Editor checklist
NAP PRP - where advanced judgment usually diverges
Referencing the content of National Association of Parliamentarians PRP credentialing expectations, consulting practice, and advanced Robert's Rules work
These notes surface places where consultant-level judgment, not just rote recall, separates advanced learners.
They are intended to support simulation-style and advisory preparation.
-
Correct rule versus usable advice
- Usually in your main path
- PRP-level work requires both technical correctness and usable guidance.
- Also check
- A technically correct answer may still fail the client if it ignores meeting reality.
- If you teach the wrong version
- Advice sounds impressive but does not solve the actual procedural problem.
- Suggested action
- Pair authority analysis with what the chair or body should do next.
This page does not replace your organization's governing documents or adopted authority. Add dated citations in your local editor log when you confirm a source.