| local-completion bias | One change’s milestone is treated as closure of another change’s premise. | Test the altered condition against one consequential consumer action and return the direct result to both. |
| simultaneity bias | Overlapping dates are treated as a dependency. | Name the exact altered condition, consumer action, consequence, and interaction window. |
| inconsistency literalism | A participant’s inconsistency claim becomes an objective contradiction. | Preserve the account, then test current relations, evidence, interpretation, and authority separately. |
| resistance attribution | A challenged conjunction is dismissed as opposition to change. | Ask what organizational prescription, action, burden, authority, or support condition the participant identifies. |
| aggregate-capacity bias | Total FTE or team count is treated as proof of feasible participation. | Inspect exact role demands, consequential actions, access, timing, informational benefit, and burden. |
| programme-superiority bias | A central view silently chooses for direct owners. | Route each substantive question to its governing Method and return its result without new authority. |
| artifact inflation | A cross-change table or dashboard becomes a control structure or compatibility certificate. | Keep the note as ordinary decision-support content and recover actual subjects and relations. |
| duplicate-decision bias | OCE.16 repeats ME.6 or an OCE comparison after routing. | Attribute the comparison and choice to the direct result; OCE.16 only qualifies entry and returns it. |