ME.16 - Introduce a Method into Practice and Decide What to Keep or Change

Primary working result: an introduction account that identifies each changed subject and keeps its kind explicit. It records the introduction strategy and its status, separately identified candidate accounts and descriptions, and any WorkPlan. It distinguishes admitted introduction Work from admitted later Work; both enact only independently admitted Methods. The account names assignment, permission, authority, access, use, enactment, and other direct-relation predicates, participants, and relied-on occurrences. It also contains decision-relevant observation positions, separate target and strategy adaptation records, an optional C.28-governed causal-use result, and one bounded keep, revise, branch, replace, or stop decision, or a retained set with its limitation.

ME.16:0 - Use This When

Use this pattern when an admitted Method variant or a status-preserved candidate account is ready for a bounded introduction attempt in a real practice and the team must learn which intended Method-related conditions were actually established after people and Systems worked. Begin by separating the Method-related target and direct-relation claims; the introduction strategy and its status; the descriptions and any WorkPlan used to guide it; performed introduction Work; later Work and observations; and the outside result that motivated the attempt.

For a first pass, write one plain row: what the team tried to establish, what Work it actually performed, what was later observed or failed, which maintained claim that observation affects, and what to do next. Add typed subjects, relation predicates, adaptation detail, or causal apparatus only where the decision relies on them.

The first useful result is an introduction-observation row. It names each changed subject or direct-relation occurrence; the introduction strategy, its status, description, and any separate WorkPlan; the bounded setting and period; authorized introduction Work; later actual Work or failed entry; decision-relevant observations; any target or introduction-strategy adaptation; evidence reach; the particular maintained claim or edition affected; the next receiving action; and residual uncertainty.

Here introduction is Plain practice wording for authorized performed Work intended to establish named Method-related conditions in a bounded setting. The Work can be completed even when access, usability, later enactment, fit, or an outside result fails. Actual availability, usability, or change comes only from later observations and, when a continuing subject is claimed to have changed, the required A.3.4 result.

Do not use this pattern to develop capability implicitly. When current capability is adequate and no relevant change is required or asserted, retain its A.2.2 basis and currentness without demanding development. Omit capability detail that cannot change the decision. Consume a named E.23.CDI or domain capability-development result only when capability change is required. If it is missing or stale, name the missing result or governing pattern, the receiving Agent when one is current, and the next development or stop action. Use ME.17 when the primary question is a bounded population-level transmission, recognition, selection, memory, retention, loss, or other cultural claim.

ME.16:0.1 - Working Distinctions

Item	Working meaning here	Boundary
introduction target	One named changed subject or one direct-relation claim: for example an admitted Method selection, a separately identified description episteme, support System, capability bearer and capability result, particular Work occurrence, domain entity, organizational System, selected structure, or assignment, permission, authority, access, use, or enactment predicate with named participants.	A mixed list of nouns does not state which things exist, which claims are maintained, or which relations obtain.
candidate account and description	Claim-bearing content about a proposed Method or local change, with candidate status retained, plus any separately identified description or representation.	A candidate account is not a Method, MethodDescription of the candidate whole, Work, or relation occurrence.
bounded setting	The place, period, practitioner population, Work family, identified organizational System or selected structure when one is relied on, participating Systems, obtaining relations, and protected conditions.	A company, team, or discipline label alone does not identify an organizational System or structure.
introduction Method, candidate account, description, plan, and Work	Retain the proposed way of establishing named conditions as a candidate introduction account until A.3.1 admits its Method. Before admission, keep claim-bearing content as that account or another honestly named description episteme; it is not a `U.MethodDescription`. After admission, use `U.MethodDescription` only when A.3.2 classifies an episteme whose one `EntityOfConcern` is that admitted Method. Keep any WorkPlan and authorized performed Work separate in both branches. Performed Work may enact only independently admitted Methods.	A strategy label, candidate account, description episteme, plan, announcement, publication, training invitation, or available tool establishes neither Method admission nor enactment, performed Work, or success.
later practice Work	Actual Work after the introduction in which an admitted Method is enacted, or in which candidate claims are compared while only independently admitted constituent Methods are enacted.	Availability, attendance, access, or one tool interaction does not establish enactment; a candidate account is never enacted.
capability-development input	An independently governed result naming holder, Work family, baseline, target, intervention, representative transfer Work, evidence, and currentness.	ME.16 can rely on the result; it does not perform or certify capability development.
observation position	One decision-relevant observation about acceptability or rejection, appropriateness or fit, feasibility, enactment or fidelity, burden or cost, reach, sustainment, an outside result, or a named changed subject or relation.	Each position has its own subject, claim, evidence, receiving action, and stop; no favourable result fills the others.
adaptation record	What changed, when, whether planned or reactive, the deciding Agent and named authorization predicate with participants, the affected level, why and under which conditions, and whether the modification changed the Method-related target or the introduction strategy, its recorded status, description, WorkPlan, support, or only a local-use condition.	A modification of the introduction strategy is not a modification of the target Method-related subject; an adaptation does not by itself change the status or kind of any account, description, plan, Method, or Work.
contribution or causal-use claim	A separately governed claim that one change participated in or caused an observed result under named conditions.	Temporal order, participant report, association, or a before/after difference supplies no causal reliance by itself.
revision decision	`keep`, `revise`, `branch`, `replace`, or `stop` for this bounded attempt and the particular maintained claims or editions affected.	It grants no authority for the next change and creates no adoption lifecycle.

