fpf.tools
Jump to text
On this page
Copy and source
Original source · lines 896–910
Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-14 19:58:00 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-14 19:58:38 UTC · last check 2026-10-15 00:05:10 UTC

LDR.Source:2 - Source contributions and evidence limits

The pattern comparisons state the claims that change the methods. The following notes make their boundaries recoverable without turning the sources into a generic reading requirement.

  • Organization Change Engineering, historical version of 3 October 2026, OCE.12, supplies the source treatment of adequate ordinary coordination, human-development cost, negotiated whole proposals, substantive integration, proposal preparation and first-use cases.
  • R10, Systems Management, 10:2 and the preparation/decision portions of 10:5 supplies working products, trusted advice, proposal preparation and shared start. The present source use is bounded to those connected portions and the already developed OCE account; it is not a review of the whole Guide. The method is taught in LDR.4, so the reader need not reconstruct it from R10. Fixed durations, categorical claims about resistance and claims that all concerns are harmless are not adopted.
  • CCL, “What Is Leadership?”, 15 March 2026 supplies a relational conceptual comparison. It does not establish a complete leadership ontology or a measured effect of the three leadership Methods and the supplied answer construction.
  • CBI, Mutual Gains Approach brief, 2023 supplies the negotiation comparison used in LDR.2. Its short source account is supplemented by the developed joint-feasibility and receiving-use construction here.
  • IAF Core Competencies, revised 6 December 2021 supplies the competent-facilitation alternative for B.5.SD. A professional competency account is not a domain-specific calculation or an effectiveness study.
  • AHRQ TeamSTEPPS 3.0 brief, huddle and debrief pages, reviewed in 2023, supply concrete teamwork comparators for LDR.1 and LDR.4. No healthcare outcome estimate or permission is transferred to the constructed non-clinical cases.
  • CFIR Opinion Leaders, current guide, supplies the informal-judgement cue and its limits in LDR.4. Identifying influence does not supply the actual advice, representation or agreement.
  • “Об фасилитаторов,” 25 May 2020, supplies a diagnostic practitioner criticism used in B.5.SD. Broad empirical claims and categorical conclusions about facilitators are not premises of the method.

Sources linked in a predecessor’s bibliography but not used for a claim here do not silently become evidence for this publication. The conditional cases and arithmetic support the illustrated choices under their stipulated premises. They are not practitioner trials, demonstrations of universal transfer or causal evaluations.