<aside> 📄
Duplicate this page into your own Notion workspace before you fill anything in. Use the "Duplicate" option from the page menu, then work inside your own copy.
</aside>
<aside> 🎯
What this is. A working canvas a team fills in together, in one session, to turn a flat list of discovery findings into two defensible lists: what to build next, and what to escalate. It exists so the reasoning behind a prioritisation decision survives three months longer than the workshop did.
This is a Curious Society way of working rather than an established named model from the literature. Treat it as a structure for arguing well, and adapt the wording to your own service.
</aside>
A discovery ends with thirty findings on a wall. All of them are real, most of them are evidenced, and nobody can agree which three matter most. What usually settles it is whoever spoke most forcefully, or whichever finding already resembles a piece of work someone knows how to write.
This canvas does not remove judgement. It makes the judgement visible: four scored dimensions, a mandatory reasoning column, a separate home for the problems you cannot act on, and a decision record that still makes sense when someone asks about it next quarter.
Work through the sections in order. A first pass on twenty findings takes roughly ninety minutes with four people.
Run this setup check before anyone scores anything. Skipping it is the most common reason a scoring session produces numbers nobody trusts afterwards.
<aside> ⚠️
If you cannot answer the spread question with data for at least half the findings, stop and get the data first. Scoring spread from memory is where this method fails.
</aside>
Agree these before the first finding is read out. Keep this section open while you score, and settle disagreements by pointing at the anchor rather than at each other.