01
Write a proposition narrow enough to examine
State the proposed change in one sentence and define any terms that could be read differently. For the fictional library, specify that the exercise concerns one later evening rather than a complete change to the weekly schedule. Record the information supplied in the exercise and identify what remains unknown. A participant might favour later access for people who finish work after the usual closing time, but should label that as a reason to investigate rather than assume local demand has already been measured. The brief keeps the actual proposition separate from the desired benefit.
02
Attach each reason to support or an open question
Give each reason its own line, followed by the material that supports it or the question that still needs an answer. In the exercise, a timetable could establish the current opening hours, while a claim about potential visitors would require different information. Do not use one source to imply more than it shows. If the facilitator supplies fictional figures, label them as exercise data throughout. Leave space for a response to each reason, so preparation includes possible weaknesses and alternative explanations rather than only the most persuasive wording.
03
Rehearse a fair response and revise the brief
Summarise an opposing concern in terms its author would recognise before answering it. For example, a participant might raise staffing arrangements as a condition that the proposal has not addressed. The response could acknowledge that gap and narrow the claim instead of treating it as irrelevant. After the practice exchange, note which definitions caused confusion, which reasons needed support and whether the proposition changed. Save the revised brief with those observations. The useful output is a clearer account of the reasoning, not a declaration that the rehearsal proved the proposed policy correct.