Scqa Framework

---
name: scqa-framework
description: Narrative structure for complex topics - Situation, Complication, Question, Answer
foundation: McKinsey SCQA framework (derived from pyramid principle)
use_case: Opening hooks, persuasive narratives, problem-solution content
---

# SCQA Framework Skill

**Foundation**: McKinsey's SCQA (Situation-Complication-Question-Answer) framework, derived from Barbara Minto's pyramid principle

**Core Concept**: Build compelling narrative by establishing situation, introducing complication, raising question, then delivering answer.

**Why This Works**:
- Engages reader with familiar situation
- Creates tension with complication (problem)
- Raises question reader now wants answered
- Delivers answer with impact (reader is primed)
- Natural storytelling flow

---

## The SCQA Structure

**Four elements in sequence**:

### 1. Situation (S)
**What**: The stable, uncontroversial starting point everyone agrees on

**Purpose**: Establish common ground with reader

**Example**:
> "Software engineers use AI coding assistants to boost productivity."

**Characteristics**:
- Non-controversial (reader nods along)
- Familiar to target audience
- Sets the stage for complication

### 2. Complication (C)
**What**: The problem, change, or challenge that disrupts the situation

**Purpose**: Create tension and make reader care

**Example**:
> "But generic AI agents produce unreliable code - state corruption, context loss, hallucinations. Teams abandon them after weeks of frustration."

**Characteristics**:
- Introduces conflict/problem
- Makes status quo untenable
- Resonates with audience pain
- Creates urgency

### 3. Question (Q)
**What**: The question reader now wants answered (often implicit)

**Purpose**: Focus attention on the answer you're about to provide

**Example**:
> "How can we get AI productivity benefits without the reliability chaos?"

**Characteristics**:
- Natural question arising from complication
- What reader is now thinking
- Can be explicit or implicit
- Sets up your answer

### 4. Answer (A)
**What**: Your solution, recommendation, or core message

**Purpose**: Deliver the answer reader is now primed to receive

**Example**:
> "CAF provides production-grade architecture that prevents AI chaos through stateless, file-based patterns proven over 6 months."

**Characteristics**:
- Directly addresses question
- This is your core message
- Reader is now receptive
- Rest of content supports this answer

---

## Complete Example

**Topic**: Introducing CAF

**Situation**:
> Claude Code has become a popular AI coding assistant, with developers using it daily for everything from bug fixes to feature development.

**Complication**:
> However, Claude Code out-of-box is a generic assistant. It doesn't understand your domain, workflows, or constraints. As projects grow complex, generic responses become frustrating - developers spend more time correcting AI suggestions than coding.

**Question** (implicit):
> How can we customize Claude Code for our specific domain without losing the ease of the IDE-based experience?

**Answer**:
> **The Claude Agent Framework (CAF) transforms Claude Code into domain-specific agents through simple markdown-based customization.** Define domain commands, specialized agents, and behavioral skills - no programming required.

---

## Variations

### SCQ (Implicit Answer)
**When to use**: Answer is your entire document

**Structure**:
- Situation
- Complication
- Question
- [Your entire article/doc is the answer]

**Example opening**:
> **Situation**: AI coding assistants promise productivity gains.
> **Complication**: Generic assistants don't understand domain specifics.
> **Question**: How do we customize AI for our domain?
>
> [Rest of white paper answers this question]

### SCA (Implicit Question)
**When to use**: Question is obvious from complication

**Structure**:
- Situation
- Complication
- Answer (question implied)

**Example**:
> **Situation**: Developers use AI assistants daily.
> **Complication**: But generic AI produces unreliable code - state corruption, context loss.
> **Answer**: CAF prevents this through stateless architecture.
>
> [Implied question: "How do we prevent AI reliability issues?"]

### CSA (Situation Assumed)
**When to use**: Audience already knows situation

**Structure**:
- Complication (jump right to problem)
- [Situation implied]
- Answer

**Example**:
> **Complication**: Generic AI assistants keep producing unreliable code.
> **Answer**: Domain-specific customization through CAF solves this.
>
> [Implied situation: "We're using AI assistants"]

---

## Application to Content Types

### Application 1: Opening Hook

**Use SCQA for article/document opening**:

```markdown
# [Title]

[Situation - 1 paragraph]
Establish the current state that readers recognize.

[Complication - 1-2 paragraphs]
Introduce the problem or challenge that disrupts equilibrium.
Make readers feel the pain.

[Question - optional, can be implicit]
What readers are now asking.

[Answer - 1 paragraph]
Your core message / solution / recommendation.
This is what the rest of the document will elaborate on.

---

[Rest of document provides evidence and detail for the answer]
```

### Application 2: Persuasive Narrative

**Structure for convincing readers**:

**Situation**: "Here's how things are..."
**Complication**: "But this problem exists..."
**Question**: "So what should we do?"
**Answer**: "We recommend [solution]"

**Body**: Provide evidence for answer
**Closing**: Reinforce answer + call to action

### Application 3: Problem-Solution Content

**SCQA maps to problem-solution**:

- **Situation + Complication** = Problem definition
- **Question** = Bridge to solution
- **Answer** = Solution statement
- **Body** = Solution elaboration

### Application 4: Positioning Statement

**SCQA for competitive positioning**:

**Situation**: "Current alternatives exist (Alt A, Alt B)"
**Complication**: "But they have these limitations..."
**Question**: "What's needed?"
**Answer**: "We provide [unique value] that alternatives don't"

