Dare I get more specific with my C line in my intentional model?


My intentional model, thus far, is
C: I run a business with 10 employees
T:
F: Excited
A: Set a descriptive vision for the future, care personally for employees, provide direct feedback, support with clear policies/rules/job descriptions
R: Happy, productive staff

My modeling reading & training thus hasn’t had my intentional Thoughts be very involved; they are usually one sentence. However, my unintentional thoughts around staff management involve concern for perpetual issues of dysfunctional staff behavior and/or turnover/hiring/retraining, which does not lead to the emotions I need to have.

If I could do an involved intentional Thought, I’d opt for:

T: I know that Alexandra, Gail, Sam, Missy, Jen, Carina, Tiffani, Jessica, Courtney, & Bethany each have the experience, skills, and potential ability to develop individually and together into a staff that can operate with little supervision.

So if that’s too involved for an intentional T line, can I be more specific in my C line?? Such as:

C: I run a business with 10 employees (Alexandra, Gail, Sam, Missy, Jen, Carina, Tiffani, Jessica, Courtney, & Bethany) who each have prior experience, a variety of skills, and who were gauged at hiring to have further potential ability.
T: The people I’ve hired will develop into a staff that can operate with little supervision.
F: Excited
A: Set a descriptive vision for the future, support with clear policies/rules/job descriptions, care personally for employees, provide direct feedback
R: Happy, productive staff

It’s tricky b/c I sense that the intentional feeling needs to be proportionally in a positive direction as the unintentional dread was in the negative direction; so to get there I feel a less involved, more direct thought is more inspiring. However if you couple the original C with this short T it doesn’t logically track: I can’t recognize in light of the fact I have staff of 11 that the people I’ve hired will develop into a staff that can operate with little supervision — it needs more context in either C or T, right??