ME.16:1 - Problem Frame

Method introductions bundle many subjects, descriptions, relation occurrences, and Work. A new procedure or description arrives with capability development, expert assistance, a tool, changed assignments, management attention, templates, review forums, and new Work. Later results are then attributed to “the Method”, while failures are blamed on resistance or capability. Neither conclusion shows what actually changed.

The practical question is more demanding: which named subjects and direct-relation occurrences were intended to change; which accounts and descriptions stated the target proposal; what status the introduction strategy and its description had; which separate WorkPlan coordinated intended Work; what authorized introduction Work and later Work occurred or failed; what was observed at each decision-relevant position; what outside result followed; and whether any contribution or causal reliance has a current C.28 basis.

ME.16:2 - Problem

A rollout plan can be reported as adoption. Training can be reported as capability. Tool availability can be reported as use. A manager’s sponsorship can be reported as permission or authority. Later Work can be merged with the introduction Work, and a favourable domain result can be assigned to the Method without an alternative or contribution basis.

When several positions are compressed into one intervention label, the team cannot revise locally. It either repeats the whole programme or rejects it, even when the defect lies in one description, support relation, capability condition, assignment, permission, authority boundary, or outside-result assumption.

ME.16:3 - Forces

Force	Tension
Real practice	Natural Work reveals use and consequences, while many conditions change together.
Intervention clarity	Separate intended changes make learning possible, while programmes prefer one headline.
Capability	New Work may need development, while ME.16 must not smuggle training in as capability.
Authority and participation	Local change needs authorization and actual performers, while sponsorship and attendance are weaker facts.
Time	Later observation is needed, while waiting too long can make sources and alternatives stale.
Contribution	A decision needs a plausible account, while causal isolation is often unavailable.
Revision locality	One defeated claim should reopen one result, while bundled rollout invites whole-programme repair.

ME.16:4 - Solution

Build a typed account of the target subjects, accounts and descriptions, the introduction strategy and its status, any separate WorkPlan, actual Work occurrences, and named relied-on relations. Perform the bounded introduction attempt, observe later Work and decision-relevant outcomes separately, distinguish target adaptations from introduction-strategy adaptations, invoke C.28 only for a causal reliance, and revise only the maintained claim the evidence contradicts.

ME.16:4.1 - Pattern-Use Unfolding

Name the outside result and bounded decision. Identify the receiving practice, intended outside result, admitted Method or candidate-account status, setting, period, population, qualification window, and what keep, revise, branch, replace, or stop will change.
Build the typed target-and-strategy account. Name changed target subjects separately: admitted Methods; A.3.2-classified MethodDescriptions or other claim-bearing epistemes; representations; Systems; capability bearers and capability results; particular Work occurrences; domain entities; identified organizational Systems or selected structures. Keep candidate target accounts and descriptions separate.

If A.3.1 has admitted the introduction Method, name it and identify a U.MethodDescription only when A.3.2 classifies an episteme whose one EntityOfConcern is that Method. Otherwise retain a candidate introduction account and identify its claim-bearing material as a candidate account, description episteme, or other named episteme with status, claims, and maintained result; do not classify it as U.MethodDescription. Identify any WorkPlan separately; neither the plan nor performed Work admits or enacts the candidate.

