Week 4 Worked Example: Defining the Problem

A full, passing Week 4 submission for the running desk organiser project. It takes the Week 3 research forward into one chosen problem statement. The architecture note at the end shows the same move for the learning pod.

Step 1: Insight Carried From Week 3

"I noticed that the real cost is not mess, it is the setup and pack-away time around every session on a shared desk."

Step 2: Root Cause (three whys)

Question	Answer
Surface complaint	"I waste twenty minutes clearing space before I can start."
Why?	Tools are spread around and some are on the floor.
Why?	There is no fixed place for them.
Why? (root cause)	The desk is shared, so nothing is allowed to stay set up between sessions.

Step 3: Three Drafted Statements

How might we help a learner keep their desk tidy?
How might we design a pen box with more compartments?
How might we help a learner on a shared desk start and pack away creative work in under a minute?

Step 4: Testing The Statements

Check	1	2	3
Names a real user?	Vague	No	Yes
Open to several solutions?	Yes but shapeless	No, names a box	Yes
Not too broad?	Too broad	Fine	Fine
Not too narrow?	Fine	Too narrow	Fine
No hidden solution?	Yes	No, the box is the answer	Yes

Step 5: Chosen Statement And Reason

Chosen: "How might we help a learner on a shared desk start and pack away creative work in under a minute?"

Why: it comes straight from the root cause in the research (a shared desk with no fixed home for tools). It names a real user and a clear measure of success, under a minute, so I can test whether a design actually works. It leaves the form open, so a roll-up mat, a lift-out tray, a caddy, or a wall rail could all compete to answer it.

Why This Passes

The statement traces back to a real thing a real person said and did in Week 3.
It names a user and a measurable outcome.
It carries no hidden solution, so ideation next week stays wide open.
The learner compared three options and chose deliberately, with reasons.

Weak Versus Strong

Weak version

"How might we make a really good desk organiser box with lots of storage that looks nice?"

Why it fails: the box, the storage, and the look are all decided already. There is nothing left to design and nothing to test. It also ignores the research finding that time, not storage, was the real problem.

Strong version

"How might we help a learner on a shared desk start and pack away creative work in under a minute?" Specific, measurable, human, and wide open to ideas.

Architecture And Spatial Track Note

Same move for the learning pod. Insight from Week 3: "Forty minutes of every session is lost to setting up and clearing tables." Root cause: furniture is heavy, stored far away, and has no quick layout. Weak statement: "How might we buy lighter tables?" (names the solution). Chosen statement: "How might we let a volunteer set up and clear a creative session space in under ten minutes?" Measurable, human, and open to fold-out units, a pre-set pod, or wall-stored furniture.

Back to course materials