Christian Ullrich
2026-07-07
Problem
The topic is too broad or unclear to create useful guidance.
Action
Define the specific area of work the guidance should cover and describe it in clear, practical terms.
Outcome
The guidance is built around a clearly defined work domain.
Problem
Guidance that targets everyone rarely helps anyone.
Action
Identify who will use the guidance and consider their responsibilities, experience, and needs.
Outcome
The guidance is designed for a clearly defined audience.
Problem
The guidance explains information without helping people perform their work.
Action
Define what people should be able to accomplish after using the guidance.
Outcome
The guidance focuses on improving real work.
Problem
The guidance becomes too broad and loses focus.
Action
Decide which topics belong inside the guidance and which should remain outside its scope.
Outcome
The guidance remains focused on a clearly defined subject.
Problem
It is unclear whether the guidance has achieved its purpose.
Action
Define the characteristics that the finished guidance should demonstrate before development begins.
Outcome
You have clear criteria for evaluating the final result.
Problem
Useful knowledge is often scattered across multiple sources.
Action
Identify all available information that may inform the guidance, including documents, existing guidance, subject-matter experts, and practical experience.
Outcome
You know which knowledge is available for development.
Problem
Not all available information is equally useful or reliable.
Action
Assess the relevance, quality, completeness, and currency of the available knowledge.
Outcome
You understand which information can be trusted and reused.
Problem
Too much information makes the guidance difficult to design.
Action
Select only the knowledge that directly supports the guidance’s practical purpose.
Outcome
The development focuses on the information that matters most.
Problem
Important information is still missing after selecting the available knowledge.
Action
Identify the missing knowledge and obtain it before developing the guidance.
Outcome
The knowledge base is sufficiently complete for development.
Problem
Different sources often describe the work differently.
Action
Combine the selected knowledge into a single coherent understanding of the work before designing the guidance.
Outcome
The guidance is built on a consistent understanding of the subject.
Problem
The draft will only be as good as the information used to create it.
Action
Prepare the selected knowledge, design constraints, and development instructions before creating the first draft.
Outcome
The development starts with complete, well-organized inputs.
Problem
Creating practical guidance from a blank page is slow and inconsistent.
Action
Generate an initial draft that reflects the agreed purpose, scope, and available knowledge.
Outcome
You create a complete first version for review.
Problem
The first draft rarely represents the strongest solution.
Action
Review the draft against the intended purpose, structure, and practical usefulness.
Outcome
You identify the most important improvements.
Problem
Not every issue deserves the same attention.
Action
Prioritize the changes that will most improve the guidance before making revisions.
Outcome
The revision effort focuses on the highest-value improvements.
Problem
The draft still contains weaknesses that reduce its usefulness.
Action
Revise the draft based on the selected improvements while preserving the strongest elements.
Outcome
The guidance becomes clearer, more practical, and better structured.
Problem
Some parts add little value or distract from the guidance’s purpose.
Action
Remove content that is unnecessary, repetitive, or too weak to justify its inclusion.
Outcome
The guidance becomes more focused.
Problem
Similar ideas are described in multiple places.
Action
Combine overlapping topics into stronger, more coherent guidance.
Outcome
The guidance becomes simpler and easier to follow.
Problem
The guidance contains unnecessary complexity.
Action
Simplify the structure, wording, and concepts without losing important meaning.
Outcome
The guidance becomes easier to understand and apply.
Problem
The sequence of ideas does not match how people naturally approach the work.
Action
Reorganize the guidance so that each part builds logically on the previous one.
Outcome
The guidance becomes easier to navigate and apply.
Problem
Continuous changes eventually reduce consistency rather than improve quality.
Action
Stop making structural changes once the guidance consistently supports its intended purpose.
Outcome
The design is sufficiently stable for final validation.
Problem
Well-written guidance may still be difficult to apply in real work.
Action
Review whether the guidance helps people perform practical tasks and make better decisions.
Outcome
The guidance supports real work rather than only explaining concepts.
Problem
Important parts of the work may still be missing.
Action
Review whether the guidance covers all essential situations within its defined scope.
Outcome
The guidance provides complete support for its intended purpose.
Problem
Different parts of the guidance may contradict or duplicate one another.
Action
Review the complete guidance for consistent terminology, structure, and recommendations.
Outcome
The guidance reads as a single coherent whole.
Problem
The guidance may appear correct while overlooking practical realities.
Action
Ask experienced practitioners to review the guidance and identify inaccuracies, omissions, or impractical recommendations.
Outcome
The guidance reflects real-world practice more accurately.
Problem
Without a formal review, guidance may continue to change without improving.
Action
Approve the guidance once it meets the defined success criteria and validation results.
Outcome
The guidance is ready for practical use.