For every relied-on assignment, permission, authority, access, use, enactment, or other direct relation, name the predicate, participant meanings, participants, and obtaining basis. Omit unclaimed positions.
Recover each maintained result and receiving action. For every target, introduction-strategy object, and observation position, record its maintained result, particular claim or edition, current status, evidence, source and qualification window, observation that would support or defeat it, receiving Agent or governing pattern when one is current, and next maintenance, reconsideration, or stop action.
Select the capability branch. Omit capability detail that cannot change the attempt, interpretation, or decision. When the decision does rely on capability, recover the A.2.2 basis: holder, Work family, envelope, measures, qualification window, evidence, and currentness. If existing capability is adequate and no relevant capability change is required or asserted, retain it as a reliance or observation condition; no development result is needed. A missing capability basis returns that A.2.2 question, not an automatic development prescription. Only when a capability-change claim is needed, consume a compatible E.23.CDI or domain development result naming holder, Work family, baseline, target, intervention, representative transfer Work, evidence, and currentness. If that required result is missing or stale, name the gap and the next governing development decision or stop; ME.16 does not fill it.
Bound authorization and protected conditions. Identify the change decision-making Agent, A.13 basis, and the named assignment, permission, or authority predicate with participants and scope that permits each intended change. Name participating Systems, confidentiality and safety stops, and protected conditions. Expertise, sponsorship, project position, ownership, tool control, assignment, permission, and authority are not interchangeable bases.
Plan decision-relevant observations before intervention. Select only positions that can change the decision: acceptability or rejection; appropriateness or fit; feasibility; enactment or fidelity; burden or cost; reach; sustainment; changes to named targets or to the introduction strategy; and the outside result. Keep acceptability as a stakeholder observation, formal fit or transfer with ME.13, actual enactment with A.15.1, bounded reach as observed participation, and a population-level continuation question with ME.17. Preserve ME.11 trial, ME.13 fit, and ME.14 worth questions as distinct inputs or later uses.
Plan separate target and introduction-strategy adaptation records. First classify every planned or observed modification as a change to the Method-related target or a change to the way it is introduced. Record what changed, when, planned or reactive status, deciding Agent and named authorization predicate, affected level, reason and conditions.

For a target change, name the affected Method semantics, description, support, capability input, fit claim, cultural question, or local-use condition. For an introduction-strategy change, name the admitted introduction Method or candidate introduction account, its admissibly classified description episteme, and any separate WorkPlan claim.

Return each modification to its own maintained result or local stop: ME.15 for admitted Method semantics or candidate lineage; ME.8 for a MethodDescription correction or improved candidate-account content, retaining the applicable subject and status; another named episteme or a local ME.16 stop for other content; ME.10 for support; A.15.2 for a WorkPlan; ME.13 for fit; or ME.17 for a population cultural question.
Perform and admit introduction Work. Recover actual performers and A.13 bases, the independently admitted Method enacted by the introduction Work, action history, temporal extent, containing System, named changed subjects, used Systems, and relied-on relation occurrences. Record the result as an attempt intended to establish named conditions. A completed failed attempt remains Work even if access, usability, or later enactment did not result. A candidate introduction Method is not enacted; name only the admitted constituent Methods actually followed.
Observe later actual Work, failed entry, and non-use. Admit later Work independently. Record which admitted Method was enacted, or preserve candidate status and name only separately admitted constituent Methods. Also record failed entry, rejection, non-use, workaround, adaptation, support demand, and burden when observed; absence of a record is not automatically non-use.
Compare every selected position. For each target, introduction-strategy object, and decision-relevant observation, state supported change, no change, uncertainty, inapplicability, or missing evidence. State the particular maintained claim or edition and next action. If a continuing subject is claimed to have changed, use A.3.4; a before/after table or performed Work alone does not establish that transformation.
Use C.28 for causal reliance. Return observations or association at their supported strength, with the limit needed by the receiving decision. When that decision relies on a causal or contribution claim, use current C.28 for the bounded causal-use question, supported use, unsupported stronger use, population and conditions, validity threat and reopen trigger. Name a contribution relation or compound claim only with its predicate, participants, applicability, and obtaining basis. C.28 settles causal support; ME.16 still makes the bounded revision decision.
Decide and return observations. Return keep, revise, branch, replace, stop, or a retained set with its limitation and any supported present course. Select a further observation or probe through C.11.DUA only when its obtainable result could change the decision enough to warrant its full burden and the needed window, access and authority are available. Use ME.8 when the observation requires correcting a MethodDescription or candidate Method account. Its candidate branch returns improved content with unresolved identification conditions retained. Other description content returns to its own episteme or a local stop. Send other observations to ME.15, ME.10, A.15.2, ME.13, ME.17, a named capability-development result, another admissible maintained result, or a receiving Agent only when the particular claim or edition and next action are stated; otherwise keep the observation as a local decision or stop.
State non-use and refresh. The result establishes neither organization-wide adoption, cultural selection or retention, general effectiveness, causal superiority, nor authorization for another setting. Reopen when the setting, population, target, introduction-strategy or description status, separate WorkPlan, capability and support conditions, named authorization basis, alternative, outside result, evidence window, or maintained claim changes.

