11 minutes
The problem you were handed, and the problem you have Complicated issues almost always arrive pre-framed — as a solution, as somebody's fault, or as a compliance question. The framing decides the answer, so it is worth the ten minutes it takes to rewrite.
What you’ll be able to do Rewrite an issue you were handed as an inquiry question that names what was observed, where in the process it happens, who is affected, and what would count as an answer. Compare the responses to this question and explain your choice: What is the first move? Document a next step for The problem you were handed, and the problem you have: Take the last issue that landed on your desk fully formed. Write the sentence you were given, word for word, then write the inquiry question underneath it and note the two things you would have to look at to answer it. Framing decides the answer A simple problem can be solved from the sentence it arrives in. Somebody names it, somebody fixes it, and it stays fixed. A complex issue behaves differently. It comes back after a reasonable repair, it looks like a different problem depending on who is describing it, and almost everyone involved is acting sensibly inside their own part of the process. Those three signs are the reliable ones. When you see them together, the thing in front of you is not a task, and treating it as a task is how a year disappears.
The trouble starts earlier than most people think. By the time an issue reaches you it has usually traveled through two or three hands, and each one has tidied it. Tidying means turning a mess into a sentence, and a sentence needs a subject and a verb — so somebody becomes the subject. That is how “returns are falling” becomes “households are not reading their mail,” and how a gap between regions becomes “that region is not following the policy.” Neither sentence is a lie. Both are conclusions wearing the clothes of a description, and once one is in the room it quietly rules out everything it did not mention.
The fix is small and it is not complicated. Write the sentence you were handed. Then, underneath it, write a question: what was actually observed, where in the process does it happen, who is affected, and what would count as an answer? The question takes about ten minutes to write and it changes what the next six weeks are for. It also protects the person who handed you the issue, because it keeps their concern — the returns really are falling — while releasing their explanation, which was never the part they needed you to accept.
Five ways an issue can arrive, and what each one rules out The solution frame The blame frame The compliance frame The anecdote frame The inquiry frame
“We need a new form.” “We should add a training.” The fix arrives before the problem does, usually because someone senior has already imagined the answer. It rules out every cause the proposed fix would not touch, and it is the hardest frame to escape, because arguing with it sounds like refusing the work. The way out is to accept the fix as one candidate and ask what it assumes.
“That region is not following the policy.” “Case managers are not raising the option.” The subject of the sentence is a group of people who are usually the furthest from the decision that built the process. This frame rules out the design, the materials, the supply of providers and the way success is counted, and it makes the people who know the most about the breakdown the least safe to ask.
“Are we out of step with the rule?” A necessary question and a narrow one. It rules out everything that is fully permitted and still produces a bad result, which is most of what this module is about. Keep the compliance question — it protects the division and the people it serves — and do not let it be the only one asked.
“I heard about a family up north.” A single story can be true, urgent and completely unrepresentative, and it can also be the first visible piece of a real pattern. Neither dismissing it nor generalising from it is inquiry. Treat it as a lead: what would have to be true elsewhere if this story is a pattern, and where would you look?
“Which households are not returning the packet, where do they stop, and what happens to them afterward?” It names what was observed, the part of the process to examine, the people affected and what an answer would have to explain. It contains no cause and no culprit, so it rules nothing out. It is also harder to write than any of the others, which is why it is usually skipped.
Observed, concluded, or a fix in disguise? Returns on the annual re-assessment packet have fallen for three consecutive cycles.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise Households are not returning the packet because they do not open their mail.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise The packet needs to be shortened to four pages.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise Two earlier changes, a brighter envelope and a reminder postcard, produced no measurable difference.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise Case managers in that region need a refresher on the policy.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise The regions with the lowest returns are the ones taking the policy least seriously.
Choose a category What was observed What someone concluded A fix in disguise Check matches Reset Write the question before you write the fix What you can change You control the sentence the work starts from. Nobody can stop you spending ten minutes turning a handed-down statement into a question, and nobody has to approve it.
What to watch for Do not open by telling the requester their framing is wrong. You will spend the meeting defending a correction instead of doing the inquiry, and the concern underneath — which is usually real — gets lost in the argument.
Your next step On the next issue you are handed, write the original sentence at the top of the page and the inquiry question directly under it. Send both back with the two things you plan to look at first and the date you will report.
Five questions that turn a complaint into an inquiry What exactly was observed?
Strip out every word that explains, blames or fixes. What is left is usually one measurable thing and one date range. If nothing is left, the issue is a theory and the first job is to find out whether it is happening at all.
Where in the process does it happen?
Walk the steps in order and find the one where people stop. “The whole thing is broken” is almost never true, and it is never actionable. A step has an owner; a process does not.
Who is affected, and who is not?
The comparison is the useful part. A problem everyone has is a design problem. A problem some people have is a design problem too, and it also tells you which assumption the design is resting on.
Who reported it, and who could not?
Every issue arrives through a channel — a complaint line, an audit, a legislator, a survey, a staff member who spoke up. Each channel has people it never hears from. Name them early; they are usually the ones the process failed hardest.
What would count as an answer?
Say it out loud before you start looking. If you cannot describe what a satisfying answer would contain, you cannot tell when you have one, and the inquiry will end whenever somebody runs out of patience.
Private reflection, for you only: think of an issue you have described to someone else recently. How did your role, your authority and the words you chose shape what they then thought the problem was? Would your description make sense to someone who does not already know how DHS works? Nothing you write here is collected, stored or seen by anyone.
Carry this forward An issue rarely arrives as a question. It arrives as a solution (“we need a new form”), as blame (“that region is not following the policy”), as a compliance check (“are we out of step with the rule?”) or as a single story (“I heard about a family up north”). Each of those closes the question before anyone asks it.
An inquiry question is specific about what was observed, where in the process it happens, who is affected and what would count as an answer. It contains no fix.
Who named this an issue matters as much as what they named. Something that reached leadership through a complaint, an audit or a legislator's office has already been filtered. The people who gave up and stopped calling are not in it at all.
A pattern that survives three reasonable fixes is almost never a compliance problem. It is telling you something about how the process is built.
A scenario about a re-assessment mailing with a falling return rate, sorting practice that separates what was observed from what someone concluded and from a fix in disguise, and a knowledge check on rewriting a handed-down issue.
Take the last issue that landed on your desk fully formed. Write the sentence you were given, word for word, then write the inquiry question underneath it and note the two things you would have to look at to answer it.
Browse and download only. Course notes are not typed or saved on this page.
Reset this lesson
Course overview Next lesson Participation and course completion in this program do not count toward DHS-required training credits unless management, a director, or DHS leadership expressly approves an exception.
