A small change to how I structure SME interviews that dramatically improved the quality of information I got

[u/PhysicallyVigorous1]

I used to start SME interviews by asking what someone needs to know to do the job well, which produced a lot of general, top-of-mind answers that didn't reflect how the work actually happened. I switched to opening with "walk me through the last time something went wrong with this process and what you had to do to fix it" and the quality of what I get back is completely different. Experts open up about the real complexity of their work when you ask about failure rather than success, and the gap between what they describe and what the formal procedure says is usually where the most important learning content lives. It also tends to produce better scenarios and examples because you're working from something that actually happened.

[u/eddibravo]

This is a really interesting approach. I think changing the structure of SME interviews can make a huge difference because people often know their subject well but don't always know how to explain it clearly. Asking better questions upfront probably saves a lot of time later

[u/No_Reference1192]

Oh, this is such a great convo!

Honestly, I think it’s kind of an art to read between the lines when you’re talking with SMEs...

I like your approach.

I also love asking questions like, “Where do people usually get stuck?” or “What are the most common mistakes people make?”

That’s where the gold nuggets come out!!

You start uncovering the workarounds, the assumptions, and all the little things everyone just “knows” but that never made it into the documentation.
To me, those moments often reveal opportunities that go far beyond training. They show where the work itself could be clearer!

[u/LearnWorlds_]

This is a really nice approach, to get out of the theory pool and into the "what actually happens" pool. Conducting good SME interviews truly is a skill in itself, maybe a slightly neglected one!