Ask the Right Questions

Ask the Right Questions

Primary Category: Decision Quality & Strategic Inquiry

Secondary Focus: Problem Framing, Assumption Testing, Evidence Definition, and Scope Governance

Artifact Profile

Ask the Right Questions is a governance artifact for structuring how problems are explored before analysis or solution design begins. It ensures that decisions are anchored to clarity, evidence, and the correct framing rather than symptoms, bias, or incomplete understanding.

Using the decision context, current framing, stakeholder viewpoints, constraints, and available evidence, the artifact produces a disciplined inquiry process. Rather than rushing to solutions, it surfaces assumptions, defines scope and boundaries, and specifies what must be true for each option to be valid.

This artifact is built for leaders, analysts, and teams responsible for high-impact, ambiguous, or contested decisions. It improves decision quality by ensuring that downstream analysis, modeling, and execution are directed at the right problem.

Three Key Questions This Artifact Helps You Answer

• What question, if answered, would most improve the quality of this decision?

• What assumptions are embedded in our current framing and what must be true for each option

to be valid?

• What evidence is required and where should scope and boundaries be set before analysis begins?

What This Framework Supports

This artifact supports organizations seeking:

• Disciplined exploration of what is actually being decided before analysis begins

• Identification of hidden assumptions embedded in current problem framing

• Clear definition of scope, constraints, and decision boundaries

• Evidence-driven inquiry that prevents premature solutioning and misdirected analysis

How It Is Used

The artifact provides a structured inquiry framework that guides leaders, analysts, and teams through:

• Refining decision-centric questions that most affect outcome quality

• Surfacing and testing assumptions underlying each proposed option

• Reframing the problem to expose alternative interpretations and implications

• Specifying what evidence is required and where boundaries must be set before analysis proceeds

This ensures that downstream modeling, evaluation, and execution are anchored to the correct decision context rather than symptoms, bias, or incomplete understanding.

What This Produces

• Refined, decision-centric question(s)

• Explicit list of assumptions underlying the current framing

• Alternative framings of the problem

• Defined evidence and data requirements

• Clear scope, constraints, and decision boundaries

Common Use Cases

• Clarifying ambiguous or politically contested problem statements

• Resolving disagreements about what is actually being decided

• Reframing decisions that have produced conflicting analyses

• Defining evidence requirements before launching analysis or modeling

• Preventing premature solutioning in strategic, policy, or investment decisions

How This Artifact Is Different

Unlike informal problem statements or solution-first approaches, this artifact treats inquiry itself as a governed decision process. It embeds assumption testing, boundary setting, and evidence specification so that subsequent analysis is focused, defensible, and aligned to the true decision at hand.

Related Framework Areas

This artifact is commonly used alongside other SolveBoard frameworks focused on:

• Strategic analysis, investment governance, and policy design

• Decision boundary design and escalation governance

• Evidence standards, auditability, and defensible analysis

• Critical thinking, assumption testing, and governance of inquiry

Related Terms

Problem framing, decision quality, strategic inquiry, assumption testing, scope definition, evidence-based decision-making, governance of analysis, critical thinking frameworks.

Framework Classification

This artifact is part of the SolveBoard library of structured decision and governance frameworks. It is designed as a repeatable problem-framing and inquiry governance framework rather than an informal brainstorming method or solution-first analysis approach.

Ask the Right Questions: Improve Problem Definition and Decision Quality

Structuring inquiry so decisions are driven by clarity, evidence, and the right framing—before solutions are generated

Definition

Asking the Right Questions is a structured artifact for governing how problems are explored before analysis or solution design begins. It defines how inquiry is framed, what assumptions must be surfaced, what evidence is required, and how scope and decision boundaries are clarified. Within SolveBoard, this artifact ensures that downstream analysis, modeling, and execution are anchored to the correct problem definition rather than symptoms, bias, or incomplete framing.

When to Use

• When the problem statement is ambiguous, contested, or politically loaded

• When prior analyses have produced conflicting conclusions

• When decisions are high-impact, irreversible, or resource-intensive

• When stakeholders disagree on what is actually being decided

When Not to Use

• When the problem is already clearly defined and bounded

• When rapid execution is required and reframing is not feasible

• When the work is purely operational with no judgment or interpretation required

Common Mistakes

• Jumping to solutions before clarifying the real question

• Accepting the initial framing without testing assumptions

• Asking for data before defining what decision it must inform

• Confusing symptoms, constraints, and root causes

Purpose of the 90-Day Maturity Uplift Plan

The purpose of this artifact is to ensure that decision-making begins with the correct framing. By structuring inquiry around intent, assumptions, evidence, scope, and consequences, it prevents wasted analysis, misaligned solutions, and false certainty. It also provides a repeatable method for elevating conversations from opinions to disciplined problem definition.

How to Apply

• Clarify the decision being made and what success would change

• Surface assumptions embedded in the current framing

• Identify what must be true for each option to be valid

• Define boundaries: what is in scope, out of scope, and non-negotiable

• Specify what evidence is required to reduce uncertainty

• Test alternative framings of the same situation

Example Scenario

A leadership team debates whether to invest in a new analytics platform. Using Ask the Right Questions, they first clarify the decision (what outcome must change), surface assumptions (that tools—not skills—are the bottleneck), define scope (which decisions are affected), and identify required evidence (current decision error rates, adoption constraints). The reframed question reveals that process design—not technology—is the leverage point, redirecting investment toward higher impact.

