CB.10:4.4 - Compare the account with other observations

Seek the observation most capable of changing the account’s meaning. It may be a recipient’s response, an actual work product, an existing activity record or a relevant outcome indicator maintained for another purpose. Recover how it was obtained and whether it concerns the same people, work and period.

Compare the parts that can conflict. A participant may report that an answer resolved the issue while a later request shows that a necessary step remained unclear. A reported improvement may coincide with a different workload or new tool. Ask what the discrepancy changes; do not discard it to preserve the preferred story.

Use stories to interpret indicators and indicators to challenge stories. An unexpected rise in repeat requests can identify a case worth following. An unexpected successful use may reveal a benefit that the current indicator misses. Revise the question or indicator when the receiving decision needs that new meaning, retaining enough continuity to interpret the change.

Treat absent links explicitly. When a result is known but the supposed community contribution cannot be recovered, report the result without attributing it. When a contribution was used but no later outcome can yet be observed, return the use and the remaining question. Lack of a record is not automatically lack of value; it limits what the account can support.

ME.11 supplies a formal method-trial contribution when the question requires it, distinguishing intended work, what occurred, conditions, burdens and evidence reach. Its result can feed the community inquiry; retain the evidence scope of any ordinary accounts used alongside it.