# What? So what? Now what? Learn from experience Three questions help you understand an experience and act more deliberately next time. - Separate events from interpretation - Extract one learning - Choose what to do next Also helps with:[Performance review season](https://www.reflacto.com/moments/performance-reviews#situation-self-assessment), [A new manager](https://www.reflacto.com/moments/new-manager#situation-first-months) ## Learn from experience in 3 steps This method turns an experience into a next step: describe it, interpret it, then act. Reflacto keeps these three stages intact. 1. ### What? Record what happened, how it ended, and how you responded. Keep observations, thoughts, and feelings distinct. 2. ### So What? Test assumptions, consequences, patterns, and other perspectives. State one specific learning. 3. ### Now What? Choose one concrete behavior or small experiment for a similar situation. ## When this method helps Use it after an event that surprised you or stayed with you, especially when you want to act differently next time. ### Key benefits - Separates the event from its interpretation - Surfaces assumptions and other perspectives - Turns one learning into a testable experiment ## Limits and when to pause The simple structure can lead to shallow reflection. In So What, use evidence and other perspectives. Where harm, safety, discrimination, or serious conflict is involved, solo reflection cannot replace feedback, investigation, or qualified support. ## What? So What? Now What? examples The three questions work for any experience. What changes is the starting point: a meeting that went wrong, a success you want to repeat, or your own reaction to criticism. Each example shows the three stages and then the whole reflection in three sentences. ### A meeting that went wrong Understand why risks came up too late and run the next meeting differently. Illustrative scenario **What?**: In Monday’s planning meeting, I presented the timeline before asking about constraints. Two risks surfaced only after we agreed on the plan. Under time pressure, I read silence as agreement. **So What?**: My urgency narrowed the discussion. Silence did not mean agreement. My learning: surface constraints before proposing a plan. **Now What?**: On Thursday, I will ask each area for one important constraint before proposing a timeline. Everyone will then review it silently for two minutes. The whole reflection in three sentences > In Monday’s planning meeting, I presented the timeline first, and two risks only came up after we had agreed on the plan. I learned that silence under time pressure is not agreement, and that constraints need to come before the plan. On Thursday, I will ask each area for one constraint before I propose a timeline. ### A success worth repeating Find out what made it work, so it does not stay luck. Illustrative scenario **What?**: The March release shipped on the planned day, the first on time in four releases. The previous three slipped by two, three and five days. Two weeks before the date, I had asked everyone to list in writing what could still block the release. Five items came in: we fixed four and moved one to the next release. I felt relieved, but unsure whether we had just been lucky. **So What?**: More effort does not explain it; the team worked its usual hours. The written list made blockers visible while there was still time to act, and two of the five items came from people who rarely speak up in stand-ups. My learning: asking early and in writing surfaces more than asking in a meeting. **Now What?**: For the June release, I will send the same request 14 days before the date. Afterward, I will compare how many items came in and from whom, to see whether the effect holds. The whole reflection in three sentences > The March release was the first of four to ship on time, after I asked for blockers in writing two weeks ahead. The written list surfaced problems while there was still time, including two from people who rarely speak up in stand-ups. For the June release, I will ask the same way 14 days ahead and count how many items come in and from whom. ### Your own reaction to criticism Look at how you responded and try a different first reaction next time. Illustrative scenario **What?**: In Wednesday’s one-on-one, Jonas said my code reviews feel like gatekeeping. I felt attacked and spent about ten minutes explaining why reviews matter. After that he said little and ended the meeting early. **So What?**: I defended my intention instead of asking about his experience. From his side it looks different: three of his last four pull requests waited more than two days for my review. My learning: when I hear criticism, my first reflex is to explain, and that stops the other person from telling me more. **Now What?**: In our next one-on-one on Wednesday, I will raise the topic again, ask for one concrete example and summarize it before I explain anything. A sign it worked: Jonas gives me more than one example. The whole reflection in three sentences > When Jonas said my code reviews feel like gatekeeping, I spent ten minutes explaining instead of asking. Three of his last four pull requests waited more than two days for my review, so his view has a basis I had not looked at. In our next one-on-one, I will ask for one concrete example and summarize it before I explain anything. Each example keeps what happened apart from what it means. Other interpretations and next steps may be just as useful. ### General or concrete? A general verdict feels like a learning but leaves you nothing to try. A concrete sentence says what happened, what it means and what you will do next. - General – “The meeting went badly because nobody cared about the risks.” Concrete – “Two risks came up after we had agreed on the plan. Nobody had raised them before.” - General – “I’m just bad at running meetings.” Concrete – “When I show a plan first, people react to it instead of adding what they know.” - General – “Communicate better next time.” Concrete – “On Thursday, I will ask each area for one constraint before I propose a timeline.” You can check the concrete version the next time a similar situation comes up. A verdict about yourself or others gives you nothing to check or try, and the next reflection stays just as vague. ### Template: reflect on your own experience Copy the template and replace each bracket with your own experience. What happened: \[event, outcome, and how I responded\]. What it means: \[the assumption or pattern I now see, and one learning\]. What I will do: \[one behavior\] in \[situation or date\]. It helped if \[sign I could observe\]. #### Check before you act on it - What?: Could someone who was there confirm it? Motives and verdicts belong in the next step. - So What?: Did you test at least one other explanation, and does the