A little structure.
A useful next step.

Use this canvas when a topic feels too broad to investigate. Keep the first version to one page and revise it after a discussion with someone who sees the problem differently.

Situation

What is happening, in which setting, and who experiences the difficulty?

Decision

What choice needs to be made? Who can act on the answer?

Question

What do you need to learn to make that choice more informed?

Evidence

What could you observe or compare? What result would change your current view?

Assumptions

What are you taking for granted about the people, process, or setting?

Boundary

What will this investigation leave unanswered?

Next action

What is the smallest useful step, and what must be in place before it starts?

Example: Before reorganising a shared research folder, ask whether an unfamiliar reader can find the latest method description. Observe the search path and points of confusion, then decide which labels need revision.

A pilot should answer a limited question about feasibility or learning. Write down the decision rule before reviewing the observations so that a convenient result does not quietly become the goal.

1. Learning goal: state the uncertainty that the pilot can realistically reduce.
2. Current process: describe what happens now and why it is an appropriate comparison.
3. Proposed change: identify exactly what will differ and what should stay consistent.
4. Observations: decide what to record, including obstacles, extra support, and missing information.
5. Limits: note how the setting or participant selection may affect interpretation.
6. Decision rule: write what would support continuing, revising, or pausing the work.
7. Review point: choose when to examine the evidence and record the resulting decision.

Use low-risk examples for an initial methods exercise. A completed pilot plan does not by itself establish that a study is appropriate to run.

Write this while the details are still clear. A short record that preserves uncertainty is more useful than a polished summary that removes it.

We asked

Restate the question and the decision it was intended to inform.

We tried

Describe the method, the setting, and any changes made along the way.

We observed

Record what happened before adding explanations. Include surprises and missing observations.

We interpret

Explain what the observations may mean and list plausible alternative explanations.

We decided

State the next action and how the available evidence supports it.

We still need to know

List unresolved questions and the limits on applying the result elsewhere.

Check the output from the perspective of someone who was absent from the work. Ask them to explain its purpose and limitations back to you; their questions often reveal the missing context.

• Purpose: the question, intended use, and audience are stated.
• Version: the record identifies which materials and revisions belong together.
• Inputs: files, fields, units, and required background are described.
• Method: the main steps, transformations, and judgement calls are visible.
• Result: observations are distinguished from interpretation and recommendations.
• Limits: exclusions, uncertainties, and unsuitable uses are explained.
• Reuse conditions: permissions and any restrictions are checked before materials are shared.
• Next questions: the reader can see what remains to investigate.