Boundaries

This artifact governs how inquiry is structured. It does not replace domain expertise or detailed analysis. It ensures that subsequent work is directed at the correct problem and decision context.

What This Artifact Does

Structures inquiry so decisions are framed around the right problem, assumptions are explicit, and evidence requirements are defined before analysis begins.

You Provide

(You may provide some, all, or none of the items below. Partial inputs are valid)

• The decision to be made and why it matters

• Current problem framing or debate (if any)

• Stakeholder perspectives or competing viewpoints

• Constraints, non-negotiables, and success criteria

• Written descriptions or pasted text

• Links to background material or prior analyses

• Files, PDFs, spreadsheets, images, and other uploads (always acceptable)

• Context notes

Core Question

What question, if answered, would most improve the quality of this decision?

Decision Logic

• If the debate is about solutions → Reframe to clarify the decision being made

• If data requests are unfocused → Define what must be true for each option

• If stakeholders disagree → Surface assumptions and boundary conditions

What the Output Means

• A refined decision question

• Explicit assumptions underlying the current framing

• Defined evidence requirements

• Clear scope and boundaries for subsequent analysis

Do Not Use When

• The problem is already well-defined and agreed

• Speed of execution outweighs reframing

You do not need to complete every section below. Provide only the information you have available or wish to provide. The AI will generate output using only the inputs you supply and will not assume or infer missing information.

Section 1 — Decision Context and Importance

What This Input Represents

The decision being considered and why it matters.

If You Have Materials, You May Provide (List file names here in your input document):

• Decision statements

• Executive summaries

• Issue briefs or memos

Guiding Questions:

• What decision are you trying to make?

• Why does this decision matter now?

• What would change if the decision were made differently?

Section 2 — Current Problem Framing or Debate

What This Input Represents

How the issue is currently being defined or argued.

If You Have Materials, You May Provide (List file names here in your input document):

• Problem statements

• Debate summaries

• Prior analyses or proposals

Guiding Questions:

• How is the problem currently framed?

• What solutions are being discussed?

• Where do disagreements or confusion exist?

Section 3 — Stakeholder Perspectives and Assumptions

What This Input Represents

The viewpoints and assumptions shaping the current framing.

If You Have Materials, You May Provide (List file names here in your input document):

• Stakeholder notes

• Meeting summaries

• Position papers

Guiding Questions:

• Who are the key stakeholders and what do they believe?

• What assumptions appear to be embedded in the current framing?

• Which assumptions, if wrong, would change the decision?

Section 4 — Constraints, Boundaries, and Evidence Requirements

What This Input Represents

The limits on the decision and what information is needed to decide well.

If You Have Materials, You May Provide (List file names here in your input document):

• Policy constraints

• Non-negotiables

• Data or evidence sources

Guiding Questions:

• What constraints or non-negotiables apply?

• What must be true for each option to be valid?

• What evidence or data is required to test those conditions?

Section 5 — Supporting Context, Files, and References

What This Input Represents

Any additional information that would help the AI interpret organizational priorities, political sensitivities, or analytical history accurately.

You May Include (List file names here in your input document):

• Background analyses or reports

• Prior decision documents or board materials

• Policy or regulatory references

• Links to data sources, dashboards, or research

• Pasted text or excerpts

Additional Instructions (Optional)

You may add extra instructions to further shape the output, including:

Requesting PDF or other output formats
Limiting page length or response size
Layout preferences (section order, headings, structure, templates)
Specifying tone, style, or format (executive, concise, detailed, formal, etc.)
Output consistency preferences (fixed structure, standardized phrasing, strict formatting)
Prioritization or scoring preferences (how gaps, risks, or actions should be ranked)
Desired mode behavior as outlined in the section below
Any other constraints, rules, or priorities relevant to your use case

If included, the AI will follow these instructions when they do not conflict with the bridge’s execution rules. More specific instructions generally produce more consistent, repeatable, and targeted outputs.

Desired Mode Behavior

Strict Mode

• Maximize determinism and repeatability
• Minimize wording variation, structure changes, and interpretive flexibility
• Do not extend beyond explicit user inputs

Balanced Mode (Default)

• Maintain structure and discipline
• Allow limited analytical judgment where inputs are incomplete
• Do not introduce external assumptions

Exploratory Mode

• Expand hypothesis space and analytical angles
• Surface alternative interpretations and scenario paths
• Still grounded only in user-provided inputs

If no mode is specified, default to Balanced Mode.

What This Enables

Based on your prepared inputs, this artifact will reframe the decision into clearer questions, surface implicit assumptions, define scope and boundaries, and specify the evidence required—ensuring that subsequent analysis and solution design address the correct problem rather than symptoms or bias.

Canonical Input Rule (For All SolveBoard Artifacts)

Documents are optional. Sections may be partially completed or left blank. Structured answers to any subset of guiding questions constitute valid input. The AI will evaluate only provided information and will not infer missing content.

