Problem Framing Canvas (MITRE)

# Problem Framing Canvas (MITRE)

Run MITRE's three-phase Problem Framing Canvas: Look Inward (assumptions, biases), Look Outward (who's affected, who's left out), Reframe (problem statement + How Might We). Solve the right problem before jumping to solutions.

Not a brainstorm — a framing tool that broadens perspective, challenges assumptions, and produces a clear, equity-driven problem statement.

## Three Phases

### Look Inward
- What is the problem? (symptoms)
- Why haven't we solved it? (new, hard, low priority, lack of resources/authority, systemic inequity)
- How are we part of the problem? (assumptions, biases)

### Look Outward
- Who experiences the problem? (when/where/consequences)
- Who else has it? Who doesn't?
- Who's been left out?
- Who benefits when problem exists vs. solved?

### Reframe
- Restate the problem with new insight
- "How might we [action] as we aim to [objective]?"

## Why This Works

- **Broadens perspective** beyond your own assumptions
- **Equity-driven** — centers marginalized voices, asks who's been left out
- **Challenges biases** — explicit examination before framing
- **Actionable output** — HMW statement ready for solution exploration

**Anti-patterns:** Not a solution brainstorm. Not a feature request list. Not a one-person exercise (needs diverse perspectives).

## When to Use

**Use:** Starting discovery, reframing existing problem, challenging assumptions, aligning teams on definition.
**Don't use:** Problem already validated, tactical bug fixes, when stakeholders committed to solution (address alignment first).

## Application

### Step 0: Gather Context

- Initial problem statement / stakeholder request
- Symptoms (tickets, churn, complaints)
- Existing research
- Assumptions you're making
- Stakeholders affected, asking, overlooked

### Phase 1: Look Inward

**Q1: What is the problem? (symptoms)**

Options: customer pain / business metric / stakeholder request / observed behavior / other

**Q2: Why haven't we solved it?**

Multi-select: new / hard / low priority / lack of resources / lack of authority / systemic inequity

**Q3: How are we part of the problem?**

1. Assuming we know what customers want (confirmation bias)
2. Optimizing for ourselves, not users (internal bias)
3. Overlooking specific user segments (survivorship bias)
4. Solution-first thinking (premature convergence)
5. Other

### Phase 2: Look Outward

**Q4: Who experiences the problem?**

- Who: personas, segments, roles
- When: triggering events/contexts
- Where: physical or digital locations
- Consequences: time wasted, deadlines missed, churn

**Q5: Who else has this problem? Who doesn't?**

- Other companies / industries / domains
- How they deal with it (workarounds)
- Who avoids the problem and why

**Q6: Who's been left out? Who benefits?**

- Marginalized voices, edge cases, overlooked
- Who benefits when problem exists (status quo defenders)
- Who benefits when problem is solved
- Who loses if solved

### Phase 3: Reframe

**Q7: Restate the problem**

Template: "The problem is: [Who] struggles to [accomplish what] because [root cause], which leads to [consequence]. This affects [specific segments] and has been overlooked because [bias from Phase 1]."

**Example:**
"Non-technical small business owners struggle to activate during onboarding because we use jargon-heavy UI and lack guided workflows, leading to 60% abandonment in 24 hours. This disproportionately affects solopreneurs without technical support, and was overlooked because our team optimizes for enterprise users with IT departments."

**Q8: How Might We statement**

Template: "How might we [action that addresses problem] as we aim to [objective]?"

**Example:** "How might we guide non-technical users through onboarding with plain-language prompts as we aim to increase activation from 40% to 70%?"

## Output Template

```markdown
# Problem Framing Canvas: [Name]
**Date:** [Today]

## Phase 1: Look Inward
- **Symptoms:** [...]
- **Why unsolved:** [...]
- **Our assumptions/biases:** [...]
- **What to redesign/reframe:** [...]

## Phase 2: Look Outward
- **Who experiences:** [...]
- **When/where:** [...]
- **Consequences:** [...]
- **Who else has it:** [...]
- **Who doesn't have it:** [...]
- **Who's been left out:** [...]
- **Who benefits (status quo):** [...]
- **Who benefits (solved):** [...]

## Phase 3: Reframe
**Stated another way:** [refined problem]
**How might we** [action] **as we aim to** [objective]?

## Next Steps
1. Validate with users (`discovery-interview-prep`)
2. Generate solutions (`opportunity-solution-tree`)
3. Formalize problem (`problem-statement`)
```

## Common Pitfalls

1. **Skipping Look Inward** → groupthink persists; force assumption discussion
2. **Ignoring "who benefits"** → miss political dynamics
3. **Generic reframe** ("improve UX") → make specific (who/what/when/cause)
4. **Too-narrow HMW** ("add a mobile app") → keep solution space broad
5. **Solo exercise** → biases persist; need cross-functional team

## References

- `problem-statement` — formalize reframed problem
- `opportunity-solution-tree` — explore solutions from HMW
- `discovery-interview-prep` — validate with customers

**External:**
- MITRE Innovation Toolkit, *Problem Framing Canvas v3* (2021)
- Stanford d.school, *How Might We* statements