---
external_source: "https://github.com/ginobefun/deep-reading-analyst-skill/tree/26cd7dc9920e025d39751e396e707399022e49ef/src/deep-reading-analyst/references/scqa_framework.md"
refresh_trigger: "Upstream `ginobefun/deep-reading-analyst-skill` major rewrite of `references/scqa_framework.md` (new element added beyond S-C-Q-A, restructured examples, or SHA pin invalidated by file rename)."
sunset_criterion: "Replace with a 50-line pointer guideline if (a) the four-element decomposition is fully internalized in `agent-docs-writing` + `requesting-code-review` + `refine-prompt` + `refine-ticket` AND (b) the example library has been rewritten with project-native scenarios."
adopted_under: "Reference-Guideline Sunset Policy — authoritative-link path. The bulk is reference content (examples ARE the framework); splitting kills the value. Full body adopted with SHA-pinned upstream URL above."
---

# SCQA Framework (Structure Thinking)

Reference guideline for Wing-1 structured-communication and
analysis work — McKinsey's S-C-Q-A decomposition for transforming
complex problems into clear narrative structures. Full-body adopt
under the **Reference-Guideline Sunset Policy authoritative-link
path** (see frontmatter `upstream` / `refresh_trigger` keys). The
reference frontmatter above pins the upstream SHA and names the
refresh trigger.

Cross-referenced from:

- [`deep-reading-analyst`](../../../.agent-src.uncondensed/skills/deep-reading-analyst/SKILL.md)
  — Step 2B structural decomposition (always run, all depths).
- [`agent-docs-writing`](../../../.agent-src.uncondensed/skills/agent-docs-writing/SKILL.md)
  — narrative structure for module docs and AGENTS.md.
- [`requesting-code-review`](../../../.agent-src.uncondensed/skills/requesting-code-review/SKILL.md)
  — PR description structure (S = current state, C = pain point,
  Q = scope, A = the diff).
- [`refine-prompt`](../../../.agent-src.uncondensed/skills/refine-prompt/SKILL.md)
  — reconstruct a free-form prompt into S-C-Q-A acceptance criteria.
- [`refine-ticket`](../../../.agent-src.uncondensed/skills/refine-ticket/SKILL.md)
  — Jira / Linear ticket clarification through the four-element lens.

> **The 4 elements:** S (Situation) · C (Complication) · Q (Question)
> · A (Answer). **Core value:** converting complexity into clarity
> through narrative structure.

## When to Use

Ideal for:
- 📊 Understanding article argumentation structure
- 📝 Organizing complex problem logic
- 💼 Analyzing business cases
- 🎯 Evaluating solution reasonableness
- 📋 Restructuring information for logical flow
- 🗣️ Preparing presentations or reports

## The Four Elements in Detail

### S - Situation (Context)

**Definition**: Stable, mutually-agreed background facts

#### Identification Method
```markdown
## Identifying Situation

Look for "background" descriptions in article:
- Industry status
- Historical development
- Market environment
- Existing consensus
- Basic facts

Extraction formula:
"At [time], [subject] in [field/industry] is in [state]"
```

#### Quality Situation Characteristics
- ✅ Objective description, minimal subjective judgment
- ✅ Generally agreed upon
- ✅ Sets stage for upcoming complication
- ✅ Relevant but doesn't delve into details

#### Example
```markdown
**Situation**:
"Over the past decade, remote work technology (video conferencing, collaboration tools) has matured.
Many knowledge companies began piloting flexible work arrangements pre-pandemic.
Employee expectations for work flexibility continue rising."

Analysis:
- ✅ States facts
- ✅ Neutral description
- ✅ Establishes discussion scope
```

### C - Complication (Conflict/Challenge)

**Definition**: Change, problem, or challenge that disrupts balance

#### Identification Method
```markdown
## Identifying Complication

Look for "turning point" signal words:
- But, however, yet
- The problem is
- The challenge is
- Concerningly
- X situation emerged

Types:
1. External changes: market, technology, policy shifts
2. Internal problems: resource shortages, capability gaps
3. Expectation gaps: expectations vs. reality
4. Emerging threats: competition, risks
```

#### Quality Complication Characteristics
- ✅ Creates tension and urgency
- ✅ Clarifies "why change is needed"
- ✅ Contrasts with Situation
- ✅ Naturally leads to Question

#### Example
```markdown
**Complication**:
"However, sudden widespread remote work exposed many problems:
- Managers struggle to assess team productivity
- Employees feel isolated and disconnected
- Company culture faces dilution risks
- Cybersecurity threats significantly increased"

Analysis:
- ✅ Contrasts with Situation
- ✅ Creates urgency
- ✅ Specific and tangible
```

