Problem Framing

The Problem Framing domain. 2 frameworks in this family. Each is graded honestly; see the evidence model for the tiers.

These frameworks interrupt before solving. A problem almost always arrives in a frame nobody chose on purpose: it is wherever the person was standing when they noticed it, and it often smuggles in a symptom, a pre-baked solution, or a single viewpoint. The shared move is to escape that initial frame deliberately, then select a working one rather than drift into whichever was stated first. How a problem is framed shapes the quality and originality of what gets produced, which is why this is the first step of the lifecycle, upstream of any significant work.

Reach for this family when

• A request names a solution (“build X”, “add a dashboard”) but the underlying goal is unstated.
• A problem arrives as a symptom or a vague aspiration (“improve engagement”) with no concrete handle.
• The cost of solving the wrong problem is real, because this is upstream of significant work.
• People are arguing past each other and may simply be working at different levels of the same problem.

Which one to use

Both produce a chosen working frame, not a longer list. They differ in how many degrees of freedom they open.

• The altitude is wrong, or unknown. Use Abstraction Laddering. It moves the problem along one vertical axis - up by asking “why? / to what end?” and down by asking “how? / what specifically?” - to find the level at which the problem is actually workable, then marks one rung as the working altitude. It moves on a single axis and nothing else.
• The frame needs more than altitude. Use Problem Restatement. It generates several genuinely different framings using distinct moves - altitude, goal-versus-implementation, stakeholder shift, inversion, is/is-not boundary - and converges on one. Reach for it when the issue is not just height but who owns the problem, a hidden assumption, or which of several rival framings is the real one.

In short: if you only need to find the right level, ladder; if you need to weigh different kinds of reframing, restate. Neither generates solutions or picks among them, and neither is a branching decomposition - for that, use an issue tree.

Composes with

Problem Framing opens the lifecycle, so it feeds nearly everything downstream. Once the real question is chosen, hand the “How Might We” angles to Divergent Ideation to generate options, or take a contested frame straight to Decision & Option Evaluation when the options already exist. A reframe that turns out to rest on a shaky belief routes naturally into Assumption & Belief Challenge before you build on it.

Framework	Evidence	What it does
Abstraction Laddering	P	Builds an abstraction ladder that moves a problem up (“why / to what end?”) and down (“how / what specifically?”) to locate the right altitude to work at, then marks one rung as the working level.
Problem Restatement	M/P	Generates several genuinely different framings of an ambiguous problem by varying altitude, stakeholder, and goal-versus-implementation, then selects the most useful one to solve and produces a reframed problem statement with How Might We angles.

Not sure which of these fits your situation? The Framework Advisor will diagnose the job and recommend a minimal sequence.