THINKING FRAMEWORKS

Use a framework, clarify your thinking.

Start with your question. Find a suitable framework and see how to use it.

Choose by work stage

Start at a relevant stage and choose a suitable framework. The order helps you find your place; it is not a required sequence.

1. Define a problem

1-1 Identify the problem

Compare the current situation with the desired state and identify the gap.

Possible result: A problem statement and evidence of the gap

1-2 Organize the problem

Separate the issues and turn a broad concern into a question you can investigate.

Possible result: A structured question and investigation scope

1-3 Set priorities

Decide which issue needs attention first under your constraints.

Possible result: Priorities and the reasons for them

2. Understand the market and customers

2-1 Assess the environment and your business

Examine external conditions alongside your business's resources and capabilities.

Possible result: Relevant conditions, capabilities, and evidence gaps

2-2 Understand customers

Examine customer groups, needs, and experiences using available evidence.

Possible result: Customer insights and questions to check

2-3 Understand competitors

Compare competitors' offerings, activities, and capabilities.

Possible result: A comparison and possible areas of difference

3. Develop and compare ideas

3-1 Generate ideas

Explore several possible responses before judging them.

Possible result: A set of candidate ideas

3-2 Develop an idea

Turn an abstract idea into a proposal people can discuss.

Possible result: A more specific proposal and its assumptions

3-3 Compare and choose ideas

Compare candidates against explicit constraints and criteria.

Possible result: A choice, tradeoffs, and unresolved checks

4. Set a strategy and a plan

4-1 Choose a strategic direction

Consider business, market, customer, and positioning choices.

Possible result: Candidate directions and the reasons to explore them

4-2 Work out how to proceed

Examine what your direction requires and what may prevent it.

Possible result: A possible approach, dependencies, and checks

4-3 Set goals

Describe the intended result and how you will check progress.

Possible result: Goals and measures for reviewing them

5. Review and improve work

5-1 Review results

Compare what happened with what you intended and identify lessons.

Possible result: Observations, lessons, and next questions

5-2 Map how the work operates

Make activities, responsibilities, and constraints visible.

Possible result: A shared picture of the current work

5-3 Explore improvements

Consider changes to the work and what each would require.

Possible result: Improvement candidates and validation plans

6. Manage a team and work together

6-1 Align on goals

Make the team's direction and each person's contribution clear.

Possible result: Shared goals and responsibilities

6-2 Improve working relationships

Examine communication and cooperation using specific observations.

Possible result: Issues to discuss and ways to work together

6-3 Support motivation

Explore work conditions and goals without assuming what motivates each person.

Possible result: Questions, support options, and follow-up actions

7. Structure and share information

7-1 Communicate information

Organize the information so others can understand the point and its basis.