### Q - Question (Core Query)

**Definition**: The central question arising from the complication

#### Identification Method
```markdown
## Identifying Question

Explicit questions:
- Questions article directly poses
- "How to...?"
- "Should we...?"

Implicit questions:
- Derived from S→C logic
- Questions author wants to answer but doesn't explicitly state

Question types:
1. Decision question: Should we do A or B?
2. Method question: How to achieve X?
3. Cause question: Why does Y happen?
4. Prediction question: What will happen?
```

#### Quality Question Characteristics
- ✅ Directly stems from Complication
- ✅ Specific and answerable
- ✅ Valuable to readers
- ✅ Sets scope for Answer

#### Example
```markdown
**Question**:
"How should companies successfully transition to long-term remote work
while maintaining productivity?"

Analysis:
- ✅ Directly addresses C's problems
- ✅ Specific and actionable
- ✅ Sets scope (remote work)
```

### A - Answer (Solution)

**Definition**: The solution or conclusion addressing the Question

#### Identification Method
```markdown
## Identifying Answer

Look for:
- Article's core recommendations
- Proposed solutions
- Derived conclusions
- Action plans

Structure types:
1. Single solution: "The answer is X"
2. Multiple steps: "Need to do A, B, C"
3. Framework tool: "Use Y framework"
4. Guiding principles: "Follow Z principles"
```

#### Quality Answer Characteristics
- ✅ Directly answers Question
- ✅ Actionable or understandable
- ✅ Logically supported
- ✅ Considers implementation feasibility

#### Example
```markdown
**Answer**:
"Successful transition requires four key steps:
1. Establish clear remote work policies and expectations
2. Invest in collaboration tech and security infrastructure
3. Train managers in asynchronous management
4. Create virtual social and culture-building mechanisms"

Analysis:
- ✅ Addresses Q's core need
- ✅ Structured and executable
- ✅ Covers multiple C problems
```

## Application Methods

### Method 1: Deconstruction Analysis (Understanding Articles)

```markdown
# SCQA Deconstruction: [Article Title]

## S - Situation
[Extract and summarize article's background setup]
- Key fact 1
- Key fact 2
- Key fact 3

## C - Complication
[Identify problems/challenges article points out]
- Conflict 1
- Conflict 2
- Conflict 3

## Q - Question
[Clarify or infer article's core question]
Explicit: [Direct quote]
Implicit: [Derived from SC]

## A - Answer
[Summarize article's solution]
Core solution: [Summary]
Supporting points: [List]

## 🔍 Assessment

### Logical Completeness
- S→C: Transition natural?
- C→Q: Does question stem from complication?
- Q→A: Does answer address question?

### Quality Scoring
- S objectivity: [1-5]
- C urgency: [1-5]
- Q specificity: [1-5]
- A feasibility: [1-5]

### Identified Issues
- [ ] S too subjective
- [ ] C disconnected from S
- [ ] Q not explicitly stated
- [ ] A answers wrong question
- [ ] Logical leaps
```

### Method 2: Restructuring (Improving Articles)

```markdown
# SCQA Restructuring

## Original Structure Problems
- Issue 1: [e.g., Unclear Situation]
- Issue 2: [e.g., Jumps to Answer without setup]
- Issue 3: [e.g., Weak Complication]

## Optimized SCQA

### S - Situation (Improved)
[Reframe clearer background based on article info]

### C - Complication (Improved)
[Strengthen conflict, increase urgency]

### Q - Question (Improved)
[Clarify core question, focus discussion]

### A - Answer (Improved)
[Structure answer, enhance persuasiveness]

## Improvement Impact
Before: [Unclear in original]
After: [Clearer after optimization]
```

### Method 3: Comparative Analysis (Multiple Articles)

```markdown
# SCQA Comparison: Topic [X]

## Article 1
S: [Background]
C: [Conflict]
Q: [Question]
A: [Answer]

## Article 2
S: [Background]
C: [Conflict]
Q: [Question]
A: [Answer]

## Cross-Analysis

### S Differences
- Shared understanding: [What both acknowledge]
- Divergence: [Different perspectives]

### C Differences
- Article 1 emphasizes: [X problem]
- Article 2 emphasizes: [Y problem]
- Insight: Different C leads to different problem framing

### Q Differences
- Article 1 tries to answer: [...]
- Article 2 tries to answer: [...]
- Insight: Question setting determines answer space

### A Differences
- Solution comparison: [Similarities/differences]
- Complementarity: [Combinable parts]
- Conflicts: [Contradictions]
```

## SCQA Variations

### 1. Standard (S-C-Q-A)
```
Stable background → Problem emerges → Question posed → Answer given
```
Use for: Problem-oriented articles

