CB.14:4.1 - Turn repeated difficulty into a bounded development question

Ask practitioners to show the situation in which their present approach is insufficient. Recover what they were trying to achieve, what they did, the result, the difficulty and the conditions that may matter. Include a successful contrast or a failed attempt when it can distinguish an explanation. Obtain permission for sharing the material at the level the joint work needs.

State the question as a change someone could use. “Help a receiving repairer recognise which case needs specialist investigation” is more useful than “improve knowledge sharing”. Identify who needs that result and what they would do differently. A request from an organiser still needs comparison with the practitioners’ work.

First look for a sufficient existing answer. Ask the person with relevant experience, recover the applicable guidance and compare its conditions with the case. ME.2 and ME.4 help recover the repertoire and its source meanings when the needed material is scattered or unclear. If an existing answer suffices, return it through CB.5 and stop the development proposal.

Separate the remaining difficulty. The instruction may be incomplete; the method may fail under a changed condition; a person may need practice; or an organisational condition may prevent competent work. These can coexist, but their recipients differ. Return a learning need to HCD, an assignment or support problem to its owner through OCE, and a reusable method question to ME.

If an explanation or effect remains unknown, use RMP.1 with the exact question and current source answer. It first tests whether existing material is sufficient. Research follows only when the unresolved question, non-routine choice, inspectable criticism and communicable result conditions hold. An unfamiliar question or an intended data collection exercise alone does not establish that need.