Decide where the work belongs
Compare the consequence of framing wrong
Describe what users lose when each candidate is misunderstood: time, access, confidence, continuity, or a downstream decision. Include the people who inherit the cost. Do not let a request with a larger budget automatically outrank a blocked outcome.
Assess evidence and ambiguity
Review the current journey, source records, interviews, and constraints for each problem. Mark where the request mixes several needs or prescribes one solution. Prefer a framing round when different interpretations would lead to different product choices.
Choose a framing queue
Select a problem, research question, owner, and review date. Defer candidates with a clear reason and a trigger such as new evidence or a changed constraint. Record a reversible next step instead of committing to a feature before the frame is tested.
What to carry forward
The priority output is a queue of problem frames with consequence, ambiguity, evidence quality, owner, and revisit trigger. Start with the frame whose misunderstanding would waste the most effort or exclude the most important outcome. Keep solution requests separate from the problem queue.
Technical background: GOV.UK user research guidance.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow