Writing the problem statement: what, where, when, how much and compared to what
The superintendent says the electricians are slow and asks for a larger crew. Recent lighting packages took six days while the earlier comparison says four. The layouts, crew hours and accepted completion boundary have not been checked. Before acting on a diagnosis, the team needs a statement that explains what was observed and what remains unknown.
Describe the gap before choosing its cause or remedy. State what happened, where, over what period, how it was measured and what comparison is being used. Give a known number where useful, while keeping its limits visible. Two sentences can focus the discussion, but a forced length or invented figure is less useful than an accurate statement the people involved can verify.
Build a statement that can survive a factual check
- Name the observed outcome. Identify the actual work package, area and completion boundary. Use a concrete description such as elapsed days to accepted completion rather than a judgement about attitude or effort. State the time period and record source so the team can find the same observations.
- Specify the comparison and its limits. Identify whether the reference is a current plan, earlier package or required condition. Check scope, quantity, resources and other relevant differences. If comparability remains uncertain, say so. A six-day record against four days shows a difference; it does not by itself establish deficient production or its cause.
- Remove the premature diagnosis and solution. Keep explanations and proposals in separate notes. 'After the ceiling change' can locate a period without proving the change caused the result. 'Add two workers' is an option to assess later, not part of the observed problem. Preserve urgent response needs through their actual route while the analysis proceeds.
- Read back and correct the statement. Ask the people with relevant records to confirm its meaning and point out missing conditions. Record unresolved data and a next check rather than forcing consensus. Once the statement is sound, use it to guide evidence gathering and options; revise it if later information changes the problem boundary.
Common mistakes
- Using a judgement about a trade as the problem statement.
- Hiding the reference or completion boundary.
- Treating sequence in time as proof of cause.
- Inventing a number or forcing agreement to finish the form.
Checklist
Check the statement for
- Observed outcome and located package.
- Period, measure and traceable source.
- Comparison and known limits.
- Causes and remedies kept as separate questions.
- Factual confirmation and the next evidence check.
Check your understanding
The new packages take six days against a four-day plan. Does 'the crew is too small' belong in the problem statement?