ME.16:4.2 - Record the Result

Result position	Required content
introduction use	Receiving practice, outside result, target admitted-Method or candidate-account status, setting, population, period, qualification window, decision, and stop.
changed subjects	Named admitted Method, claim-bearing episteme, representation, System, capability bearer and result, Work occurrence, domain entity, organizational System, or selected structure actually claimed.
candidate accounts and descriptions	Candidate status, proposed claims, separately identified descriptions and representations, and missing admission basis.
relied-on relations	Named predicate, participant meanings, participants, applicability, obtaining basis, interval when material, and unsupported overread for every assignment, permission, authority, access, use, enactment, or other relied-on relation.
maintained results and receiving actions	Maintained result, particular claim or edition, status, evidence, source and window, supporting or defeating observation, receiving Agent or governing pattern when current, and next action or stop.
capability branch	Omit when decision-irrelevant. Otherwise retain the current A.2.2 basis for adequate existing capability without a development requirement, or return the missing capability basis. When a capability-change claim is needed, consume the compatible development result with holder, Work family, baseline, target, intervention, transfer Work, evidence and currentness; if required but missing or stale, name that development gap and next governing decision or stop.
introduction strategy	Admitted introduction Method or status-preserved candidate introduction account; its maintained result; a candidate description episteme before admission, or a `U.MethodDescription` only after A.3.1 admission and A.3.2 classification; any separately governed WorkPlan; intended conditions, version and window, evidence, and strategy modification kept separate from target modification.
introduction and later Work	Separately admitted actual Work, performers, enacted admitted Methods, history, extent, containing Systems, changed subjects, relation occurrences, results, failed entry, non-use, and gaps.
decision-relevant observations	Selected acceptability/rejection, appropriateness/fit, feasibility, enactment/fidelity, burden/cost, reach, sustainment, target-change, and outside-result positions, each with its own subject, claim, evidence, disposition, and next action.
adaptation	Target or introduction-strategy classification; what changed and which target, strategy, description, or separate WorkPlan it changed; the recorded kind and status of each affected item; when; planned/reactive status; deciding Agent and named authorization predicate; affected level; reason and conditions; maintained result; and receiving action or stop.
causal reliance, when needed	C.28 question and result, supported use, unsupported stronger use, conditions, validity threat, residual uncertainty and reopen trigger. Observation or association limits stay in the substantive result where they matter to its use.
return	`keep`, `revise`, `branch`, `replace`, `stop`, or retained set; particular maintained claim or edition affected; local decision, named receiver, or stop; any selected next observation; bounded non-use and reopen condition.

ME.16:4.3 - What Changes in Practice

Teams stop reporting that a Method was “rolled out” and start distinguishing the Method-related target, the introduction strategy and its status, its description, any separate WorkPlan, performed introduction Work, later Work, named relied-on relations, and separate observations. An introduction attempt can be completed without establishing the intended conditions. A favourable outside result can remain useful without filling every observation position or becoming causal proof.

Revision becomes local. A stale target description, unsuitable target variant, failed support relation, missing capability result, weak introduction strategy, stale strategy description, unworkable WorkPlan, or local-use adaptation can be reconsidered through its own maintained claim or edition without repeating or rejecting the entire programme.

ME.16:4.4 - Minimal Constructed Introduction Replay

Calibration-Team-B wants to reduce mixed-unit release escapes. It selects admitted target Method M-Unit-Review-1 from ME.15 for a D30–D60 bounded attempt; candidate target C-M-Unit-Review-Approx-1 remains outside. The changed target subjects are MethodDescription edition 4, its repaired representation, verified conversion-table System ConversionTable-B, and the assigned pre-release review Work. Separate claim-bearing results state the intended local selection and support conditions. No new organizational System or selected structure is inferred from the team label.

The introduction strategy is separately admitted Method M-Introduce-Unit-Review-1: configure the description and representation, establish and check table access, brief the reviewer on the changed distinctions, and observe one review. MethodDescription-Intro-B-1 has that admitted Method as its one EntityOfConcern, and A.3.2 classifies it as a U.MethodDescription; WorkPlan-Intro-B-1 separately schedules this bounded use. Neither episteme is the target Method or the later review Work.

CDI-R22-1 names holder Reviewer-22, calibration-report-review Work, the mixed-unit report envelope, baseline detection results, target four-of-four seeded unit cases, supervised practice and representative transfer Work, qualification evidence, and currentness through D60. ME.16 consumes this result; it neither treats attendance as capability nor performs the development.