### 2. Direct Lead (A-S-C-Q-A)
```
State conclusion first → Explain background → Problem → Question → Detailed answer
```
Use for: Executive summaries, fast-paced reading

### 3. Suspense (C-S-Q-A)
```
Throw out conflict → Explain background → Pose question → Provide answer
```
Use for: Attention-grabbing, marketing articles

### 4. Exploratory (S-C-Q-A-Q-A)
```
Background → Problem 1 → Answer 1 → Deeper problem 2 → Answer 2
```
Use for: Complex problems requiring layered depth

## Practical Example

### Example: Startup Article

**Article Title**: "Why Most Startups Fail"

```markdown
## SCQA Deconstruction

### S - Situation
Startup ecosystem has flourished over past 20 years.
Venture capital abundant, tech infrastructure mature,
barriers to entry dramatically lowered. Hundreds of thousands of new startups form annually.

### C - Complication
However, statistics show:
- 90% of startups fail within 3 years
- Failure rates rising, not declining
- Even well-funded companies struggle

"Why are failure rates higher today when conditions are better?"

### Q - Question
Implicit core question:
"What fundamental factors cause startup failure?
How to identify and avoid these fatal mistakes?"

### A - Answer
Article identifies three fatal issues:
1. Solving fake needs (42% of failures)
2. Running out of cash (29%)
3. Team problems (23%)

With corresponding solutions...

## Assessment

Logical completeness:
✅ S→C: Sharp contrast, creates suspense
✅ C→Q: Naturally leads to "why"
✅ Q→A: Answer highly targeted

Quality scoring:
- S: 4/5 (objective but could focus more)
- C: 5/5 (data-driven, creates urgency)
- Q: 4/5 (implicit question, should state explicitly)
- A: 4/5 (practical but needs more validation)

Improvement suggestions:
Explicitly state Q after C, don't let readers guess
```

## Integration with Other Frameworks

### SCQA + Pyramid Principle

```markdown
# Structured Expression

SCQA: Set problem framework
├── S-C-Q: Introduce core question
└── A: Pyramid structure expansion
    ├── Point 1
    │   ├── Support 1.1
    │   └── Support 1.2
    ├── Point 2
    └── Point 3
```

### SCQA + Critical Thinking

```markdown
# Deep Analysis

Layer 1: SCQA identifies argument structure
Layer 2: Critical thinking evaluates each part
- Is S objective?
- Is C real?
- Is Q reasonable?
- Is A effective?
```

### SCQA + 5W2H

```markdown
# Completeness Check

SCQA: Understand overall structure
5W2H: Check detail completeness
- Is S's background sufficient (When, Where)?
- Is C's problem clear (What, Why)?
- Is A's solution feasible (How, How much, Who)?
```

## Common Questions

### Q1: What if article lacks obvious SCQA structure?

A: Proactive reconstruction
```markdown
Even if article is messy, you can:
1. Extract information fragments
2. Categorize into SCQA buckets
3. Identify missing pieces
4. Reorganize understanding
```

### Q2: Hard to distinguish S from C?

A: Key is "stability vs. change"
```markdown
S: Stable background, mutually agreed
C: Change or problem disrupting balance

Test method:
- If you remove this sentence, does problem still exist?
  - Yes → Likely C
  - No → Likely S
```

### Q3: Article has multiple SCQAs?

A: Layered analysis
```markdown
Overall SCQA: Entire article
Sub-SCQAs: Each section

Example:
Overall: S-C-Q-A
└── Section 1: S1-C1-Q1-A1
└── Section 2: S2-C2-Q2-A2
```

## Practice Exercises

### Exercise 1: Daily SCQA Deconstruction
Choose one article, spend 10 minutes identifying SCQA

### Exercise 2: Elevator Pitch
Use 30 seconds to introduce any topic in SCQA structure:
- 5 sec: S
- 10 sec: C
- 5 sec: Q
- 10 sec: A

### Exercise 3: Comparative Reading
For 2-3 articles on same topic, compare SCQA differences

### Exercise 4: Restructure Writing
Take your own writing, reorganize using SCQA

## Key Quotes

> "Structure creates clarity. Clarity creates impact."

> "Good structure makes complex ideas simple.
> Bad structure makes simple ideas complex."

> "SCQA doesn't limit creativity—
> it makes your ideas easier to understand."

---

**Remember**: SCQA is a thinking tool, not a writing formula. Use flexibly to serve clarity and deep understanding.

---

## ADOPT citation

Adopted from [`ginobefun/deep-reading-analyst-skill`](https://github.com/ginobefun/deep-reading-analyst-skill) @ commit `26cd7dc9` · `src/deep-reading-analyst/references/scqa_framework.md` · MIT License.
