CB.15:4.2 - Choose a small action that needs both contributions
Look for an action that is feasible with limited preparation and useful even if the relationship goes no further. Good candidates expose the practical difference: work through one referral, compare two interpretations of the same case, inspect a relevant operation on a visit, or prepare one joint response.
| Needed result | Possible form | What must come back |
|---|---|---|
| An answer to a bounded question. | Consultation or case discussion with qualified contributors. | An answer, applicability limit or precise missing inquiry for its receiver. |
| A concrete understanding of how another practice works. | A prepared visit, demonstration or learning expedition. | An account of the observed work and conditions, with what the visitor could try or still needs. |
| A working connection between recurring contributions. | A trial of one handover or jointly produced item. | The received result and an identified correction or condition for repeat use. |
| A larger new contribution. | A bounded joint project. | The agreed product and its use conditions; CB.14 governs a shared repertoire contribution. |
| A position to carry into an external decision. | Joint preparation with an explicit mandate through CB.16. | The authorised position and the decision-maker’s response. |
Choose from the result rather than the attraction of a format. A visit is useful when situated observation can change understanding; a question that can be answered from an existing account may need no visit. A project is useful when the contribution needs sustained work; an informal encounter cannot silently promise its delivery.
Ask both sides to refine the first task. Keep it small enough for their actual commitments, but large enough to reveal whether the proposed connection works. If no task offers value under available conditions, end with that conclusion or a specific missing condition.