropriate.
Make the thinking, doing and outcome check visible. Review whether the arrangement is fair and sustainable rather than requiring one person to do every stage.

5. No. A self-managed cue can support the agreement.
The question is who maintains the cue and responds to it. Using tools differs from requiring another person to keep prompting and monitoring.

6. No. Examine the missed step and actual pattern.
Discuss timing, capacity, information and follow-through. Repeated refusal, threats or control may need a different response, but a worksheet cannot establish motives or assess safety.

Keep only information you need and can safely store. If there are threats, coercion or retaliation, appropriate local support takes priority over negotiating this form.