Possible result: A structured explanation or proposal

Framework overview ↗Compare frameworks ↗Try a search

Share information

Swipe the table sideways on mobile →

Framework summary by scenario
Framework	Purpose	What to bring	What you will have	Limits and cautions
1-1-26W2H	Answer eight planning questions to align the purpose, audience, execution, timing, place, and resource limits of an activity.	An activity brief, known arrangements, resource limits, and unanswered questions. Bring the people responsible for operations and delivery into the review.	A compact activity brief with eight explicit dimensions, remaining checks, and a next action. Missing information stays visible.	The worksheet organizes a plan; it does not confirm demand, attendance, authorization, or feasibility. A budget cap is not actual spending, and an attendance target is not a result. The eight boxes do not represent a sequence or score.
1-2-1Logic tree	Break a broad question into explicit branches so you can examine its parts and decide what to investigate next.	One clear question, a basis for dividing it into branches, and evidence or open questions for each branch.	A structured investigation with defined branches, visible gaps, and specific checks for the next level of detail.	The shape of a tree does not establish causation or completeness. Check for overlap, missing branches, and changes in the question being answered.
1-2-2Issue definition worksheet	Connect an observed gap to a bounded improvement task, a target, and explicit constraints before scheduling a solution.	A current measure and its definition, supporting observations, a proposed target, the delivery window, and available people. Identify the population and observation period before comparing results.	An issue card with current evidence, a target, the gap, included work, and constraints. It should support a decision about the next investigation or prototype.	This is BizThinkFrame's worksheet structure, not a standardized research or scoring instrument. Interview feedback can suggest an investigation; it does not establish what caused a metric gap. A complete issue card is not proof that a target is achievable.
3-2-1Idea concept sheet	Describe who an idea serves, the problem it addresses, how it works, and the smallest useful test.	One idea, its intended users, a problem, and an initial value hypothesis.	A concise concept with a proposed mechanism, assumptions, and a small test.	A clear concept is not proof of demand or feasibility. Avoid turning anticipated benefits into established outcomes or calling a manual test a working algorithm.
3-2-2Storyboard	Describe a user’s actions, thoughts, and feedback across key moments to reveal gaps in a proposed experience.	A user, a situation, a goal, and the important moments in the experience.	A sequence of text frames and questions for an experience test.	A coherent story does not establish usability or technical feasibility. Include failures and recovery where they matter; simple text or sketches are enough to explore the sequence.
3-3-2SUCCESs checklist	Review a message through six lenses: Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, and Stories.	A message, its audience, supporting evidence, and the action you want readers or listeners to consider.	A revised core message, evidence gaps, and an audience-understanding check.	Memorable wording does not establish truth, persuasion, or business results. Unexpected claims and stories still need an honest basis. Do not invent an experience or numerical score to complete the checklist.
4-2-2Business Model Flow Diagram	Show who provides goods, services, information and money to whom, with explicit directions, assumptions and agreement gaps.	Business scope, parties and roles, typed exchanges, agreement status, and money units and periods.	A readable party-and-exchange map, an edge list, money assumptions and responsibility or contract checks.	This is a business model flow diagram, not software deployment, a capability hierarchy or an org chart. Edges are exchanges, not a process sequence. Separate information from goods and money. A balanced arithmetic example proves neither transactions nor profit; a pilot permission does not approve a paid business model.
4-2-4Gantt chart	Place dated tasks and owners on a timeline, then examine the calendar, dependencies and available person-hours.	Task IDs, inclusive start and finish dates, a working calendar, predecessors, owners, effort and capacity assumptions, and actual progress records if available.	A task timeline with dependency and resource checks, plus the tasks and assumptions affected by a delay.	Workdays, elapsed calendar days and person-hours are different units. Parallel work needs both dependency and capacity support. This diagram displays entered dates; it does not infer progress, critical paths, resource leveling or completion probability. Check missing or invalid dates instead of filling them with defaults.
4-2-5Organizational chart	Show roles and relationships with an explicit line meaning, keeping project coordination, personnel reporting and decision rights distinct.	The organization or project scope, roles, supported duties, reporting and coordination relationships, staffing status and uncertain authority.	A role chart with defined lines, an authority and interface note, unconfirmed relationships and a review plan.	Position is neither a measure of ability nor a grant of budget or approval rights. Separate proposed lines, actual reporting and personnel management. Retain cross-functional relationships rather than forcing them into a tree. Confirm R/A/C/I for individual deliverables separately.
4-3-1Roadmap	Work back from an outcome to stage outputs, enabling resources and explicit decisions, keeping tentative windows distinct from commitments.	The current state, a justified outcome, stage outputs, broad windows, resource constraints, dependencies and actual commitment status.	A staged route with outputs, windows, capabilities, entry and exit checks, and review points.	A roadmap is not approved funding, a detailed schedule or a delivery guarantee. Distinguish tentative windows, options, commitments and achieved outputs. Gates need actual checks; a proposed pilot is not an observed improvement. Capacity is not inferred from a timeline.
4-3-2KPI tree	Connect an outcome to compatible counts and rates, specify the arithmetic, and keep targets and causal hypotheses separate.	An outcome definition, traceable counts from a compatible cohort, units, observation window, data source and a proposed target.	A metric tree with explicit arithmetic, a reproducible baseline, target assumptions and a next data check.	Decomposition is not causation. Numerators, denominators and outcome maturity must agree. Do not calculate through overlapping groups, unmatched periods or a zero denominator. Keep targets, leading indicators and measured effects distinct. The diagram illustrates a two-level product identity; other decompositions need their own operations.
