C.32.MWA.PP:4.2 - Establish the Methods and the connections that performance must preserve
Bring in the identified Methods, candidate accounts and individually supported local connections, preserving their prior status and unresolved conditions. A candidate account does not become an admitted Method through allocation. If actual Work is later described as enacting a Method, establish that claim for the Method and occurrence in question.
For each decision-changing contribution, inspect the actual explanation or demonstration, not its name. Identify what material or situation it works on, what a competent performer does, why the action could obtain the result, which conditions are preserved, and where the Method stops.
Try the operation on one representative input or a sufficiently explicit prospective case. The purpose is to locate the first unsupported connection. Different findings require different work:
| Finding in the attempted use | Obtain this contribution before relying on the proposed arrangement |
|---|---|
| The Method and its receiving result are sufficient; only local access or capacity is missing. | Preserve the Method and design the missing performance/support relation. |
| Competent people can perform the decisive judgement, but the learner or another provider cannot recover it. | Obtain a qualified demonstration or reconstruct the missing criterion; design learning separately. |
| One Method returns a result that the next cannot use. | Construct an adapter, choose a compatible Method or revise the receiving condition with its owner. Explain why the connection works. |
| No qualified way obtains the requested subject result. | Use C.39 and the relevant subject or research practice to construct a way or return a precise unresolved inquiry. |
| The proposed activity succeeds, but does not establish the promised mastery or continuing capability. | Obtain the missing personal or collective contribution and its observation; otherwise narrow the promise. |
| A universal account loses a condition on which one specialty depends. | Retain a justified specialization or change the common boundary rather than forcing the specialty through an unsuitable common procedure. |
C.39 supplies the general missing-way construction: search through the required change, recover a relevant operation, try its receiving use, and construct only the still-missing connection. Keep subject-method development distinct from pedagogical construction. A learning designer may choose a contrast or practice task without inventing a missing scientific criterion. Conversely, a subject expert’s correct answer does not supply a teachable route by itself.
If the original difficulty is not yet a usable problem, B.5.PI supplies inquiry from a weak cue or an apparently completed result. C.40.CD can develop a new problem from an achieved result. For continuing development, return their question to the selected development practice, rather than treating question formation as the entire development transition.
Retain distinct sources of change. Revising a Method can change what future performances require. Training can develop a person’s capability; a claim of capability change needs suitable performance evidence. Assigning a qualified person identifies an expected contribution; the permissions and authority required for that work need their own grounds. Reuse adequate existing evidence and authorization. Improving a tool can change available means. These repairs can be combined, but none supplies the others merely by being in the same project.
Explain the important joins in ordinary language. For example: “The domain review must return the condition under which the proposed experiment is interpretable before the participant runs it. A general coach can help formulate the question, but cannot substitute for that domain judgement.” This tells the architect what kind of performer and timing are required. “Coach, expert, learner” alone does not.
Do not force every result-use or support relation into Method composition. Use B.1.5 for a proposed whole; B.1.5.CM can resolve its identity. When that is the only unresolved question, finish with the relation or composition result. A materially different way to obtain the receiving result, rather than a larger Method name, creates the architecture comparison here.