Use the Five Whys to Test Strategy, Not to Fix Mistakes

The five whys are usually seen as a problem-solving tool. But in my experience, that use is limited. We tend to latch onto the first answer and rush forward, building a false sense of confidence.

The real value is in exposing the logic behind our bets. From exec teams to delivery teams, it helps make assumptions visible and testable.

Here’s an example:

Say we have an initiative to improve our Edtech lesson taxonomy.

We can ask: 1. We believe we can improve our search taxonomy 2. We believe it will let us suggest more relevant lessons 3. We believe this will lead to more lessons taken 4. We believe this will lead to more lessons completed 5. We believe this will improve renewal rates

This is a simple example, but these linked assumptions, what I call a hypothesis chain, are often buried. And when they stay buried, teams lose sight of why the work matters. This can lead to metrics gaming and other unintended consequence.

When we surface that logic, OKRs can become a shared lens for learning.

We are not just tracking progress. We are testing belief.

What hypothesis chain are your OKRs resting on?