The five factors in Chapter 1 — purpose, timing, ground, leadership, and rules — are not a kit for pressing someone. They are a stay-out / stay-in checklist. A costly conflict in a family, a classroom, or an organization can be run through the same five questions. If the five are unclear, staying out is the default.
Write them as questions you can answer now:
- Purpose. Do the people on each side still share one aim? Without that, entry unravels.
- Timing. Has the moment actually arrived, or is someone only impatient?
- Ground. Does this ground help you preserve, or force a hard fight? If it does not fit, do not fight.
- Leadership. Who is making the call — can they preserve, or only escalate?
- Rules. Are the rules, rewards, and rhythm clear? If the system is unclear, do not pull people in.
Most wasteful fights are not lost for lack of force. They are started before the five factors are in place. A letter, a public confrontation, a round of escalation can look like “solving it” and still be an entry you cannot cheaply reverse.
So do not draw a map of how to close the other side. Draw a map of whether to enter: who is the object, is the aim worth this conflict, which factor is weakest, and would staying out leave the next cycle better. The weakest factor is the only thing to verify next. Staying out is a judgment.
Comparison is not mobilization. After you compare, you can still stop. Discipline here means everyone knows when not to enter and when to stop — not when to press.
Start with Chapter 1 and write enter or stay out. The method page only structures the question.