SCQA Template: Frame Any Problem in Four Moves (with Examples)

You call a kickoff meeting for a problem nobody has solved yet. You send a pre-read packed with every fact you found. Then the meeting starts and splits in two: one group is sure the cause is price, another is sure it is service, and both are quoting the same spreadsheet.

Facts do not produce agreement on their own. Each person reads them through their own story. If the room does not accept the problem, it will not accept your analysis later. SCQA is a short, repeatable way to get the problem agreed before the evidence arrives.

What is SCQA?

The letters name four blocks, in order: Situation, then Complication, then Question, then Answer. Barbara Minto introduced it as the opening structure for the Pyramid Principle. It is a framing tool, not an analysis tool, and most projects use it twice: once at the start, to agree why the work exists, and once at the end, to open the recommendation.

Read aloud, a good SCQA takes about a minute.

The four blocks and the test for each

Situation. Facts the audience already accepts. Stable, documented, not up for debate. The test: would anyone in the room ask for a source? If so, it is not Situation material.

Complication. What changed, or what is now at risk, that makes the Situation unstable. It usually carries a time marker and a before-and-after gap. The test: hide it and reread the Situation. If nobody now has a reason to act, the Complication is doing its job.

Question. The single question that the Complication naturally raises. It should match the key question of the project, placed right after the tension.

Answer. Your point of view. At kickoff it is a working hypothesis; at the end it is a recommendation backed by evidence. The test: someone could reasonably disagree with it. A list of activities ("we will interview, then analyze, then model") is not an answer.

The SCQA template

Copy this and fill one sentence (or two) per block:

• Key question of the project: ...
• Audience and format: who will read or hear it, and where
• Situation: two to four facts nobody disputes
• Complication: what changed, when, and the gap it opened
• Question: the natural "so what now?"
• Answer: one contestable view, stated as a hypothesis (kickoff) or a recommendation (final)
• Neutrality check: have contested phrases been moved out of the Situation?
• One-minute read: pass or fail

An SCQA example

Here is a kickoff version for a fictional software company whose trial users are not converting to paid plans.

• Situation: We offer a free trial of our scheduling product to small clinics. Trials have been our main source of new customers since launch.
• Complication: Over the last two quarters, fewer trials have turned into paid accounts, and the team does not agree on why.
• Question: What should we change in the trial experience this half-year to bring conversion back to where it was, without adding sales headcount?
• Answer: Our working view is that clinics stall during setup, before they see the product working, rather than at the pricing page. We will test this over the next month.

Notice what is not in the Situation: "onboarding is broken" or "our price is too high." Those are interpretations, and each one belongs to a side of the argument. Keeping them out is what lets both sides accept the opening.

The answer-first version (ASC)

Senior readers often want the conclusion first. Reorder the same content as Answer, Situation, Complication, and restate the Question only if it helps:

• Answer: We think trials stall during setup, not at pricing, and propose a one-month test before touching price.
• Situation: Trials have been our main source of new customers.
• Complication: Fewer of them have converted over the last two quarters, and the cause is not measured.

A shorter cousin, SCR (Situation, Complication, Resolution), works for quick updates. It drops the explicit Question, which can hide weak logic, so use it with care.

Seven steps to write one

1. Write the Question first, from the project's key question, with no solution hidden inside it.
2. Write the Situation using only facts that are measured, documented or observable.
3. Find the real Complication: a change with a time marker.
4. Check that the Question follows from the Complication and is not a separate topic.
5. Draft the Answer at the right level of certainty for the moment.
6. Read it aloud in under a minute. A listener should be able to repeat all four blocks.
7. Test it with one person who disagrees. Success sounds like: "I don't agree with your answer, but I understand the story."

Common SCQA mistakes

• A contested Situation. "Service is failing" is a claim, not a fact. Keep only numbers, dates and documented facts.
• A Complication that is just another fact. No change, no tension, no reason to act. Require a time marker and a gap.
• A Question that changes the subject. The Complication is about a new competitor; the Question is about staff turnover. Read the Complication aloud and ask what a neutral observer would ask next.
• An Answer that is a task list, or that arrives on slide six. Write one sentence someone could argue with and, for executives, put it first.

When SCQA is the wrong tool

SCQA frames a problem; it does not explain it. If you cannot yet state the Complication, you may need interviews or a MECE breakdown of possible causes first. For a routine status update, it is ceremony: progress, blockers and decisions are enough. And with audiences that want evidence before conclusions, keep the Answer as a hypothesis and pair it with an analysis plan.

Go further

SCQA is Chapter 2 of The Problem-Solving Toolkit, right after the problem statement, and it comes with a printable SCQA Builder sheet. Read Chapter 1 for free to see how the book sets up the key question that SCQA builds on, or start with our overview of the Frame, Find, Decide, Deliver method.