Connection to Phase 2: Solution Phase
The Problem Statement is the input document for the next phase. When the team has completed the Gate Review and the Problem Statement is validated, something important happens: the team earns the right to think about solutions.
This concept — earning the right to build — is central to the methodology. It's not a matter of permission or bureaucracy. It's a matter of quality. A team that has done rigorous discovery arrives at the solution phase with an understanding of the problem that allows them to evaluate solutions with judgment. A team that skipped discovery arrives at the solution phase with opinions, not judgment. And opinions, when not backed by data, produce endless discussions.
The Problem Statement travels to Phase 2 accompanied by the Actor Map, the Synthesis Board, and the Interview Guide. These four artifacts together contain the defined problem, the people surrounding it, the evidence that supports it, and the method by which it was discovered. They are the foundation upon which the solution will be built.
And there's one element that deserves special attention in that transition: the success criteria defined in the Problem Statement becomes the evaluation criteria for the solution in Phase 2. It's not the solution that defines its own success. It's the problem that defines it. This distinction seems subtle but prevents one of the most costly errors: building something that works perfectly by its own metrics but doesn't solve what it was supposed to solve.
Building is a symptom, not a goal. Building is the natural consequence of having thought well. It's not an achievement in itself. A team that celebrates having built fast without validating the problem is celebrating in the wrong direction.
The problem is still the product. AI just changed what happens after you find it.