Problem Framing

Purpose

Problem Framing ensures teams invest their creative energy in the right direction. By systematically questioning assumptions, reframing perspectives, and testing alternative problem statements, the method prevents the costly mistake of brilliantly solving the wrong problem.

At a glance

• Group size: 4–12
• Duration: 40 minutes
• Difficulty: Moderate to high
• Facilitation style: Structured group discussion with facilitator prompts
• Setting: Workshop room with whiteboard or digital board

How to run

1. State the initial problem (3 min): Write the problem as currently understood on the board.
2. Question assumptions (10 min): List every assumption embedded in the statement. Challenge each: "What if this isn’t true?" "Who says so?" "What evidence do we have?"
3. Shift perspectives (10 min): Rewrite the problem from 3 different viewpoints — the user, the business, the competitor, society, or a specific stakeholder.
4. Broaden and narrow (10 min): Ask "Why is this a problem?" three times to go broader. Then ask "What specifically?" three times to go narrower. Find the level that’s actionable.
5. Select the frame (7 min): Compare 2–3 reframed problem statements. Vote on the one that best captures the real challenge and offers the most design leverage.

Materials needed

• Whiteboard or large paper
• Sticky notes and markers
• "5 Whys" and "How Might We" templates
• Dot stickers for voting

Pitfalls & common mistakes

• Accepting the first framing: The initial problem statement is almost never the right one. Push for at least 3 alternatives.
• Framing as a solution in disguise: "We need a mobile app" is a solution, not a problem. Keep asking "Why?"
• Spending too long: This is time-boxed exploration, not philosophical debate. Move to "good enough" and iterate.
• Solo framing: Problem framing done by one person reflects one perspective. It must be collaborative.

Inclusion & accessibility

• Use silent writing before discussion so all voices contribute.
• Provide the initial problem statement in writing, not just spoken.
• Rotate the "devil’s advocate" role to prevent one person from dominating critique.

Variations

• Problem statement mad libs: Use a template: "[User] needs a way to [need] because [insight]" and fill it in multiple ways.
• Reverse framing: State the opposite problem ("How do we make this worse?") and reverse the insights.
• Customer-first framing: Start from a real user quote and build the problem statement around it.

When NOT to use this

• When the problem is genuinely clear, well-researched, and agreed upon — move to ideation.
• When the team is in execution mode and reopening the problem would derail momentum.
• When it becomes an avoidance tactic — endless reframing without committing to a direction.

Source & further reading

• Dorst, Kees — *Frame Innovation* (MIT Press, 2015)
• Wedell-Wedellsborg, Thomas — "Are You Solving the Right Problems?" (Harvard Business Review, 2017)
• d.school, Stanford — "Point of View" and "How Might We" method cards