STR.2:4 - Solution

Compare the changed fact, claim or comparison basis with what the strategic decision actually relied on. Follow the consequence only while a receiving action can change. Use sufficient existing evidence before proposing additional inquiry.

STR.2:4.1 - State what changed and what remains unknown

Describe the observation with the subject, interval and conditions that change its meaning. “Our three renewal quotes are lower” is not “the market price has permanently collapsed”. “The supplier no longer promises delivery by June” is not evidence that delivery is impossible.

Recover the earlier premise at comparable scope. It may be an explicit model input or an assumption implicit in the chosen direction. Distinguish three kinds of change:

• A change in the world needs the relevant domain evidence: for example, a supplier has withdrawn an available service.
• A changed account needs comparison of the earlier and later claims: for example, a forecast now covers a narrower population.
• A changed basis of choice needs the earlier and proposed or adopted objective, constraint or comparison rule: for example, a new strategic policy admits a kind of commitment previously excluded.

Several can occur together. State what changed in each; proposing a new criterion does not make it applicable, and adopting it does not rewrite earlier observations. Establish who can change a governing condition when its force matters.

If the claims cannot be compared, name the missing fact. An absent old estimate, unknown population or inaccessible contract limits the impact judgment. Uncertainty is a qualified result rather than permission to treat the premise as unchanged.

STR.2:4.2 - Find the strategic use

Ask which decision relied on the premise and how. Inspect the actual proposal, commitment or comparison. Would changing this premise alter an option’s feasibility, relative merit, scale, timing, permission or required protection?

For one already known use, complete that direct comparison. When a changed source may have several partly unknown uses, use FPF A.10.1 to discover actual reliance within a stated receiving-use boundary. It distinguishes source-based discovery from inspection of receivers that may use the premise without a citation. STR.2 then supplies the strategic judgment for the affected uses; it does not repeat the general source-discovery method.

A practical boundary might be “the two renewal decisions and the service proposal due at this Board meeting”. A no-impact conclusion cannot reach beyond the uses for which its evidence is adequate.

STR.2:4.3 - Compare the consequence, not merely the signal

Recover why the premise mattered. A lower generic-inspection price may reduce the attractiveness of expanding that offering without invalidating service already funded by current contracts. Loss of a shared specialist may instead make several proposed directions infeasible at once.

Test the smallest consequence that can settle the use. If the preferred option remains feasible and preferable over the relevant changed range, retain it with the qualified premise. If the changed value crosses a meaningful boundary, reopen the affected comparison or commitment. If the consequence depends on unknown demand or cost, preserve that uncertainty for STR.3 or STR.9 rather than pretending the observation has already selected a response.

If the comparison basis changed, apply the new basis consistently to the affected alternatives. Preserve the old result as an answer under its earlier conditions. A newly important customer use may reopen the option family or problem formulation, not merely adjust a weight in the old ranking.

Use an existing forecast, cost calculation or qualified professional determination when it answers the question. More measurement is worthwhile only when an attainable answer could change the receiving decision before it is needed.

STR.2:4.4 - Return one usable disposition

State the effect in the language of the receiving choice. For example: “Do not use the old price in the proposed expansion comparison; current contracted service remains funded under the supplied conditions.” This is more useful than marking the entire strategy red.

When another participant needs to rely on the return, include the observation, the affected premise, the decision and consequence, the evidence limit and the next necessary action.

Keep recommendation and authority separate. Finding that a premise failed can justify advising a pause; it does not grant the analyst permission to cancel an obligation. A service owner may have an established stopping authority, while a Board retains the choice of a new direction. STR.12 connects a later signal to those actions.

STR.2:4.5 - Preserve unaffected work and stop

Stop when the bounded receiving question has a supported disposition or a limitation. Follow another dependency only if its result or action could change. A mention of the affected proposal is not enough.

State a useful reopening observation where uncertainty remains: a signed customer term, completed cost component, relevant delivery confirmation or an agreed observation of capacity. The observation needs a receiving decision and useful timing; it is not a request to monitor every available indicator.