OPS-PRACTICE-CHANGE — Change the way of working without treating publication as successful use

Situation: A new admission or handover method looks promising, but testing it competes with continuing service, and a local success is being used to justify wider adoption.
Question: What can be retained or changed now, and which later-use claim does the evidence actually support?
First useful result or blocker: A supported local method-use decision or revised candidate account, followed only when needed by a separate conclusion about the named practitioners’ use.
Start with: OPS.17 when alternatives need comparison, or OPS.16 - Decide Whether and How to Change an Operating Method when the question concerns one method or proposed way of working.
Stop or return: Keep a sufficient current result. Treat the proposed way as a candidate when its status as a reusable method is still unresolved; publication, attendance and tool use do not establish independent later application.

Select the changed operating contribution. Compare the proposed action and result with current practice and a simpler sufficient correction. Readiness-based admission, protection of an established constraint and extra capacity solve different problems. Use the constraint diagnosis from OPS.9, retaining an unresolved rival explanation when it could change the treatment.
Establish that the trial can coexist with service. OPS.19 can keep a trial closed when two package completions and a possible repeat already occupy all six rig-hours. OPS.16 uses an actual coexistence result, including incident coverage, support, permission, fallback and the return to continuing service, before relying on a later trial window. A plan to obtain those conditions is not their availability.
Limit the local conclusion to what was done. In the later constructed PumpWorks interval, the already admitted method PW-TestAdmission-v2 is tried on two packages. One is correctly admitted; the other is correctly held for missing permission, while service and recovery remain protected. OPS.16 retains that method for the specified package family and conditions, keeps the earlier method for the unaffected family and leaves provider-unavailability use unresolved. This does not establish general superiority or wider independent use.
Ask a different question when another group must use it. OPS.20 - Deliberately Continue and Change Operations Culture bounds the practitioners, practice and interval. In the six-week example, two coordinators use the method correctly in familiar eligible cases; a third starts a case without required provider support. Preserve the supported familiar use and revise the failed branch. The other named shift and longer retention remain unknown. The current conclusion can finish without a new experiment; a later receiving use may justify a feasible protected replay of the unresolved branch.