MethodEngineer-B is independently admitted as an Agent for local Method-configuration Work. Assignment occurrence ASG-Intro-B-1(MethodEngineer-B, W-Intro-B-1) covers only D30–D60. Permission occurrence PERM-Intro-B-1(MethodEngineer-B, configure, MethodDescription-4, Representation-4, ConversionTable-B) permits the three named configuration actions. Release authority remains with ReleaseDecider-B; neither assignment nor permission transfers it to the reviewer, engineer, or tool.

Authorized W-Intro-B-1 is admitted as Work performed by MethodEngineer-B inside containing System Calibration-Team-B; it enacts M-Introduce-Unit-Review-1, configures the selected target description and representation, establishes access to ConversionTable-B, briefs the reviewer, and records the assignment and authority boundary. The Work is intended to establish those local conditions. If access configuration fails, the introduction Work still occurred but the support condition did not obtain. If the briefing or sequence proves unusable while the target Method remains adequate, the affected result belongs to M-Introduce-Unit-Review-1, MethodDescription-Intro-B-1, or WorkPlan-Intro-B-1, not to M-Unit-Review-1.

Later W-B-Review-1 is independently admitted as Work performed by Reviewer-22; it enacts M-Unit-Review-1, detects a seeded Celsius/Kelvin mismatch, stops the release recommendation, and records fourteen minutes and one lookup. The observation positions remain separate: the reviewer accepts the local use; appropriateness is supported only for the named report family; table access and completion show bounded feasibility; the recorded operations support enactment for this Work occurrence; fourteen minutes and one lookup are burden observations; reach is one holder and one Work occurrence; sustainment is unknown; and one corrected report is the outside result. No adaptation occurred in this replay.

Return keep for the D30–D60 attempt on the observed local conditions, later Work, mismatch detection and corrected report. The result supports that bounded continuation. A later claim that either Method caused fewer release escapes needs C.28 and the evidence for that stronger use.

If table access failed, return the contradicted ME.10 support claim and next support action. If the introduction sequence or briefing failed, return the observation to the maintained claim in M-Introduce-Unit-Review-1, MethodDescription-Intro-B-1, or WorkPlan-Intro-B-1 and keep the target result separate. If CDI-R22-1 expired, name that result and stop pending its governing development decision; if later Work changed reusable target or introduction semantics, reopen ME.15 for the affected Method.

If the failed lookup path has two proposed later repairs that the available evidence cannot distinguish, and no useful comparative observation is obtainable before the current decision, return both options with that limit and keep the failed support route stopped. Return the contradicted support claim and options to ME.10. This completes the current introduction result; further comparison is selected when its obtainable answer warrants the full burden.

In a separate constructed no-development case, the same admitted review Method is introduced to Reviewer-23 by repairing the conversion-table lookup path. The current A.2.2 basis CAP-R23-1 identifies that holder, calibration-report-review Work, the mixed-unit envelope, the required detection measure, representative evidence, and a qualification window covering the attempt. It supports adequate existing capability; no capability change is required or claimed. The engineer repairs and checks the lookup path under separately supported configuration permission, and the independently admitted later review Work uses it successfully. Return keep for this bounded support change and preserve CAP-R23-1 as a reliance condition. No CDI result is missing merely because none was supplied, and no training is commissioned. If the capability basis later expires, return its currentness question to A.2.2; if the Work envelope instead changes so that development is needed, open that separately governed question. This case changes neither the reliance on CDI-R22-1 nor its expiry stop in the preceding case.

ME.16:5 - Archetypal Grounding - Workplace Introduction and Revision

The SSFD programme reports a three-year intervention involving more than 300 engineers, training followed by supported four-to-six-month workplace projects, expert assistance, 72 reports recording SSFD use, and 41 reports supporting deeper analysis. Use this account to distinguish the target, strategy, performed Work, observations, adaptations, and outside results; it is not evidence from an isolated causal experiment.

Treat training followed by supported four-to-six-month workplace projects and expert assistance as a source-described candidate introduction strategy unless independent A.3.1 admission is available. Keep that candidate introduction account, its available description epistemes and separate plans, the SSFD target Method or candidate account, capability evidence, project Systems, performed Work, later reports, named assignment or use relations, target adaptations, strategy adaptations, burdens, and domain results separate.

If an observation exposes a content defect in the candidate introduction account, ME.8 can improve that account without classifying it as a U.MethodDescription. Other description content returns to its own episteme or a local stop; introduction or use alone requires no revision.

Record acceptability or rejection, appropriateness or fit, feasibility, enactment or fidelity, burden or cost, reach, and sustainment only where the source supports each position. The reports do not admit the candidate introduction Method or make every modification a target-Method change. The bounded ME.16 decision can use observations or association without C.28; any claim that SSFD or its introduction strategy caused the reported benefits needs a current C.28 result.