learning fit in one sentence? - Now What?: Could someone else see whether you did it, and do you know when you will try it? ## Questions Reflacto asks The original model asks three questions: what happened, so what, and now what. Reflacto asks each of them and adds two: one about your own thoughts, feelings and response after you describe the event, and one about the single learning you take away before you choose a next step. ### Learn from experience Understand an experience and decide what to do differently next time. 1. What happened? Describe the situation and its outcome as concretely as possible. (Original question) 2. What were you thinking and feeling, and how did you respond? (Added by Reflacto) 3. So what? Why does this experience matter, and how do you now make sense of it? (Original question) 4. What is the most important thing you learned from this experience? (Added by Reflacto) 5. Now what? What will you do differently in a similar situation? (Original question) After the last question, Reflacto shows a learning plan with concrete next steps. ## Questions about using What? So What? Now What? ### Describe what happened #### What belongs in the What stage? The context, what happened, who was involved, your role and the outcome. Your thoughts and feelings belong there too, as your response, not as facts about someone else’s intent. You could say > “Two risks came up after we had agreed on the plan.” Leave the “why” for the next stage. “Nobody cared about the risks” is already an interpretation. [General and concrete sentences side by side](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#general-or-concrete) #### How soon after the event should I reflect? Write down what happened within a day or two, while the details are fresh. The interpretation can wait until you are calmer. You could say > “I’ll note what happened tonight and think about what it means on Friday.” Details fade quickly, and memory fills the gaps with your interpretation. If you are still upset, stop after the What. ### Make sense of it #### How do I keep So What from becoming rumination? Test assumptions, other perspectives, consequences and patterns instead of replaying the event. Stop when another pass adds no useful learning. You could say > “How would Jonas describe this one-on-one?” If you keep coming back to blame, your own or someone else’s, ask what you could do differently next time. [Example: your own reaction to criticism](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#example-critical-feedback) #### Should I only reflect when something went wrong? No. When something works, the method shows you what to repeat. You could say > “What did we do differently this time that got the release out on the planned day?” Success is easy to put down to luck or effort. Look for the specific thing you did that you could do again. [Example: a success worth repeating](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#example-on-time-release) ### Choose the next step #### What makes a useful Now What? Name the behavior, where you will try it and what others could observe. You could say > “On Thursday, I will ask each area for one constraint before I propose a timeline.” “Communicate better” cannot be checked. A small experiment you can try next week beats a big resolution. [Example: a meeting that went wrong](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#example-late-risks) #### How do I know whether the change worked? Before you try it, decide what you would see if it helped. Afterward, check whether you saw it. You could say > “If the constraints come in before the plan, nobody should raise a new risk after we agree.” Then run the three questions again on the new experience. That second, shorter reflection shows whether the learning holds. [Template with checks](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#template) ### About the method #### How is this different from GROW? GROW starts with a goal and finds a path forward. This method starts with an experience and asks what it can teach you. Use it when you need to understand first. If you already know what you want and are stuck on how to get there, GROW fits better. #### When is this method not enough? When harm, safety, discrimination or a serious conflict is involved. Reflecting alone cannot replace feedback, an investigation or qualified support. The simple structure can also stay shallow. Bring in evidence and at least one other person’s view. [Limitations](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#limitations) ## Origin and Reflacto's adaptation Terry Borton introduced the three questions in his 1970 book Reach, Touch, and Teach. John Driscoll later developed them into a reflective-practice model; other authors published further adaptations. Also known as: Borton reflective model, Driscoll model of reflection, The three Ws ### What Reflacto changed **From the original model**: Borton’s three questions, each asked on its own: what happened, what it means, and what you will do next. **Added by Reflacto**: Reflacto adds two prompts, one for your own thoughts, feelings and response and one for the single learning you take away, and ends with a learning plan. [See every question Reflacto asks](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what#questions) ### Primary sources and further reading - [Borton: Reach, Touch, and Teach – Bibliographic record for Terry Borton’s 1970 book, where the three questions originated.](https://books.google.com/books?id=FjS8AAAAIAAJ) - [University of Edinburgh: What? So What? Now What? – The university explains the three stages, Driscoll’s adaptation, and the risk of shallow reflection.](https://reflection.ed.ac.uk/reflectors-toolkit/reflecting-on-experience/what-so-what-now-what) Editorially reviewed by [Daniel Schmeiß](https://www.reflacto.com/about) Last substantive review: September 29, 2026 ## Related reflection methods Compare another method that approaches a similar situation from a different angle. - [GROW Model – You feel stuck on a complex problem or are helping someone move forward. GROW guides you from the Goal through the current Reality and the Options to a Way Forward you commit to. It works well for your own thinking and as a coaching structure for others.](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/grow) - [Feedforward: Plan the next attempt – A development conversation risks getting stuck in defending the past. Feedforward turns the focus to the future: you name a goal and ask for concrete suggestions on what to do next. This keeps the conversation constructive and easier to accept.](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/feedforward-coaching) [Compare all methods](https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks) --- Original page: https://www.reflacto.com/frameworks/what-so-what-now-what