Blueprint Solutions
A way to work out whether an operations problem is a decision, a process, or a tool, before you spend money fixing the wrong one.
Two ways to use it. Fill it in on something that’s bugging you right now, or skip the boxes and take the reference into your next meeting. Whatever you type stays in this browser, on this device.
Skip to the referenceWhy this is worth ten minutes
Someone says “our CRM is broken,” so the obvious move is to buy a new CRM. Here is what can actually sit underneath that one sentence, and what the migration touches.
No agreement on what belongs in it
Still brokenNobody owns keeping it current
Still brokenInformation arrives too late to use
Still brokenThe CRM genuinely can’t do it
FixedSame symptom, four very different fixes. Three of the four, you paid to move the problem. That’s why the tests below run in the order they do, and why the tool question comes last.
Not your biggest strategic problem. Something concrete, that happened, more than once.
Keep that second box honest. You’ll test it against your answer at the bottom.
Pick the last real one and walk through it. The questions are in past tense on purpose, because you’re reconstructing one thing that happened rather than describing how it’s meant to go.
The factsSet the scene, and stop there. No interpretation yet, and no why either.
The frictionWhere the work stopped, slowed, or repeated. These are the answers to pull on. Keep asking why until the answer stops changing.
For example
Write down what you found there. Resist naming it.
Every one of those answers is evidence. None of them is a diagnosis yet, and the three tests below are where you find out which.
Read each one against what you wrote above, not against your general sense of how things go. If your answers don’t support a box, leave it unchecked.
Is the rule missing? Check what’s true. Any two, go find the decision.
Anything checked above stays as your notes. It doesn’t count as a signal until you’ve asked.
Is the path missing? Two yeses and the path is a constraint. That doesn’t rule the tool out, so still run the third test.
Anything checked above stays as your notes. It doesn’t count as a signal until you’ve asked.
This one comes last because it has no answer until the other two are settled: can our tools reasonably support the process you’ve decided you need?
Every one of these is a recurring cost, not a one-time annoyance. That’s what separates irritating from a constraint.
Anything checked above stays as your notes. It doesn’t count as a signal until you’ve asked.
Most real problems live in an overlap. Two at once is the normal case, not the messy exception.
Naming them isn’t the point. Knowing which to fix first is. When they’re tangled, one is holding the others in place.
Not all three. The one the others are waiting on.
The only question that changes what you do next
Fix that, and the other two stop being blocked. Fix either of the others first, and you spend a quarter finding out.
Back at the start, you said the fix was
Keep this half
Nothing to fill in here. This is the method itself, for whenever you need it again.
| What someone says | Sounds like | Ask instead |
|---|---|---|
| “We have a spreadsheet for that.” | Tool problem | Is it working, or compensating? |
| “Then I send it over to Finance.” | Process problem | Is that handoff clear and reliable? |
| “The system won’t let us.” | Tool problem | What are we asking it to do, and why? |
| “It depends who you ask.” | Process problem | Is there actually an agreed rule? |
Nobody says “we have a decision problem.” The obvious reading on every row is a reasonable reading. It just isn’t the only one.
Two of these is usually enough. If people answer differently, that’s your finding.
“If this worked perfectly, what would happen?”
In a group you get one blended answer, usually the most senior person’s. Ask for a sequence of events, not a picture.
Then ask: did everyone describe the same thing?
Work them in order. Manual isn’t broken. Compensating for something that was never designed is.
Anonymize or generalize sensitive information first. AI needs the structure, not the names. It organizes the evidence. You decide what’s wrong.
The takeaway
Keep in touch
Want to stay in the loop?
A few times a year, when a project wraps up and I have room for another, I send one short email to let you know. I also occasionally share practical resources that might be useful.
Jen Pakravan
Blueprint Solutions · Operations Consultant
Operational strategy and systems design for founder-led B2B companies, 15 to 150 people, whose informal systems have stopped scaling.
Send me what you wrote down.
Copy your answers and email them over: jen@blueprint-solutions.io
Know someone I should meet? Start here