CB.16:4.3 - Develop a position the recipient can act on

Construct the contribution around the actual decision. Explain the current difficulty, the proposed change, why it helps the receiving work, the evidence and limits, and the support needed to make it feasible. State what response is requested: a decision, a change to a proposal, a trial, information or a further conversation.

Compare materially different options when the choice remains open. Include the useful part of the current arrangement and the loss each change introduces. A narrower feasible request may obtain a needed contribution sooner; a broader request may be necessary if the narrow one leaves the real problem intact. Explain the choice to the represented participants.

Make the resource implications visible. State what the community can offer within its actual commitments and what must come from the recipient or another owner. A group of practitioners can propose protected review time; it cannot create that allocation by promising enthusiasm.

Prepare a joint position that can carry meaningful disagreement. Depending on the group’s rules, it may be a supported majority proposal with a minority account, a common minimum with stated unresolved questions, or several attributed alternatives. Use a joint position only at the scope the participants have authorised.

If the contribution is advice, say what it can establish and which decision remains with its receiver. A request to be consulted may be justified by a useful professional contribution; it does not by itself establish an exclusive right to represent the domain.