STR.13:5 - Archetypal Grounding
These are constructed teaching cases. Estimated burdens illustrate decisions, not measured comparative effectiveness.
STR.13:5.1 - SensorCo selects the analysis its current choice needs
SensorCo is considering device-only activity and service directions over twelve months. Several plausible futures can reverse the preferred commitment. Its team can use a qualified three-future comparison from STR.4 and STR.9, including whole service costs, permissions and the viable device rival. A single expected sales figure would conceal the decision’s material uncertainty.
The method question changes if an authoritative restriction establishes that the service commitment under consideration is unavailable throughout the entire decision window. Suppose the restriction is sufficient for that eligibility conclusion and no feasible service alternative changes the present choice. Repeating the full scenario exercise cannot make that excluded commitment available.
The team then uses the established constraint and direct comparison to support the present device-only decision. It preserves the prior scenario reasoning for its qualified uses and possible later conditions. It does not infer that scenarios are generally worthless or that the company should never consider another service direction.
A useful repertoire can retain the following distinctions without inventing a universal ranking:
| Situation | Present method use | Reason and limit |
|---|---|---|
| Several feasible commitments trade places across consequential plausible futures | Use a discriminating scenario and robustness comparison. | It exposes reversal conditions; it does not supply probabilities or authority. |
| A qualified constraint settles the present eligibility question and no live alternative changes it | Use the direct constraint and sufficient current comparison. | Extra scenario work does not change this choice; broader applicability remains unclaimed. |
| A necessary cost component is unresolved and attainable costing can change the choice | Obtain bounded complete costing before deciding on further inquiry. | A negative sufficient result can end inquiry; missing cost is not a negative result. |
The four-day preparation already authorized in the connected case remains a bounded allocation. A method preference does not enlarge it. If preparing a stronger comparison would exceed that allocation, the team must compare a smaller sufficient result, a different obtaining arrangement or a separate authorized decision.
STR.13:5.2 - A wording repair and a candidate branch
A strategy note says “approve the portfolio” where the established method already distinguishes retained alternatives from jointly authorized work. Readers repeatedly mistake a shortlist for allocation. The maintainer rewrites the instruction to name the actual result and checks the affected examples. This is a description repair, not a new method variant.
Separately, the team’s present routine begins every direction inquiry with a full scenario workshop. It proposes a reusable change: test decisive eligibility constraints first, while retaining scenario work when it can still distinguish feasible choices. That changes an entry or ordering rule. It is a candidate branch whose preserved and changed semantics, intended situations and limits should be explicit.
The word change supplies no evidence for the new branch’s effectiveness. A later local use can supply an occurrence with its conditions; it does not by itself establish transfer to a different team, decision or authority arrangement.
STR.13:5.3 - Retrieve the reason, not just the old answer
A practitioner retrieves a five-year-old device/service comparison. It contains a useful explanation of why incident support and data rights mattered. Its numerical estimates and permissions concern the earlier situation.
The practitioner retains the explanation and obtains the current conditions needed for the new choice. An accessible note pointing to the relevant reasoning can solve the memory problem. Rebuilding an archive or repeating the old recommendation is unnecessary.