IS.2:4.1 - Follow the episode through the intended result

Recover the actual occasion, input, interpretation, action, output and receiver. Ask what the participant believed they were doing and what was expected to happen next. Compare that account with permitted task material: a case, input, tool response, work product or receiving decision.

An effective question is “Show me where you could no longer continue”. Follow the answer both ways. Backward, identify the missing condition or earlier contribution. Forward, ask what result the next person or system needs and why the current result is insufficient. B.1.5.EW helps when the action’s contribution to the encompassing work is unclear.

For example, finding a source edition can be part of judging support for a claim, which is part of preparing a release recommendation. Correct retrieval is not sufficient if the retrieved source cannot support the claim. Equally, debating the recommendation cannot repair an unavailable source.

Include a successful contrast when it can distinguish the failure. The same performer using a different source route may reveal an access problem; success with an expert present may instead reveal the expert’s missing contribution. Preserve that assistance in the account rather than treating both episodes as independent performance.

If the intended event has not occurred, use an explicit prospective case and keep its status clear. A walkthrough can identify a contradiction or unavailable input without proving that later work will succeed.