The M-CaReM-AI Method: Defining Work for AI / Unit 7 MCM 171 review, 2 to 3 minutes
Three Corrections and a Parked Disagreement
The idea
A worked example, constructed for this course, records the library session's outcomes in the form the method asks for, including a disagreement left deliberately unresolved.
In practice
The analyst writes up four items. The first is a correction to the definition: an in-library use of a reference item is not a Loan, and becomes its own Bronze thing, In-Library Use. The second is a correction to properties: the Loan gains a returning branch field, because the council figures count by it, while the starting branch stays for staff records. The third is a correction to lifecycle that the group did agree on: a Loan whose item is reported lost moves to a new state, lost, rather than staying overdue forever. The fourth is the disagreement. The branch manager wants a lost Loan closed at once and a Fine raised. The finance officer wants it kept open for ninety days in case the item turns up, because reversing a fine is costly. The analyst does not choose. She writes both positions into the Pack's open questions, names the head of circulation as the person to decide, and sets a date. A red, yellow, green round at the end shows green for the definition and properties, and yellow for lifecycle, which matches the parked question.
Where people slip
The disagreement was not a failure of the session. It was a real policy question that the old system had answered silently, differently in different screens. Writing both sides down, with an owner and a date, turned an argument into a decision someone will make. Had the analyst chosen a side herself, the Pack would have encoded one manager's preference as the library's rule.
Your place on the trail
Every lesson rests on earlier ones and opens later ones. Tap any to jump.
Something wrong in this lesson? Flag it · Sources for The M-CaReM-AI Method: Defining Work for AI