| How can facilitation make different meanings usable? | Attend to the actual interaction: elicit concrete contributions, test formulations with participants, and revisit how the developing model carries their meanings. | Following a workshop script or completing a shared diagram is treated as sufficient evidence of common understanding. | Adapt: PSD.7:4.2–4.3 and 4.6 add targeted meaning and attribution checks within the same interaction. The extra attention is accepted for a material difference, without requiring a full recording or research study. | Franco and Greiffenhagen’s 2018 facilitated-modeling analysis supplies a bounded empirical account of situated OR practice, not a universal script. Zimmermann and Curran’s 2023 microlevel study supplies the more specific candidate line on facilitator questions, references to contributions, and recursive development of shared meaning in one heritage-science workshop. Neither establishes universal transfer, consensus, or causal effectiveness for every engagement. | Reopen when participants cannot recognize the returned meaning, the channel suppresses material contributions, or stronger comparative practice supplies the same fidelity with less effort. |
| How should inquiry close when disagreement remains? | Return attributed common claims, material dissent, and the exact missing evidence or authority result. | A unanimous summary is manufactured, or all disagreement postpones every useful return. | Adapt: PSD.7:4.4–4.6 and both substantive cases separate meaning, support, truth, consent, and choice. This accepts a less simple summary in exchange for preserving an action-changing difference; an already-clear factual correction takes the cheap exit. | Current A.2.9 supplies receiving-use judgement and the distinction between communication, response, achievement, consent, and authority. Current A.6.REL supplies occurrence distinction only when needed; direct predicates and evidence establish obtaining relations. Retaining material dissent is the PSD solution constraint for contested decision support, not an empirical claim that disagreement always improves decisions or grants a veto. | Reopen when a direct rule changes the effect of dissent, new evidence resolves a disputed claim, attribution is corrected, or the receiving use can no longer preserve the unresolved difference honestly. |