Problem solving Align

SCQA

SCQA is situation, complication, question, answer: a structure for proposals and executive summaries.

The questionWhat question is in my reader's mind, and does the opening of this document answer it?

Barbara Minto's own name for the introduction is the SCQ framework. The A is the answer, which she places directly after it at the top of the pyramid.

Process · Barbara Minto, 1980s

1
Situation Context the reader already accepts
2
Complication The change that creates the need to act
3
Question The question the reader now asks
4
Answer The main message, stated up front

Schematic of the four parts of SCQA, in the order they open a document.

When to use it

You are writing an executive summary, proposal, or steering committee memo and the reader will give you one page.
A draft opens with background the client knows better than you do.
A team has findings but has not agreed on the question they answer. Writing the situation, complication, and question tests that quickly.
Two stakeholders read the same facts and expect different recommendations. Writing the question forces them to agree on which one they are answering.

When to avoid it

The reader disputes the situation as you would state it. The opening becomes an argument, so address the contested fact first.
The deliverable is reference material or a data pack with no recommendation to lead with.
You do not have an answer yet. The structure helps you write the answer, and it will not produce the thinking. Use first principles or Kepner-Tregoe to get there.
The update is short and routine. A single sentence will do.

Overview

SCQA is a structure for the opening of a document or presentation. It states a situation the reader already accepts, a complication that disturbs it, the question the complication raises, and then the answer. It supports one choice: what goes in the first lines, so the reader sees why the document exists and gets the recommendation without waiting.

Picking the question is the hard step. The answer should be the main message of the whole document, so the question has to be one that the entire document answers. If the answer is too large or too small for it, the question is wrong, and rewriting the answer will not fix it. It also needs a reader who accepts the situation as written.

The four parts

Situation

A few sentences of context the reader already accepts, anchored in time and place. It contains nothing new. The test is whether the reader would nod. Writers tend to let it grow, because it is where research gets shown.

Complication

The change that disturbed the situation and created the need to act. It is a change in a stable situation, and it is not always a problem. It should be specific and evidenced, and it can often begin with however.

Question

The question the complication raises in the reader's mind. It is usually implied in the final document, but write it down while drafting. It has to be the reader's question and not the writer's preferred one.

Answer

The document's main message, stated first as a claim someone could disagree with. Everything beneath it in the pyramid supports it. A topic such as options for the network is not an answer, but a recommendation is.

What it is not

A device for building suspense. Some summaries describe SCQA as a story that saves the answer for the end. In Minto's structure the answer follows the introduction immediately, and the document supports it.
A problem statement. The complication is a change to a stable situation, and sometimes the change is an opportunity.
A template that fixes a weak question. If the reader disputes the situation, or the complication is generic, the question will not land and the answer will not be read.

The steps

Write down the reader

Name who will read it, what they already know, and what decision they face. If there are two readers with different views of the situation, write the introduction for the one who must say yes.
Draft the situation

Write statements the reader would accept without argument. Cut anything they would find new, because new facts belong in the support. Aim for a few sentences, anchored in time and place.
Find the complication

Name the change, deadline, or constraint that makes the document necessary. If you cannot find one, you may have no reason to write. The output is one or two specific sentences.
State the question

Write the question the complication raises, in the reader's words. Then check that your answer addresses this question and no other. If it does not, change the question or the answer until they match.
Write the answer and test the opening

State the answer as a one-sentence claim and build the supporting points beneath it. Read the situation, complication, and question to someone from the client and ask what they would ask next. If it is your question, the opening works.

In practice

The steering committee had received the same eleven-slide summary twice and still asked what the team was recommending. The first draft opened with the history of the retail bank's branch network and the shift to digital banking. The question that draft implied was how digital is changing banking, and the committee already knew the answer.

The rewrite went like this. Situation: the branch network has been stable for five years. Complication: leases on forty branches expire within eighteen months, and the bank must decide on each by March. Question: which of the forty should be renewed? Answer: renew fourteen, convert seven to smaller formats, and exit nineteen. That sums to forty, so every lease was accounted for, and the summary now opened with a claim the committee could accept or contest.

What you leave with

An introduction of a few sentences the reader accepts, that names the change and leads to a stated question.
The question, written down, even if it is cut from the final text.
The answer as a one-sentence claim at the top of the document.
A check on whether the supporting evidence actually answers this question.

Failure points

Situation as literature review

The writer opens with everything they learned. The reader, who knows it, reaches the complication on page two and stops trusting that the document is about them.

Complication that is only a topic

Digital disruption is a theme and not a change. With no specific event or deadline, there is no question that has to be answered now.

A question the answer does not fit

The answer recommends a program, but the question asked which option to choose. Or the question is broad and the answer covers a small piece of it. The reader sees the gap even if the writer does not.

Answer as a topic

The summary says what the document covers and not what it recommends. The reader has to read the whole thing to find the claim.

Written for the author

The situation reflects what the team agreed on, not what the reader accepts. The finance director and the operations director may accept different situations, and one introduction cannot serve both unchanged.

The failures above are usually Synthesis & Story: the work was done, but it never became one clear message a client could act on.

Origin

Barbara Minto joined McKinsey & Company in 1963 as its first female MBA hire, working in Cleveland and then London until 1973. She then taught the method through her own training business. Her book first appeared in the mid-1980s (sources give 1985 and 1987) as The Pyramid Principle, and was revised in 1996 as The Minto Pyramid Principle: Logic in Writing, Thinking and Problem Solving. In it, the situation, complication, and question form the introduction to a document built as a pyramid under one governing thought, and the answer is that thought.

Minto's own term is the SCQ framework, and the answer is part of the pyramid that follows. Her site marks The Minto Pyramid Principle as a registered trademark and the SCQ Framework as a service mark of Minto Books International. This note describes the idea in general terms, and her book and course are the authoritative version. SCQA is the form most other writers use.