This is a long comment, rather than an answer. The poset in Edward and Hastings context LNM 542 is elegant reedy, so the injective and the reedy model structures coincide, but independently of this, the constant diagram functor does not preserve fibrations, contrary to the statement in theorem 3.2.4. Consider the poset $A = \{\bullet \to \bullet \gets \bullet \}$, and a fibrant object $X \to 1$ in $\mathcal{C}$. It follows from 3.2.7 that if the constant diagram were a fibration in $\mathcal{C}^A$, then the diagonal $X \to X \times X$ must be a fibration in $\mathcal{C}$. However EH apply this to posets $P$ which are reindexing of filtering categories, so we add the following to include this situation. It is easy to see that this poset is the category $A = P_{< j}$ for the subdiagram $j = \{\bullet \to \bullet\}$ of two consecutive numbers in $\omega$, where $P$ is the result of the "Mardesic trick" (i.e. Deligne construction Prop. 8.1.6 SGA4) applied to $\omega$. Finally, it is easy to see directly that the constant diagram determined by a fibration $X \to Y$ is a fibration in $\mathcal{C}^P$ provided that for any $j \in P$, the finite poset $P_{< j}$ is either empty or connected, which clearly is not the case in the example above.

hypothesisrather than a conclusion in several theorems here -- perhaps Riehl and Verity would know conditions guaranteeing this. $\endgroup$ – Tim Campion Sep 27 '17 at 23:11