Aglet

Turn Research Question Reviews Into Better Planning

A question review teaches the team how its backlog reflects uncertainty and decision pressure. Preserve the wording before and after prioritization, the method constraints, and what the selected round could realistically answer. Use that case to make future planning more deliberate without blocking exploration.

Keep the lesson for the next incident

  1. Save the queue rationale

    Keep the original questions, assumptions, evidence gaps, ranks, dependencies, and final round plan together. Include one question deferred because its answer would not change a choice. This gives later researchers a reason rather than a mysterious absence.

  2. Change the planning prompt

    Add a required decision, method fit, and participant context to the backlog. Include a field for unanswered prerequisites and a place to mark curiosity work. Explain how the change addresses the confusion found in this review.

  3. Watch for research without decisions

    Set a signal such as questions with no owner, prompts that ask whether users like a feature, or findings that never reach a review. Assign a person to sample the next plan and revisit the planning habit when the signal appears.

What to carry forward

The learning record should connect the question backlog to the prioritization rationale, planning change, and recurrence signal. State what the team will ask differently next round. Keep deferred curiosity visible while protecting research time for decisions with meaningful consequences.

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