A Problem Well Stated Post 5: You Have a Problem Statement, Now What?

A well-written problem statement is only the beginning. Once it’s finalized, the real work starts—turning that statement into effective corrective actions. This post walks through the steps: validating and documenting your problem statement, aligning stakeholders, and using it as a roadmap for improvement. We’ll also explore why a clear problem statement is critical for ISO/IEC 17025 compliance and how it can justify major changes, like implementing an electronic laboratory notebook (ELN).

A Problem Well Stated Post 4: Evolution of a Problem Statement

n small to mid-sized testing laboratories, a well-developed problem statement is the foundation of effective corrective action. This post explores how a problem statement evolves—from initial detection to a fully actionable plan—within the framework of ISO/IEC 17025. Rather than rushing to solutions, lab teams are encouraged to begin with a “concept statement,” a rough draft that helps focus investigation and align team understanding.

As the issue is explored, the statement becomes more refined, guiding root cause analysis and corrective action planning. This evolution ensures that actions are targeted, meaningful, and compliant with quality system requirements. The post outlines the full lifecycle of a corrective action, including documentation, scope evaluation, implementation, and effectiveness review.

Visuals such as a lifecycle flow diagram, a concept-to-commitment chart, and a cost vs. impact prioritization matrix help readers apply these ideas in their own labs. Resources are provided for early- to mid-career professionals seeking practical tools, templates, and training to strengthen their lab’s quality systems.

Whether preparing for accreditation or responding to an assessment, this post offers bite-sized strategies to help labs build clarity, accountability, and sustainable improvement—starting with a well-stated problem.

A Problem Well Stated Post 3: Building Problem Statement that Actually Work

In the third post of the A Problem Well Stated series, we introduce a practical framework—the 7-Question Matrix—to help lab teams write clear, focused problem statements. These statements guide investigations, reduce noise, and improve root cause analysis.

You’ll learn the difference between metadata thinking and root cause thinking, and why starting with what you know now leads to better outcomes. We also emphasize a critical mindset shift: problem statements evolve—they’re living documents.

Plus, we tackle a common mistake: blaming people instead of fixing processes. Protecting psychological safety leads to stronger teams and smarter solutions.

Bonus: Download our worksheet to apply the matrix in real time.

Try it now: Use the 7 questions to reframe one current issue. See what clarity emerges

A Problem Well Stated Post 2: Problem Trigage

If you’ve ever jumped into fixing a lab issue only to realize later you were solving the wrong problem—or solving it too intensely—this post is for you.

In Problem Triage, I unpack a common challenge in quality systems: the tendency to rush into root cause analysis or corrective actions without first defining what’s really going on. We’re not talking about experimental hiccups—we’re talking about the internal disruptions that ISO/IEC 17025 calls Nonconforming Work. These are the slowdowns, surprises, and detours that threaten outcomes and demand thoughtful response.

I share why teams often struggle to define these problems clearly, and how triage—yes, like in an ER—can help. You’ll learn how to pause, assess severity and scope, and choose a response that fits the issue, not just the urgency.

This post is a call to breathe, reflect, and lead with clarity. Because when you triage well, you don’t just fix problems—you build a lab culture that’s resilient, focused, and ready for anything.

A Problem Well Stated Post 1: An Introduction

This post is where the series begins—and where clarity starts to take shape.

In A Problem Well Stated, I dig into one of the most overlooked skills in lab leadership: defining the problem before solving it. It sounds simple, but in fast-moving environments, it’s easy to skip this step and jump straight into action. That’s where things go sideways.

I share why strong problem statements are more than just good writing—they’re strategic tools. They help teams align, reduce noise, and focus on what actually needs fixing. You’ll learn how to spot vague or misleading problem definitions and how to reshape them into statements that drive smarter, faster solutions.

This post is a reminder that clarity isn’t a luxury—it’s a leadership skill. And when you build it into your team’s habits, everything from troubleshooting to innovation gets sharper.

What is a LabHandler?

abHandler.com began as a spark—an idea that echoed my role as a quality manager. Not the owner of the lab, but the handler: attentive, independent, and always working to refine its strengths. Like a professional handler preparing for the National Dog Show, I build relationships, coach best practices, and ensure labs are ready to shine. The audit, much like the “Big Show,” is a chance to showcase what we’ve cultivated. Behind the scenes, I jog alongside the lab, making sure its best features are front and center. That’s when LabHandler truly found its purpose—and I found mine.