issue-trees

name	issue-trees
description	Decompose a core problem into root causes with an ASCII tree. Outputs a fenced code block using box-drawing characters. Use for root-cause analysis, drilling from a high-level problem down to testable sub-problems, or step 2 of a strategic analysis.

Issue Trees

Concept

An issue tree breaks a vague problem into progressively smaller, more concrete sub-problems until you reach something testable. Each branch is a hypothesis about why the parent problem exists. Done well, the leaves are things you can actually go investigate.

Required output format

A fenced code block with text syntax. Use ASCII box-drawing characters:

• ├── non-final child
• │ vertical continuation under a non-final child
• └── final child at each level

```text
Core Problem
├── Category 1
│   ├── Sub-factor A
│   └── Sub-factor B
└── Category 2
    └── Sub-factor C
```

Rendering fallback

Some destinations mangle box-drawing characters — Slack, certain email clients, and some chat UIs render them as boxes or question marks. If you know the output is heading to one of those, use an indented-dash tree instead:

- Core Problem
  - Category 1
    - Sub-factor A
    - Sub-factor B
  - Category 2
    - Sub-factor C

It loses some elegance but stays readable everywhere. Default to box-drawing; switch only when needed.

This is "Slack mode." When the user asks for Slack / Teams / email / plain-text output (or names that as the destination), use this indented-dash form for the whole tree by default.

Defaults & flex points

Default	When to flex
At least 2 levels deep	A 1-level tree is a list. Push deeper. For complex problems, 3–4 levels.
3–8 words per node	Stay short — long node text destroys readability.
Branches MECE at each level	This one doesn't flex.
Stop when leaves are testable	A leaf that says "we have problems with customers" isn't done. "Onboarding completion fell to 61%" is.

Example — marketing / conversion

Problem: E-commerce site conversion rate dropped from 3.2% to 1.9% over Q3.

Conversion 3.2% → 1.9%
├── Traffic mix shift
│   ├── Paid social spend redirected to top-of-funnel
│   ├── Branded search share fell
│   └── Affiliate program reduction
├── On-site experience
│   ├── Page-load time +800ms after CDN change
│   ├── New checkout layout shipped Aug 14
│   └── Mobile bounce rate climbing
├── Pricing & promotion
│   ├── Promo cadence reduced (cost-cutting)
│   ├── Free-shipping threshold raised $50 → $75
│   └── Competitor undercutting on top 20 SKUs
└── Inventory & merchandising
    ├── 12 hero SKUs out of stock
    ├── New collection launch delayed two weeks
    └── Recommendation algorithm retrained

Every leaf is concrete. Each one could be assigned to someone with "validate this in 3 days." That's the bar.

Common mistakes

• Lazy categories. "Internal" vs. "External" is too coarse. Force specificity.
• Mixed levels. All children of a node should be the same kind of thing.
• Tree as list. One level deep = bulleted list. Push deeper.
• Verbose nodes. Sentences in the tree make it unreadable. Compress.

When to use this skill alone vs. as part of the full analysis

• Standalone: when the user has named the problem but needs help decomposing it before going to investigate.
• As part of full analysis: strategy-consultant — issue trees are step 2 of 5. If you also want to test which branch is the actual cause, follow up with hypothesis-driven.

---

Acknowledgment & License

Adapted from Analyst Academy on YouTube — 5 Consulting Frameworks to Solve Any Problem. MIT-licensed; see LICENSE.