LDR.2:4.2 - Recover the condition behind a position

Ask what result a stated demand protects, what would fail without it and what observation could answer the concern. Retain the participant’s own answer; do not reinterpret every objection as misunderstanding.

For example, “the complete interface by day 20” may protect the need for daily production data, while automatic control can wait. That distinction creates options only if the customer with the necessary authority accepts it. If complete control by day 20 is a real non-negotiable requirement, the reduced proposal does not satisfy it.

Separate a needed result from an assumed means. A required safety property may be met in several configurations; a preferred staffing arrangement may be one way of obtaining a contribution. Use the domain method to examine that claim. B.5.QD.CF helps reconsider conflicting assumptions where an assumed necessary means creates the impasse. D.4 helps when the conflict concerns value premises and acceptable consequences. Neither method grants permission to relax an effective requirement.

Recover meaningful alternatives if agreement fails: continue the present service, obtain a different provider, narrow the result, delay it, perform independent work or decline. A party with no acceptable no-agreement outcome still needs an honest account of that condition; pressure does not make an impossible proposal feasible.