AI Execution Instructions

You are operating in Bridge Execution Mode. Follow these rules exactly. Do not reinterpret, summarize, optimize, or override them. Do not introduce external knowledge, assumptions, or inferred content. Evaluate only user-provided inputs. If required information is missing or ambiguous, flag it rather than guessing. Output must follow the defined Output section exactly.

Users may provide some, all, or none of the input sections. Process only what is explicitly provided. Treat empty sections as intentionally omitted.

Purpose

Reframe a decision or problem by generating the right questions, surfacing assumptions, defining scope, and specifying evidence requirements.

What This Bridge Answers

What are the right questions we must answer to make this decision well?

Inputs (All Optional)

• Decision being considered

• Current framing or problem statement

• Stakeholder viewpoints or points of disagreement

• Constraints, success criteria, and non-negotiables

• Supporting materials: text, links, PDFs, spreadsheets, images, or other uploads

• Context notes

Note: Output Quality and specificity scale with input completeness. The user has been informed of this via the input sheet.

Processing Rules

A valid output must satisfy all of the following:

• The decision being made is explicitly stated

• Assumptions embedded in the current framing are identified

• At least one alternative framing of the problem is presented

• Evidence required to resolve the decision is specified

• Scope, boundaries, and non-negotiables are clearly defined

When inputs are sparse:

• Produce the most complete output possible with available data

• Explicitly flag what's missing and how additional inputs would enhance the analysis

• Do not infer or assume missing information

Execution Steps

• Review inputs to confirm the decision context

• Extract and list implicit assumptions

• Reframe the situation into one or more decision-centric questions

• Define what must be true for each option to be valid

• Identify the evidence required to test those conditions

• Clarify scope, constraints, and decision boundaries

Output

• Refined decision question(s)

• List of assumptions underlying the current framing

• Alternative framings of the problem

• Evidence and data requirements

• Defined scope, constraints, and boundaries

Failure Conditions / Misuse

• Providing solutions instead of reframing the question

• Leaving assumptions implicit

• Defining questions without specifying evidence requirements

• Allowing scope to remain ambiguous

Mode Behavior (From Input Sheet)

Strict Mode

• Maximize determinism and repeatability
• Minimize wording variation, structure changes, and interpretive flexibility
• Do not extend beyond explicit user inputs

Balanced Mode (Default)

• Maintain structure and discipline
• Allow limited analytical judgment where inputs are incomplete
• Do not introduce external assumptions

Exploratory Mode

• Expand hypothesis space and analytical angles
• Surface alternative interpretations and scenario paths
• Still grounded only in user-provided inputs

If no mode is specified, default to Balanced Mode.

Additional Instruction Governance

User-provided additional instructions must be followed exactly unless they conflict with core Bridge Execution Rules. If a conflict exists, Bridge Execution Rules take priority.

Additional instructions may control format, tone, structure, length, or ordering, but must not introduce inferred content, external knowledge, or speculative assumptions.

If instructions are ambiguous, flag ambiguity rather than guessing.

Additional Instructions Execution Rule

If the user provides instructions in the Additional Instructions field, they are binding execution constraints.

Failure to follow them constitutes a Bridge Execution Failure.

Reminder to AI: If a format is requested (e.g., PDF, DOCX), the final output MUST be delivered in that format.

Artifact Instructions

These instructions explain what information the Ask the Right Questions artifact requires and how to prepare your inputs.

How to Prepare Your Input Document (Required Format)

Create a new Word (or similar) document.
Copy all text from the Input Sheet tab into the document.
Save it — this is now your Input Document.
Answer the guiding questions directly in the Input Document and reference any supporting files there.
Save the completed Input Document (Word, PDF, etc.).
Copy all text from the Bridge AI Prompt tab and paste it into the prompt field.
Attach the completed Input Document and any referenced files when submitting the prompt.

No Supporting Files? No Problem.

You can proceed without uploading any supporting documents, spreadsheets, dashboards, reports, or other attachments.

The Input Document is still required, but it may contain only plain-text answers to the guiding questions.

Written responses alone are sufficient for the AI to generate output.

Supporting files, links, and pasted materials are always optional.

Missing Inputs Are OK

You do not need to complete every section.
You do not need supporting files.

The AI will still run. It will:

Use only the inputs you provide
Skip or flag missing sections
Never fail due to incomplete information

Output quality scales with input depth — but execution never breaks.

Submitting Files

If you upload files, list each file name under the relevant “If You Have Materials” section in your Input Document. This ensures each file is clearly tied to its intended use.

What to Expect From This AI Bridge

This bridge generates a structured, high-value starting point, not a guaranteed final deliverable. Output quality improves as inputs become clearer, deeper, and more complete.

This artifact supports iteration. Users are encouraged to refine inputs, test variations, and rerun the bridge to improve results.

The AI organizes complexity and accelerates insight — but final judgment and decisions remain with the user.

In Short

Stronger inputs → stronger outputs
Iteration improves results
Cross-artifact testing can reveal new perspectives
This artifact enables progress, not perfection