Who can say yes, and yes to what?
Original fictional teaching conversation. The people, print-shop scenario and pilot are invented; this is not a client case or a recorded interview.
Synthetic macOS voices: Daniel as Host and Samantha as Founder. Neither voice represents Rishwajeet Singh or a real interview guest.

FULL SOURCE

D01 | 00:00.000–00:03.648 | Host
What made you realise the approval button was solving the wrong problem?

D02 | 00:04.148–00:22.726 | Founder
We were watching a print shop get a customer proof approved. There were two PDFs in the chat, both called final. Someone replied, looks good. The operator had the machine ready, but he was still making a phone call. I thought he needed a clearer notification. He actually needed to know whether that person could authorise the print run.

D03 | 00:23.226–00:25.330 | Host
Why did the green tick not settle it?

D04 | 00:25.830–00:38.114 | Founder
The green tick told us someone had clicked. It did not tell us whether they could release the job. We had made the action visible and left the decision unclear. Those are two different problems, even when they happen on the same screen.

D05 | 00:38.614–00:44.548 | Host
But sometimes approval really is just checking a typo. Are you making a simple job too complicated?

D06 | 00:45.048–01:00.070 | Founder
That is fair. A spelling correction does not need a committee. The question is which decision you are asking for. Check this wording, approve this version, and spend money printing it can belong to different people. If one person owns all three, the process should stay simple.

D07 | 01:00.570–01:02.997 | Host
So what did you change in the next version?

D08 | 01:03.497–01:22.261 | Founder
We separated a comment from a release decision. The proof had a version number, and the job named one person who could authorise printing that version. Everyone else could still flag a problem. A new file reopened the release decision. It was a small change to the screen, but first we had to agree who actually owned the risk of printing the wrong thing.

D09 | 01:22.761–01:25.806 | Host
And when that person does not reply before the deadline?

D10 | 01:26.306–01:35.180 | Founder
You need an agreed substitute or you move the deadline. Silence cannot suddenly mean approval because the machine is waiting. That would hide a decision nobody has made.

D11 | 01:35.680–01:37.819 | Host
Did that prove the new process worked?

D12 | 01:38.319–01:49.587 | Founder
No. This was a small pilot. We still needed to see whether people used the version numbers when a real rush job arrived. A tidier demonstration is not evidence that the whole operation became faster.

D13 | 01:50.087–01:52.667 | Host
What would you ask before building the button again?

D14 | 01:53.167–02:07.315 | Founder
Who can say yes, and yes to what? I would ask that before discussing the notification colour or the dashboard. The most useful part of the old process was the phone call we had wanted to remove. It revealed a decision our software had not understood.

EDIT: scene | 00:58.849
D02 | source 00:04.148–00:22.726 | edit 00:00.000–00:18.578
D03 | source 00:23.226–00:25.330 | edit 00:19.078–00:21.182
D04 | source 00:25.830–00:38.114 | edit 00:21.682–00:33.966
D05 | source 00:38.614–00:44.548 | edit 00:34.466–00:40.401
D06 | source 00:45.048–01:00.070 | edit 00:40.901–00:55.922
D07 | source 01:00.570–01:02.997 | edit 00:56.422–00:58.849

EDIT: question | 00:54.418
D14 | source 01:53.167–02:07.315 | edit 00:00.000–00:14.148
D05 | source 00:38.614–00:44.548 | edit 00:14.648–00:20.583
D06 | source 00:45.048–01:00.070 | edit 00:21.083–00:36.104
D03 | source 00:23.226–00:25.330 | edit 00:36.604–00:38.708
D04 | source 00:25.830–00:38.114 | edit 00:39.208–00:51.492
D07 | source 01:00.570–01:02.997 | edit 00:51.992–00:54.418

Machine House original teaching material. You may adapt the worksheets; retain the fictional/synthetic label if reusing this demonstration.