The Digital Vaccine case supplies three sequential action-research cycles in an operating health-services ecosystem. For each cycle, record the Method-related target, the introduction strategy and its status, its separately identified description, and any separate WorkPlan. Then record prioritization, performed introduction or validation Work, observation, target adaptation, strategy adaptation, and revision for the bounded concern. The evaluation remains ex ante and case-specific and establishes neither Method admission, long-term effect, nor transfer to the other elicited domains.

The Halogen and methodology-spread studies add observed adaptation, project demands, practitioner skills, identified organizational conditions where recoverable, drivers, and barriers. For each adaptation record whether it changed the Method-related target, the introduction strategy, its description, a separate WorkPlan, support, or local use, while preserving the recorded kind and status of each. Also record when, planned or reactive status, deciding Agent and authorization basis, affected level, reason, and conditions. Neither source proves a universal sequence or one causal driver of spread.

Implementation-science comparators sharpen this account without supplying its domain ontology. Proctor et al. motivate separate acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, enactment/fidelity, burden/cost, reach, and sustainment questions. FRAME motivates recording changes to the Method-related target. FRAME-IS supplies the separate question of what changed in the introduction strategy itself. Updated CFIR motivates context and determinant questions; the 2021 MRC framework motivates iterative refinement around key uncertainty and decision usefulness. ME.16 retains the target-versus-strategy distinction while rejecting health-specific entities, a maturity ladder, phase gate, compulsory adoption sequence, and any inference from those taxonomies to FPF Method admission, Work, relation, capability, authority, or culture.

ME.16:5.1 - APP-ME-01 Early Stop

The EC-417 three-release statement remains a WorkPlan. Do not report introduction, release enactment, later revision, cadence effect, or receiving result until the introduction strategy is identified and actual introduction Work and release Work are admitted with performers, enacted admitted constituent Methods, capability inputs, Systems, named Agent-performed Work occurrences, relation occurrences, assignments, permissions, authority, conditions, target and strategy adaptations, burdens, deviations, and domain results.

The ME.10 support-use task observations may supply identified support baselines and gaps. They do not establish an introduction Method, release Work, AI-provider use, feedback Work, capability, or Method fit. Preserve C-EC-Release-v2 as a target candidate and CUR-EC417-CadenceEffect-1 as unsupported. The application has no supplied A.2.2 capability basis, so a receiving decision that relies on capability returns that missing basis first. If a current adequate basis is supplied and no capability change is needed, retain it without requiring development. Name E.23.CDI or a domain development result and next action only for an actually needed capability change; do not invent capability or prescribe development from the gap alone.

ME.16:6 - Bias-Annotation

Recurring bias	Likely drift	Repair
rollout-compression bias	Target subjects, introduction strategy, descriptions, plans, relations, Work, and observations become one “introduction”.	Keep the typed target account, strategy and its status, description, any separate WorkPlan, performed Work, named direct relations, and observations distinct.
success-presupposition bias	Completed introduction Work is said to make the Method available and usable.	State the intended conditions; later observations may return success, failure, uncertainty, or missing evidence.
training-as-capability bias	Attendance or expert help becomes a holder capability.	Recover the A.2.2 capability basis and currentness. A capability-change claim additionally needs its compatible development result; preserve adequate existing capability without inventing a development need.
availability-as-use bias	Published material or a configured tool becomes later enactment.	Admit actual Work and the named `enactsMethod` or use relation independently.
authorization compression	Expertise, sponsorship, project position, ownership, assignment, permission, and authority become interchangeable.	Name the predicate, participants, scope, and positive basis for each relied-on relation.
outside-result attribution bias	A favourable domain result fills every observation position and becomes causal proof.	Compare each selected position; use C.28 only when the decision relies on causality.
adaptation-smearing bias	A local workaround silently changes the target, introduction strategy, descriptions, WorkPlan, support, and fit together.	Classify the modification as target or introduction-strategy change and return only the maintained account, description, WorkPlan claim, support claim, fit claim, or local decision actually affected.
lifecycle bias	Introduction, reach, and later use become compulsory adoption stages.	Keep ME.16 independently enterable and use ME.17 only for a bounded population-level cultural question.

