microsoft/hve-core
Publicmirrored fromhttps://github.com/microsoft/hve-coreAvailable
docs/design-thinking/method-01-scope-conversations.md
90lines · modecode
| 1 | --- |
| 2 | title: "Method 1: Scope Conversations" |
| 3 | description: "Define project boundaries and stakeholder alignment through structured conversations that surface constraints, expectations, and success criteria." |
| 4 | sidebar_position: 5 |
| 5 | author: Microsoft |
| 6 | ms.date: 2026-02-25 |
| 7 | ms.topic: tutorial |
| 8 | keywords: [design thinking, method-01, scope-conversations] |
| 9 | estimated_reading_time: 5 |
| 10 | --- |
| 11 | |
| 12 | ## What This Method Does |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Method 1 establishes the boundaries and direction for a Design Thinking project through structured stakeholder conversations. You identify who has a stake in the outcome, what constraints shape the work, and where the scope is frozen (non-negotiable) versus fluid (open for exploration). These conversations surface the assumptions, expectations, and success criteria that anchor every subsequent method. |
| 15 | |
| 16 | Without clear scope, teams risk solving the wrong problem, missing critical stakeholders, or building solutions that ignore real-world constraints. Method 1 ensures alignment before investment. |
| 17 | |
| 18 | ## When to Use |
| 19 | |
| 20 | * At the start of any new Design Thinking engagement |
| 21 | * When a project's boundaries, stakeholders, or constraints are unclear |
| 22 | * When sponsors, users, and operators have conflicting definitions of success |
| 23 | * Before committing resources to Design Research (Method 2) |
| 24 | |
| 25 | ## Space Context |
| 26 | |
| 27 | Method 1 is the **entry point to the Problem Space**. The Problem Space spans Methods 1 through 3 and focuses on understanding the problem before generating solutions. In Method 1, you establish what the project should and should not address. Methods 2 and 3 deepen understanding through research and synthesis. |
| 28 | |
| 29 | > [!NOTE] |
| 30 | > You must complete scope conversations before moving into research. Skipping Method 1 introduces risk of misaligned expectations and missing constraints throughout the project. |
| 31 | |
| 32 | ## Key Activities |
| 33 | |
| 34 | * Stakeholder discovery: Identify sponsors, end users, operators, and influencers across three tiers: decision makers, direct users, and affected parties. |
| 35 | * Frozen versus fluid assessment: Classify each constraint as frozen (non-negotiable: budgets, regulations, timelines) or fluid (open for redesign: workflows, interfaces, processes). |
| 36 | * Constraint mapping: Document physical constraints (environment, equipment), operational constraints (schedules, staffing), and technical constraints (systems, data, integrations). |
| 37 | * Scope alignment: Facilitate conversations that surface conflicting assumptions and establish shared success criteria among stakeholders. |
| 38 | * Rapport building: Earn trust through active listening, genuine curiosity, and demonstrated respect for domain expertise. |
| 39 | |
| 40 | ## How to Start |
| 41 | |
| 42 | Begin by identifying the stakeholders who own, use, or are affected by the outcome. Then conduct structured conversations to surface constraints and expectations. |
| 43 | |
| 44 | Use this prompt to start a scope conversation session: |
| 45 | |
| 46 | ```text |
| 47 | I'm beginning a Design Thinking project focused on [topic]. Help me identify |
| 48 | stakeholders across three tiers (decision makers, direct users, affected parties) |
| 49 | and classify the known constraints as frozen or fluid. |
| 50 | ``` |
| 51 | |
| 52 | During each conversation: |
| 53 | |
| 54 | * Ask open-ended questions that invite detail, not yes-or-no confirmations |
| 55 | * Listen for assumptions stated as facts |
| 56 | * Document constraints immediately with their frozen or fluid classification |
| 57 | * Note areas where stakeholders disagree |
| 58 | |
| 59 | ## Expected Outputs |
| 60 | |
| 61 | * Stakeholder map organized by tier (decision makers, direct users, affected parties) |
| 62 | * Constraint inventory with frozen and fluid classifications |
| 63 | * Scope statement defining what is included and excluded |
| 64 | * Success criteria agreed upon by key stakeholders |
| 65 | * Open questions and assumptions requiring validation in Method 2 |
| 66 | |
| 67 | ## Quality Checks |
| 68 | |
| 69 | * All three stakeholder tiers are represented (decision makers, direct users, affected parties) |
| 70 | * Every identified constraint has a frozen or fluid classification |
| 71 | * Scope boundaries are explicit about what is excluded, not just what is included |
| 72 | * Success criteria are measurable and agreed upon by sponsors |
| 73 | * No stakeholder group is assumed to share another group's perspective |
| 74 | |
| 75 | ## Next Method |
| 76 | |
| 77 | When you have a clear scope statement, stakeholder map, and constraint inventory, proceed to [Method 2: Design Research](method-02-design-research.md) to investigate user needs within the boundaries you established. |
| 78 | |
| 79 | ## Related Resources |
| 80 | |
| 81 | * [Design Thinking Overview](README.md) |
| 82 | * [Method 2: Design Research](method-02-design-research.md) |
| 83 | * [Method 3: Input Synthesis](method-03-input-synthesis.md) |
| 84 | |
| 85 | > Brought to you by microsoft/hve-core |
| 86 | |
| 87 | <!-- markdownlint-disable MD036 --> |
| 88 | *🤖 Crafted with precision by ✨Copilot following brilliant human instruction, |
| 89 | then carefully refined by our team of discerning human reviewers.* |
| 90 | <!-- markdownlint-enable MD036 --> |
| 91 | |