CB.15:4.4 - Clarify meanings through the shared work

Have each side explain the relevant action through a concrete case. Ask what starts it, what material it needs, what decision is made, what result leaves and who uses that result. Where the accounts conflict, locate the difference before proposing a shared term.

Compare consequential expressions in use. If one group calls a request “ready” when all fields are filled and another means a qualified practitioner has accepted it, preserve both meanings and say which condition the joint work needs. A short explanation or distinct wording may suffice.

When a recurring comparison or translation depends on an exact relation between local meanings, use F.9 to test the semantic correspondence or difference and its suitability for the proposed use. A mapping of terms does not itself provide permission to share material, authority to decide or a working referral arrangement.

Use the difference to change the joint action. Revise the question, add necessary context, obtain an unavailable contributor or keep two outputs for different recipients. Let each side recover the revised arrangement in its own words and apply it to the case.

Separate a misunderstanding from a substantive conflict. One group may understand a request precisely and still be unable to fulfil it because of cost, priorities or professional obligations. OCE.12 helps make those conflicting contributions and choices explicit; the actual owner decides what can change.