This one turned out to be wrong

One investigation, from the first guess to the verdict that killed it, with the evidence still attached.

A concluded investigation read left to right: the hypothesis, four evidence cards, and the insights and verdict they led to.
Step one
A near-empty canvas holding a single hypothesis card, with the add-item menu open showing what else can go on it: evidence, insight, conclusion.

Pose a hypothesis

Write down what you think is true before you go looking. One card, at the start, so it can be wrong in public later.

Step two
A close-up of the evidence behind one workstream: three cards naming their sources, linked to the insight they support.

Gather evidence

A stack of interview notes, a churn number, a pile of support tickets - whatever you actually have. Group it into sections and link it to the claim it speaks to. The evidence that contradicts you stays on the canvas too, so nobody can quietly drop it.

Step three
A concluded investigation ending in a verdict card reading that the benefit-led headline lifted trial starts, with the insights it produced beside it.

Reach a verdict

The verdict sits on the canvas with the evidence still wired to it. Somebody asks later and the reasoning is right there underneath the answer. An insight worth keeping gets promoted out to the workspace, so the next investigation starts with it instead of from zero.

None of this is a new idea

Writing down what you expected and what you found is old advice. The missing part was a question that visibly closes. The guess at the top of this page is still up there, wrong in public, with the evidence attached.

Pose your first hypothesis