Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 6fdd529809bd6d8f2eb624800f0c94b24af7c80af1d24f1fa25335dae0ac7b47

# What, So What, Now What?

Participants review a shared experience across three structured rounds: factual observations, interpretive meaning, and practical next steps. The resulting three-column record aligns the group on concrete actions grounded in shared evidence.

**Time:** 35 minutes. Liberating Structures suggests up to 45 minutes; this 35-minute plan allocates compact turns for up to 24 people.
**People:** 4 to 24. Solo reflection followed by small groups of 4 to 7 people (or one whole circle if 10 or fewer), then whole-room recording

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Separate observable facts from interpretations and next actions during a retrospective debrief.
**Use it when:** Use after a project milestone, incident, or contentious workshop when participants disagree on causes or rush prematurely into action.
**Skip it when:** Skip when participants do not share a common event, when urgent crisis commands must be given immediately, or when verified facts are unavailable.

## Materials and tools

- One notepad or scratch paper per person
- One pen or pencil per person
- Flip chart and markers (or shared digital whiteboard if remote/hybrid)
- Timer
- One optional talking object per group (such as a pen or token)

## Before participants arrive

1. If total group is over 10, arrange seating in small clusters of 4 to 7 people. If 10 or fewer, arrange all chairs in one circle.
2. Draw three columns on the flip chart or digital board: What? So What? Now What?
3. Ensure scratch paper, pens, and timers are ready.

## Say this to open

We will debrief our shared work in three distinct stages. First, What: observable facts and data only. Second, So What: why those facts matter and what patterns emerge. Third, Now What: next actions that make sense. Keeping these separated stops us from leaping to fixes before we understand what happened. Please write quietly when each prompt begins.

## How to run it

### 1. Frame debrief and set stages (3 minutes)

Name the shared experience being reviewed. Read the opening script. Explain the rule: keep observations free of judgment during stage one. If using talking objects, explain that only the holder speaks, passing it clockwise.

### 2. Stage 1: What? (Solo and table discussion) (6 minutes)

Participants write solo for 1 minute answering: What happened? What did you notice, see, or hear? Then groups of 4 to 7 (or the whole circle if 10 or fewer) discuss for 5 minutes. Direct them to state observable facts rather than evaluations. For example, say 'three deadlines passed' instead of 'the team was careless.'

### 3. Stage 1: What? (Harvest observations) (3 minutes)

Ask each group for one or two distinct observations. Record them onto the flip chart or digital whiteboard under 'What'. If an interpretation surfaces, ask the speaker for the raw observation behind it before logging it.

### 4. Stage 2: So What? (Solo and table discussion) (7 minutes)

Participants write solo for 1 minute on: Why is that important? What patterns or conclusions emerge? What hypotheses make sense? Groups (or the whole circle if 10 or fewer) then discuss patterns for 6 minutes.

### 5. Stage 2: So What? (Harvest patterns) (4 minutes)

Collect key patterns, interpretations, and hypotheses from groups onto the flip chart or digital board under 'So What'. Intervene gently if people jump ahead to proposing action steps.

### 6. Stage 3: Now What? (Solo and table discussion) (6 minutes)

Participants write solo for 1 minute on: Now what? What actions make sense? Groups (or the whole circle if 10 or fewer) discuss proposals for 5 minutes, focusing on practical next moves.

### 7. Stage 3: Now What? (Harvest and debrief) (6 minutes)

Collect agreed actionable steps onto the chart under 'Now What'. Conduct a whole-room debrief with 2 or 3 brief contributions, asking how separating facts from conclusions altered their proposed actions.


## Debrief questions

- Where did we notice the strongest impulse to jump straight from observations to fixes?
- Which pattern under 'So What' had the strongest agreement across the room?
- Which concrete action listed under 'Now What' should start first?

**Finished output:** A three-column chart showing agreed factual observations, interpretive patterns, and chosen next steps.

## Remote

Run video in a main room with breakout rooms of 4 to 7 people. Facilitate silent solo writing in the main call. Send groups to breakouts for timed discussions. Regroup to collect points, having one spokesperson per breakout paste notes directly under the active column on a shared digital whiteboard.

## Hybrid

Keep in-person attendees grouped at physical tables and assign remote attendees to online breakout rooms. Share a single digital whiteboard on screen in the physical room. An in-person scribe types spoken room inputs into the digital board, while remote groups type their points directly into the three columns.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may contribute verbally, write silently on scratch paper, or pass their speaking turn without explanation.
- Solo reflection time allows people who prefer quiet processing to frame observations before group dialogue.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants jump to assigning blame or proposing fixes during the What phase.**

Ask: What specific visible detail led to that thought? Record the factual detail under What and hold the interpretation for So What.

**One person dominates the small-group conversation.**

Instruct groups to pass the talking object. Each person holds it once to speak or pass before anyone takes a second turn.


## Terms used here

- Ladder of Inference: A model showing how people move from raw data to selected facts, assumptions, conclusions, and actions.
- Talking Object: An item passed within a circle where only the holder speaks, and each person speaks once before second turns.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Liberating Structures by Henri Lipmanowicz and Keith McCandless, drawing on the Ladder of Inference framework associated with Chris Argyris and Peter Senge.

Retained the three-stage progression (What, So What, Now What) and sequence from Liberating Structures. Set a compact 35-minute timetable fitting groups of 4 to 24. Clarified unified recording across in-person and digital formats, defined concrete turn rules for talking objects, and streamlined small-group versus single-group workflows for groups under 10.

[Liberating Structures](https://www.liberatingstructures.com/9-what-so-what-now-what-w/)

[Liberating Structures](http://www.liberatingstructures.com/9-what-so-what-now-what-w/)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/what-so-what-now-what-w/