| How should a practitioner open an ill-structured or contested decision-support situation? | The best-known line is to bind inquiry to a named receiving use while keeping framing plural, contextual, and revisable before committing to one PSM, model, or formulation. | A fixed sponsor brief or Method-first workshop is the serious default; an unbounded “include everything” inquiry is the opposite default. | Both defaults hide the decision-support return: one naturalizes the first frame, the other cannot stop. Adapt: PSD.1:4.1–4.4, the flood-pump case, and the first seven checklist rows require a receiving use, provisional boundary, plural-formulation return, and local reopen before Method choice. | Smith and Shaw’s 2019 PSM review is a best-known-line candidate for the continuing PSM branch and its differing characteristics; Kogetsidis’s 2025 review is an application comparator. Kelly and Gero’s 2022 framing review, Litster, Cardoso, and Hurst’s 2024 systems-mapping study, and Nickel, Hurst, and Duimering’s 2024 contextual trade-off study support explicit candidate framing, contextual comparison, and revision. The reviews are non-exhaustive; the studies establish neither one framing ontology, universal Method, shared frame, prevalence, nor superiority. | Reopen if comparative practice shows a lower-effort opening that preserves the same receiving-use, plurality, authority, stop, and revision value, or if a source changes the conditions under which framing must be reopened. |
| How should decision-support advice remain useful without becoming the later choice? | The best-known current FPF line is result-first and authority-bounded: name the receiving decision, reuse or request only the outside-practice result it needs, return the recommendation as a premise, and let the authorized chooser produce the separate ChoiceResult. | Expert-report, approval, score, or model-output language treated as the decision is the serious default. | The default transfers authority by format and hides blockers. Adopt: PSD.1:4.1, 4.2, 4.5, the development-direction case, and the authority checks keep performer, recipient, holder, outside-result owner, and choice owner distinct. | Current A.15.9 supplies the smallest bounded-result return and supplier/receiver authority split; current C.11 supplies choice over an already-available option set. Neither pattern bounds a professional problem-structuring and decision-support engagement or selects its next field-specific branch. | Reopen if direct choice or outside-result guidance gains the complete engagement-boundary move at equal or lower effort, or if practitioner use shows that the current separation prevents rather than improves a necessary authorized combined role. |