The presenting problem is almost never the real problem. When an organisation brings in an external consultant to run a diagnostic, the brief usually describes a symptom: poor communication between teams, slow decision-making, high turnover. The diagnostic process needs to be designed to get below the symptom to the structural cause.

Start with the people doing the work

The most reliable source of information about how an organisation is actually functioning is the people in the middle and at the front line. They see the gaps between the stated process and the real one every day. They know which decisions take too long and why. They know which relationships are not working. The mistake most diagnostics make is starting and ending with the leadership team, who are often the last to know what is actually happening.

Map the real process, not the stated one

Every organisation has a process chart and an actual process. They are almost never the same. The gap between them is usually where the problem lives. In a diagnostic, we ask people to walk us through what actually happens when a specific type of decision needs to be made, or when a specific type of problem arises. The divergence from the official process is almost always instructive.

Look at recent decisions that went badly

Asking about decisions made in the last twelve months that people are still unhappy about is one of the most reliable diagnostic tools we use. The pattern in those decisions, who was involved, who was not, what information was missing, where the process broke down, usually points directly at the structural issue. People are often surprisingly willing to talk about this if the conversation is confidential and the interviewer is genuinely curious rather than looking to assign blame.

Write findings that can be acted on

A diagnostic report that lists everything that is wrong is not useful. A diagnostic report that identifies the two or three structural issues that, if addressed, would improve most of the other things, is useful. The prioritisation is part of the work. So is writing the recommendations in language that the people who need to act on them can understand without a glossary.

Build in a feedback loop

Before the findings report is finalised, share the draft findings with a small group of people from across the organisation, not just the leadership team. This serves two purposes. First, it catches errors of fact or interpretation. Second, it begins the process of building ownership of the findings among the people who will need to act on them. A diagnostic that lands as a surprise tends to generate defensiveness. One that people have had a hand in shaping tends to generate action.

A well-run diagnostic is the foundation of everything else. If you are not sure whether your organisation needs one, the questions we get asked most often is a good place to start, or book a discovery call and we can talk through the situation.