5-2-1Business process inventory	List actual tasks, ownership, inputs, outputs, and time on a common basis before choosing a process to improve.	A defined team or process, an observation period, actual task records, and a consistent definition of time. Separate active work from waiting and avoid counting the same effort twice.	An editable seven-column task inventory and a short list of improvement candidates with evidence to investigate next.	An inventory describes recorded work; it does not establish a root cause, rank employees, or calculate recoverable capacity. Weekly staff-hours and elapsed lead time measure different things. Check units and observation periods before combining records.
5-2-2Business process flowchart	Map a bounded business process with explicit actions, decisions, exceptions and return conditions, separating current records from a proposal.	Process boundaries, roles, supported steps, decision conditions, exceptions, return paths, inputs, outputs and unconfirmed handoffs.	A flowchart with decisions and return conditions, a waiting and handoff list, and a walkthrough plan.	A flowchart establishes neither efficiency nor effective controls or service completion. Every branch needs a condition, and waiting is not completion. Split complex processes into bounded subflows. This figure illustrates one decision; additional decisions need their own explicit paths rather than invented steps or authority.
5-2-3PERT chart	Build a task network, calculate estimated durations and float, and identify tasks on a critical path.	Task IDs, task names, duration estimates in one unit, and predecessor IDs.	A dependency network, an estimated project duration, and critical tasks with zero total float.	The calculation assumes the dependency logic and resource availability are valid. It does not level resources, model schedule probabilities, or promise a delivery date. Parallel work may take longer when tasks need the same person.
5-2-4RACI matrix	Assign execution, accountability, consultation and information for each deliverable, then check authority, capacity and actual agreement.	Stable tasks and deliverables, roles and authority records, working relationships, information needs, acceptance status and availability.	A per-deliverable RACI draft with gaps, authority questions, communication triggers and confirmation actions.	Accountable is not automatically the approver of every step; approval rights need separate evidence. Multiple R contributors or a combined R/A are possible, but this worksheet uses one A per row. Write None where C or I is unnecessary. Assignments do not prove acceptance, available capacity or authorization; discuss gaps and conflicts.
5-3-3Business improvement proposal	Connect the problem and evidence to a proposed change, expected benefit, resources, implementation, and review.	Evidence of the problem, verified explanations and remaining hypotheses, an improvement option, estimated resources, and the decision or approval needed.	An editable seven-part proposal that separates evidence, expected benefit, resource estimates, implementation responsibilities, and risk checks.	A written proposal does not grant approval or establish a return on investment. Targets and estimated effort remain assumptions until checked. Staff effort in person-days is not elapsed calendar time or a cash budget. This tool organizes supplied facts without calculating feasibility, allocating resources, or approving a plan.
6-1-1Mission, vision, and values	Clarify why an organization exists, the future it aims for, and the behaviors that guide difficult choices.	The organization’s purpose, desired direction, customer concerns, and decisions that expose conflicting priorities.	Distinct statements of mission, vision, and values, with behaviors to discuss and test.	A slogan does not ensure alignment or consistent service. The statements need practical examples, discussion, and review; proposed commitments must be achievable.
6-3-3GROW model	Clarify a goal, examine the current reality, explore options, and let the person choose an action and a way to follow up.	The person’s desired outcome, current evidence and constraints, available support, and possible actions.	A goal, a view of the current situation, several options, and a next action chosen by the person, with timing and follow-up.	Ask open questions rather than decide on the person’s behalf. Will is also described as Way forward. A suggested action is not a commitment unless the person confirms it, and a commitment does not mean the action is completed.
7-1-1Product proposal	Connect a user problem and evidence to a bounded solution, expected value, a validation plan, resource estimates, and the decision required.	User-task evidence, intended users and scenarios, current alternatives, a proposed solution, resource estimates, and known risks. Identify missing acceptance criteria, ownership, and authority.	A reviewable product proposal that separates expected value from evidence, states exclusions, and identifies validation and approval conditions.	This is BizThinkFrame's proposal structure, not a standard approval template. Interview interest is not a purchase or permission to build. Estimated work is not an approved schedule, and a pilot plan is not a validated result. User, payer, and decision-maker roles may differ.
7-1-2Event Proposal	Explain an event’s purpose, audience and experience, then make schedule, resources, budget and approval conditions reviewable.	Audience evidence, purpose and proposed targets, date/site/capacity conditions, experience, staffing, cost assumptions, risks and decision authority.	A reviewable event concept with schedule, budget basis, responsibilities, acceptance measures and approval gaps.	Keep targets, signups, attendance and completed tasks separate. Capacity is not an attendance forecast, and interest is not a sale. Estimates and reserve are not actual spend or approval. Confirm site, people and participant conditions before delivery. The proposal proves neither demand, causal improvement nor return; it is not a product specification or a complete safety procedure.
7-1-3PREP communication	Organize a short recommendation as Point, Reason, Example, Point, and finish with a clear request.	One recommendation, its supporting reason, a relevant fact or example with its context, and the decision or action requested.	An editable four-part speaking or writing outline with the main point, reason, example, and closing request.	A clear argument is not proof that a recommendation is correct. One example may not represent the whole population. PREP does not verify evidence, grant approval, or replace a fuller analysis of alternatives and risks when those are needed.
7-1-4TAPS Communication Structure	Organize To be, As is, Problem and Solution around the audience’s concern, then make a bounded decision request.	Audience expectations, comparable current records, gap and causal evidence, unknowns, alternatives, constraints and decision authority.	A T/A/P/S outline with a bounded request, preserving facts, targets, assumptions, alternatives and open questions.	Do not invent the audience’s desired state. Keep scope, time, units and denominators in As is. A gap does not establish a cause, and a coherent story does not validate a solution. Compare alternatives and conditions; a presentation neither approves nor implements the plan. Speaking order is not an automatic workflow.

More scenario matches do not mean a better framework. Choose for your specific question.How to use the library