# From assumptions to useful experiments. · Facilitation guide

A mixed product and design team learning to turn an uncertain idea into a small, reviewable test.

90 minutes; 18 people; 5 groups of at most 4. The final group may be smaller.

## Materials

- A notebook or the local workbook
- A shared fictional service challenge
- A visible timer
- A way to compare alternatives
- A facilitator to adapt the discussion

## Learning objectives

### Frame the uncertainty

Outcome: Separate observed context from an assumption and write a learning question.

Success: The question names an audience, a situation and one uncertainty.

### Make the test small

Outcome: Choose a reversible test that can answer the question with the available time.

Success: The plan names a method, a participant or source, and a bounded action.

### Name the decision signal

Outcome: Define an observable signal and a next decision before looking at results.

Success: The plan explains what would support, weaken or leave the idea unresolved.

## Run of show

### 0–10 · Notice before interpreting

1. Read the fictional studio challenge.
2. Write one observation and one interpretation separately.
3. Share the distinction with a partner.

Facilitator: Ask for literal observations first. A pause does not prove confusion or intent. Invite at least two alternative explanations.

Worksheet: A fictional studio sees first-time visitors pause at a wall of plant choices. What was observed? What explanations are still assumptions?

### 10–25 · Choose one useful question

1. Name the visitor and the moment.
2. List the assumptions affecting the next decision.
3. Choose one assumption to investigate.
4. Write a question that a small test could answer.

Facilitator: Keep questions neutral. Replace 'How do we prove the new sign works?' with a question that permits the idea to fail.

Worksheet: Write&\#58; For \[audience\] in \[situation\], we need to learn \[uncertainty\] before deciding \[next action\].

### 25–40 · Make three alternatives visible

1. Sketch a care card, a welcome sign and a guided question.
2. Name what each option could reveal.
3. Choose the simplest option that tests the selected uncertainty.

Facilitator: A polished design is unnecessary. Ask whether each alternative can answer the question or merely demonstrate an attractive solution.

Worksheet: Describe three possible tests. For each, list the learning value, time needed and one limitation.

### 40–60 · Build a reversible experiment

1. Name the method and permitted participants or sources.
2. Write the exact prompt or observation protocol.
3. Define the smallest useful output.
4. Name risks, permissions and stopping conditions.

Facilitator: Review consent and privacy needs for a future real test. No outreach is performed. Keep the planned intervention small enough to stop or revise.

Worksheet: Create a test plan with method, source, protocol, output and stopping conditions. Use fictional participants in this exercise.

### 60–80 · Agree on the signal before the result

1. Name the observable signal.
2. Write what would support the next step.
3. Write what would weaken the idea.
4. Explain when the evidence would be inconclusive.

Facilitator: A small exercise does not establish statistical significance. Preserve uncertainty and sample limits. Discourage universal causal claims.

Worksheet: Complete&\#58; We will observe \[signal\]. If \[support\], we will \[action\]. If \[contradiction\], we will \[change\]. If \[inconclusive\], we will \[follow-up\].

### 80–90 · Review, revise, leave with a next step

1. Trade worksheets and name one observable improvement.
2. Use the practice questions to revisit a gap.
3. Revise the plan and download your local worksheet.

Facilitator: Ask for actionable feedback rather than a score alone. Confirm that everyone has downloaded their worksheet before closing.

Worksheet: What changed after peer review? What is the next question, who owns it and what evidence would change your mind?

## Adaptation

Check prior knowledge, access needs and material permissions. Pilot the pacing with a real group. No educational effectiveness claim or secure assessment is provided.