AskCraftA sentence is not yet an explanation
“I read your articles, but chose someone recommended by a friend.”
It is tempting to ask, “Did the articles fail to build trust?” That supplies the author’s hypothesis. Agreement still tells us little about when the person contacted their friend or what they needed to establish.
Return to an event
This is a fictional learning example.
Interviewer: “Think back to when you decided to ask your friend. What had just happened?”
Participant: “I opened three service pages. They all described a big project; I needed one meeting.”
Interviewer: “What made them look like big projects?”
Participant: “Teams and ongoing support. I could not find whether I could bring one question.”
Interviewer: “What did you ask your friend for?”
Participant: “Someone willing to do a one-off consultation.”
A possible issue now emerges: the scope of help was unclear. This does not prove trust was irrelevant, but gives us a grounded question about service fit.
A useful follow-up has an anchor
- Time: “What happened before that?”
- Action: “What did you open or do next?”
- Comparison: “Which options remained at that point?”
- Meaning: “What did ‘complicated’ mean to you then?”
- Evidence: “What led you to that conclusion?”
Do not fire these off as a checklist. Follow the account. Sometimes a pause is more useful than another question because the person is still forming their thought.
Review your own recording
Mark where an explanation first appeared in your words. Did the participant support it with an episode, or merely agree? Note missing moments, alternatives and subsequent actions. These provide concrete targets for improving the interview.
“Why?” is not forbidden. Repeating it, however, does not replace reconstructing events and can encourage a neat retrospective story.