ME.16:7 - Conformance Checklist

Target subjects; either the admitted introduction Method with an A.3.2-classified MethodDescription or the candidate introduction account with its description episteme; a separately governed WorkPlan; performed Work; and named relied-on relations are separated by kind. No pre-admission description is classified as U.MethodDescription.
Every organizational claim names the organizational System, selected structure, constituent organization, or relation organization actually relied on.
Every observation position names its maintained result and particular claim or edition, receiving Agent or governing pattern when current, and next action or stop.
Introduction Work is stated as an authorized attempt intended to establish named conditions; a failed attempt is recordable without contradiction.
Decision-relevant capability keeps its A.2.2 basis and currentness, or returns the missing basis. Adequate existing capability without a needed change requires no development result. Only a needed capability-change claim consumes a compatible development result or returns its missing/stale basis with a next governing action or stop; irrelevant capability detail is omitted.
Assignment, permission, authority, access, use, enactment, and other relations name predicates, participants, scope, and obtaining basis.
Later Work is independently admitted; candidate accounts are not enacted, and only independently admitted Methods may fill an enactment claim.
Decision-relevant acceptability/rejection, appropriateness/fit, feasibility, enactment/fidelity, burden/cost, reach, sustainment, target-change, and outside-result observations remain separate.
Every adaptation distinguishes target change from introduction-strategy change and records the affected target, strategy and status, identified description episteme, separate WorkPlan, support or local-use condition; time and planned/reactive status; deciding Agent and authorization; level, reason and conditions; maintained result; and receiving action or stop.
A relied-on causal or contribution claim uses C.28 and preserves supported and unsupported uses, validity threat and residual uncertainty. An observational result carries only the qualification needed for its receiving use.
The comparison records the action supported by the available evidence, or the alternatives that remain unresolved and the reason they cannot yet be distinguished. Any further observation or probe has a useful obtainable answer worth its full burden and feasible conditions.
ME.13 receives a bounded fit or transfer question, ME.17 a bounded population-level cultural question, and ME.15/ME.10/A.15.2 only an observation contradicting one particular maintained claim or edition. ME.8 receives a needed correction of MethodDescription or candidate-Method-account content and preserves its status; other content returns to its own episteme or a local stop.
The result claims no adoption lifecycle, maturity ladder, phase gate, general effectiveness, causal superiority, or authority outside its boundary.

ME.16:8 - Common Anti-Patterns and How to Avoid Them

Anti-pattern	Repair
“We trained everyone and rolled out the Method.”	Name the actual training or development result, introduction Work, later Work, and every unobserved position.
“The tool was available, so the Method was used.”	Recover actual performer Work, enacted Method, direct tool-use relation, and result.
“Management sponsored it, so the team was authorized.”	Recover assignment, permission or authority, Agent basis, and scope separately.
“Results improved after launch, so the Method caused them.”	State timing, alternatives, covarying changes, contribution basis, and residual uncertainty.
“Several projects used it, so the culture adopted it.”	Use ME.17 only when a named cultural relation and population evidence exist.

ME.16:9 - Consequences

Method introductions become observable interventions. Teams can learn from use, non-use, adaptation, and outside consequences while keeping the target, introduction strategy and its status, description, any separate WorkPlan, support, capability, authority, identified organizational Systems or selected structures, Work, and domain changes distinct.

The cost is a more explicit baseline and observation design. Some programmes end with bounded association and residual causal uncertainty, and a capability gap can stop introduction even when training was delivered.

ME.16:10 - Rationale

An intervention can change several subjects, relations, and descriptions at once. Learning requires each claimed change to retain its own subject, governor, baseline, evidence, and receiving use. Otherwise the intervention label becomes a substitute for both Work and explanation.

Separating the Method-related target from the introduction strategy, its status and description, any separate WorkPlan, capability development, and cultural continuation prevents ME.16 from becoming an adoption lifecycle. It remains the practice for introducing one bounded Method-related change, observing later Work and consequences, and revising the particular maintained claim or edition defeated by evidence.