---

## Integration with Pyramid Principle

**SCQA + Pyramid work together**:

**SCQA**: How to structure the opening/hook (narrative flow)
**Pyramid**: How to structure the answer and supporting arguments (hierarchical)

**Combined structure**:
```markdown
Opening (SCQA):
├─ Situation
├─ Complication
├─ Question
└─ Answer [This is Level 1 of pyramid]

Body (Pyramid):
├─ Argument 1 supporting Answer [Level 2]
│  └─ Evidence [Level 3]
├─ Argument 2 supporting Answer [Level 2]
│  └─ Evidence [Level 3]
└─ Argument 3 supporting Answer [Level 2]
   └─ Evidence [Level 3]

Closing:
└─ Reinforce Answer + CTA
```

**SCQA gets reader to care about your answer. Pyramid organizes proof of answer.**

---

## Crafting Effective Components

### Crafting Situation
**Good situation**:
- ✅ Familiar to audience
- ✅ Non-controversial
- ✅ Concise (1 paragraph)
- ✅ Sets stage for complication

**Bad situation**:
- ❌ Controversial (audience disagrees)
- ❌ Unfamiliar (audience confused)
- ❌ Too long (reader loses interest)
- ❌ Doesn't connect to complication

### Crafting Complication
**Good complication**:
- ✅ Resonates with audience pain
- ✅ Creates urgency
- ✅ Makes status quo untenable
- ✅ Leads naturally to question

**Bad complication**:
- ❌ Audience doesn't relate
- ❌ No urgency (so what?)
- ❌ Too dramatic (not believable)
- ❌ Doesn't set up your answer

### Crafting Question
**Good question**:
- ✅ Natural from complication
- ✅ What reader is thinking
- ✅ Your answer addresses it
- ✅ Can be implicit (often better)

**Bad question**:
- ❌ Disconnected from complication
- ❌ Too broad or vague
- ❌ Your answer doesn't address it
- ❌ Stated explicitly when obvious

### Crafting Answer
**Good answer**:
- ✅ Directly addresses question
- ✅ Your core message
- ✅ Concise and memorable
- ✅ Rest of content supports it

**Bad answer**:
- ❌ Doesn't answer question
- ❌ Vague or generic
- ❌ Too complex (save detail for body)
- ❌ Not your actual core message

---

## Common Mistakes

### Mistake 1: Starting with Complication
❌ **Don't jump to problem without context**:
```markdown
AI coding assistants produce unreliable code...
```
**Why**: Reader doesn't have context. What AI assistants? Who's using them?

✅ **Establish situation first**:
```markdown
Software engineers use AI coding assistants daily. But these assistants produce unreliable code...
```

### Mistake 2: Weak Complication
❌ **Complication doesn't create urgency**:
```markdown
Situation: Developers use AI assistants.
Complication: Sometimes the suggestions could be better.
```
**Why**: "Could be better" doesn't create enough tension.

✅ **Strong complication with real pain**:
```markdown
Situation: Developers use AI assistants.
Complication: But 40% abandon them within weeks due to state corruption and unreliable output - wasted time, broken code, lost trust.
```

### Mistake 3: Answer Doesn't Match Question
❌ **Mismatched Q&A**:
```markdown
Question: How do we make AI assistants more reliable?
Answer: CAF provides markdown-based customization.
```
**Why**: Answer talks about customization, not reliability.

✅ **Matched Q&A**:
```markdown
Question: How do we make AI assistants more reliable?
Answer: CAF prevents failures through stateless architecture and file-based persistence.
```

### Mistake 4: Answer Too Complex
❌ **Answer tries to explain everything**:
```markdown
Answer: CAF is a meta-framework that provides commands, agents, and skills organized in a plugin architecture with markdown-based configuration that allows...
```
**Why**: Too much detail. Save for body.

✅ **Concise answer, details later**:
```markdown
Answer: CAF transforms Claude Code into domain-specific agents through markdown-based customization.

[Body provides details about commands, agents, skills]
```

---

## Quality Checklist

**When applying SCQA, verify**:

- [ ] Situation is familiar and non-controversial
- [ ] Complication creates real tension/urgency
- [ ] Complication resonates with audience pain
- [ ] Question naturally arises from complication
- [ ] Question is what reader now wants answered
- [ ] Answer directly addresses question
- [ ] Answer is your core message
- [ ] Answer is concise (details in body)
- [ ] Flow is natural (S→C→Q→A)
- [ ] Reader is now primed to hear evidence

---

## Integration with Positioning

**SCQA + Positioning Manifest**:

**From positioning manifest**:
- Core message = Your Answer (A)
- Audience context/pain = Informs Complication (C)
- Desired action = Influences how you state Answer

**Example**:
```json
{
  "core_message": "CAF transforms Claude Code into domain agents",
  "audience_context": "Developers frustrated by generic AI assistants"
}
```

**Becomes SCQA**:
- **S**: Developers use AI assistants
- **C**: But generic assistants frustrate with domain-ignorant responses
- **Q**: How to get domain-specific AI?
- **A**: CAF transforms Claude Code into domain agents

---

## References

**Foundation**: McKinsey's SCQA framework, derived from Barbara Minto's pyramid principle

**Key insight**: People engage with stories that start where they are (Situation), introduce tension (Complication), raise a question they want answered (Question), then deliver the answer (Answer).

**Application**: Use SCQA for openings and persuasive narratives. Use Pyramid for organizing supporting evidence.

---

**Skill Version**: 1.0
**Created**: 2025-10-31
**Used by**: author agent (optional, for narrative structure)
**Key Innovation**: Narrative engagement that primes reader to receive core message