SYSE.15:4.1 - Perform the Move

1. Name the engineering result and receiving decision. State the actual System or intended-system designator selected as the project system-of-interest, relevant use, configuration, conditions, decision horizon, intended users of the account, and the first recurring result whose Method is missing or doubtful.
2. Recover candidate Methods from Work. Inspect representative Work, including successful, failed, and difficult occurrences. For each candidate, recover the reusable action, generic participant meanings, conditions, intended result, applicability limits, and evidence. Keep actual performing Agents, assignments, capabilities, and authority with the dated Work.
3. Recover candidates from sources without importing the source whole. Inspect relevant sources—for example, standards, handbooks, lifecycles, model-based frameworks, AI workflows, or local traditions. Apply A.3.1 before identifying a Method and A.3.2 before relying on a MethodDescription. Keep an unresolved cue when the reusable way cannot yet be stated.
4. Compare the same result under the same conditions. Hold the result, actual or intended System kind stated in the project-system choice account, use, configuration, evidence needs, and protected losses stable while varying the Method. A new tool, description, assignment, or parameter is not automatically a new Method.
5. Test whether specialization changes the work. Compare a narrower engineering Method with the broader FPF or DPF move at comparable effort. Retain the specialization only when it changes what practitioners notice, decide, do, obtain, check, or use as a stop or return, and that difference is useful and warranted for this domain. A domain noun or extra example is insufficient.
6. State each Method relation separately. Record broader-kind classifications, participation in whole Methods, alternatives, refinements or replacements, result-use dependencies, and compatibility only when their own conditions obtain. Do not infer any of them from a list, vertical diagram, shared source, or Work order.
7. Exercise an interacting engineering slice. Use bounded representative Work in which several candidate Methods interact—for example, physical modeling, implementation, integration trial, configuration, assurance, and release around one change. Observe whether the needed decisions and System effects improve. Also record relevant costs or limits—for example, integration loss, rework, elapsed time, capability, platform constraints, or a protected characteristic that would otherwise be traded away silently.
8. Make the repertoire decision. The authorized Agent records which Methods are retained now, retained as alternatives, replaced, excluded for this use, proposed for development, or still unresolved. If a retained Method lacks a capable Agent, provider, platform, or assignment, record that separate gap and send it to the appropriate capability, provider, platform, or obtaining-arrangement decision.
9. State evidence, currentness, and return conditions. Give each relied-on claim its actual epistemic status— for example, project observation, qualified expert estimate, institutional description, academic or press visibility, declared conformance, or evidence of enacted practice. Reopen only when a changed result, source, Method, project condition, capability, provider, or platform can change the decision.

The numbered steps explain the Method. Source inquiry, modeling, realization, integration, assurance, platform development, and Method development can overlap and recur; choose Work order from the actual dependencies.