ME.16:11 - SoTA-Echoing

Source	Disposition and contribution	Transfer limit and practitioner implication
Yildirim, Campean, and Uddin, function-modeling evaluation in industry practice	Adopt: training, expert assistance, four-to-six-month workplace projects, later report analysis, application variety, limitations, and direct/indirect contribution as separate introduction and observation positions.	One automotive OEM, retrospective reports, and SSFD within a broader methodology establish neither isolated causality nor universal transfer or capability.
Tsai, Zdravkovic, and Söder, DBE-design Method action research	Adapt: prioritization followed by three plan-perform-evaluate cycles as a naturalistic revision structure.	The evaluation is ex ante and case-specific and does not establish long-term organizational effect, causal superiority, or transfer.
Schønheyder and Nordby, design-Method use and evolution in professional practice, and Hiort af Ornäs et al., drivers and barriers in methodology spread	Adapt: observed modifications, project and skill conditions, identified organizational conditions where recoverable, drivers, and barriers as observation and revision questions.	One firm and one interview study supply neither a universal programme nor causal proof of spread.
Proctor et al., Outcomes for Implementation Research	Adapt: keep acceptability/rejection, appropriateness/fit, feasibility, enactment/fidelity, burden/cost, reach, and sustainment as decision-relevant observation positions distinct from the outside result.	Reject: health-service/client ontology, adoption as an FPF cultural fact, a compulsory outcome set, and any automatic stage order. Use only positions that can change the bounded decision.
Stirman, Baumann, and Miller, FRAME	Adapt: for a Method-related target, record what changed, when, planned/proactive or unplanned/reactive status, decider and authority, affected level, reason and conditions, and whether Method semantics, description, support, or local use changed.	Reject: fidelity labels as Method identity or admission, and do not import healthcare intervention kinds. Return each target modification to its particular maintained claim or local decision.
Miller et al., FRAME-IS	Adapt: distinguish modifications to the introduction strategy from modifications to the Method-related target; for the strategy, record the changed component or function, nature, timing, participants in the modification decision, rationale, and scope.	Reject: healthcare intervention and implementation-strategy ontology, automatic Method admission, and a compulsory reporting module. Record the introduction strategy’s status and keep its description, any WorkPlan, performed Work, and affected maintained result separate.
Damschroder et al., updated CFIR	Adapt: ask which context and determinant observations can explain anticipated or actual success or failure.	Reject: a universal determinant inventory, success score, maturity ladder, or inference from a determinant label to an obtaining FPF relation.
Skivington et al., 2021 MRC complex-intervention framework	Adapt: identify key uncertainty, context interaction, refinement, stakeholder perspective, and comparative resource/outcome consequence; permit repeat, reconsider, or stop.	Reject: a compulsory phase sequence or gate. The source neither admits FPF Methods and Work nor supplies causal support; C.28 remains conditional.
Current FPF `A.3.1`, `A.3.2`, `A.15.2`, `A.15.1`, `A.13`, `A.2.2`, `E.23.CDI`, `A.3.4`, `A.10`, `C.28`, and direct relation governors	Adopt: Method admission, MethodDescription identity, WorkPlan identity, Work admission, Agent basis, capability, capability development, bounded transformation, evidence, causal-use boundary, and relation semantics.	ME.16 contributes the typed attempt, later observations, target-versus-strategy adaptation record, conditional causal branch, and local revision decision; it does not redefine those governors.

Reopen the pattern when practitioners cannot separate target subjects and accounts, introduction strategy and status, description, any separate WorkPlan, performed Work, relation occurrences, observations, and receiving actions; when stronger cross-domain evidence changes the observation or adaptation positions; when repeated introductions reveal an independent organizational-change problem; or when current FPF Method, description, plan, Work, relation, capability, evidence, or causal-use semantics change the action.

ME.16:12 - Relations

ME.1 supplies the Method-of-interest and outside result. ME.15 supplies an admitted variant or status-preserved candidate lineage with applicability and currentness. A candidate account is not enacted; later Work may enact only independently admitted constituent Methods.
ME.15 governs admitted Method semantics and candidate lineage, provenance, evidence, applicability, currentness, and retirement claims for both target and introduction accounts. ME.8 authors or revises a MethodDescription of an admitted Method, or improves a candidate Method account while retaining its unresolved status. Other description content stays with its own episteme. A.15.2 governs the separate introduction WorkPlan; ME.10 particular support claims; ME.13 bounded fit and transfer questions; and ME.17 bounded population-level cultural questions. Return an observation only with the contradicted admissible maintained claim or edition plus the next action.
E.23.CDI or a domain capability-development pattern governs capability change. A.2.2 governs the relied-on capability result; ME.16 records it as an input, observation, or named gap.
A.3.1 governs admission of both target and introduction Methods, and A.3.2 governs U.MethodDescription membership. A WorkPlan and performed Work neither admit nor enact a candidate Method. A.13 governs precise Agent claims and A.15.1 every introduction and later Work occurrence. Assignment, permission, authority, access, use, enactment, and other direct relations retain their own named predicates, participants, applicability, and obtaining tests.
A.3.4 governs a claimed actual bounded change to a continuing subject. Introduction Work, a before/after account, an adaptation record, or a decision label does not by itself identify a U.Transformation.
A.10 governs evidence use. When the ME.16 decision relies on a causal or contribution claim, C.28 governs the bounded causal-use question, supported and unsupported uses, conditions, validity threats, and reopen trigger. Without that reliance, ME.16 stops at observation or association.
Proctor, FRAME, FRAME-IS, updated CFIR, and MRC supply bounded comparator questions only. FRAME and FRAME-IS support the target-versus-introduction-strategy distinction; none creates FPF health ontology, adoption lifecycle, maturity ladder, phase gate, Method admission, Work occurrence, relation occurrence, capability, authority, or culture claim.