DTM.1:4.4 - Relate continuation to consequences
Now compare the variant’s continuation with the effects just recovered.
| Observed or modeled relation | Working characterization and consequence |
|---|---|
| Continuation depends on another contribution, while effects are unresolved | Dependence is established; usefulness and harm remain open. |
| Participants obtain useful contributions from the arrangement under the stated comparison | Cooperation is supported for those participants and conditions. Inspect any relevant omitted recipient before generalizing. |
| A variant or participant gains continuation through another’s resources while impairing that other’s stated work | Parasitic use is a candidate explanation of this relation. Identify the causal extraction or diversion; disadvantage alone does not establish it. |
| Effects change with access, scale, time or allocation of costs | Retain a conditional relation; model the condition that changes its character. |
These are not permanent types of people or organizations. Several relations may coexist: cooperation between two participants can impose harm on a third. The description also does not settle what intervention is legitimate; the applicable agreements, rights and decision methods do that work.
The minimal output can be one sentence: “This procedure depends on the shared service, improves current output while the service is available, and leaves the team without a tested substitute.” That is already enough to consider a substitute or a different assurance arrangement without calling either participant a parasite.