E.23.CAE:5.1 - Human knowledge that remains inert

Tell. A practitioner can explain a structural decision principle when it is named but does not use it in a differently worded workplace case. The failure may concern retrieval, recognition of applicability, adaptation, enactment, or an envelope limit; “they forgot” decides none of these.

Show. First confirm that the workplace case lies inside the claimed capability envelope. Without reteaching, present a qualified reference case that the practitioner previously solved, then the workplace case, then the reference again. Ask separately whether the principle is relevant before asking for a solution. If a structural comparison makes the principle recognizable and the practitioner can then adapt it, the observations support availability plus an applicability-selection failure under the uncued condition. They do not prove one universal retrieval mechanism or complete workplace capability. Human Capability Development or a direct domain Method can receive the result only after a separate next-action decision.

This is the minimally viable case: one holder, one Work family, one reference return, one applicability observation, one changed demand, one disposition, one surviving rival, and one candidate route.