Problem-impact ranker

What CLARA will ask you for

• Programme name — your programme's name (e.g. SKYPROTECT).
• Track — the slice of the programme this artefact belongs to (workstream, capability area, feature line, etc.), or Programme-wide if it spans tracks.
• Problem set scope — which body of problems you're ranking (e.g. "all problems across the end-to-end journey", or one track's friction). One line.
• Source of the problems — where the captured problems come from (the Research synthesis friction table, a workshop board, a pasted list). Named in the output so the ranking is traceable.
• Inputs — CLARA will search the programme's Confluence space for friction points, themes and problem statement from the research synthesis; persona(s) for the affected roles; prior-knowledge summaries (optional); raw field notes / captured problem sources; journeys and service blueprints (optional). You can also paste fresh material if it's not in Confluence yet.

Where the output lands

Knowledge Base/{{track}}/Problem-impact-analysis inside your programme's Confluence space.

Tips

• The ranking is an action queue, not a complaint list. Its value is the sort order and the tiers — an unranked pile of problems tells the team nothing about where to start.
• Reach × Severity says how much a problem hurts; Leverage says whether fixing one thing fixes many. A high-leverage root cause should usually be scoped as a single product, not N point fixes — that judgement is the whole point of the "Clusters" note.
• Evidence scoring keeps you honest. A persuasive problem backed only by 💬 discussion should rank below a duller one with 💻/🧪 behind it — and the gap is exactly what tells research what to go prove next.
• This page is the hand-off between synthesis and build: the Research synthesis says what is wrong, this artefact says which wrong thing to fix first, and the PRD generator builds for the top-ranked (or user-chosen) problem. Keep the problem statements clean enough that the PRD can lift one straight out.