Less reconstruction.
The reason belongs beside the decision, not across emails, notebooks and the memory of whoever worked the case.
Simply Discover / Case reasoning
Reasoning
Canvas
Keep the why.
Not just the outcome.
Connect case decisions to the evidence and rationale behind them. Explain the work without rebuilding the story from memory.
Follow a caseThe decision, in context.Illustrative case
Source evidence
Mailbox records
Correspondence in scope
Intake context
HR grievance
Events in summer 2025
Officer's decision
Include surrounding dates
Preserve the context
Rationale kept with the case
“Include March through September to preserve the surrounding correspondence.”
Evidence linked · Reason recorded
The evidenceThe material behind the decision.
The rationaleWhy the officer took that step.
The recordAn account another person can follow.
01 / Beyond the activity log
The decision is only
half the story.
Why this date range? Why was that document included? What prompted a referral for legal review?
Case systems can record what happened without preserving the judgement behind it. Reasoning Canvas is designed to keep that explanation with the work, while the context is still fresh.
Context that travels.
A colleague should be able to understand the scope, the choices and the open questions without starting the investigation again.
Experience worth reusing.
Templates can carry a considered approach into repeat work, while leaving room for the judgement each new matter needs.
Chain of custody tracks the object.
Chain of reasoning tracks the thinking.
02 / Follow the reasoning
One request.
A connected account of the work.
A DSAR begins with a request. The useful record also explains how it became a scope, a review and a response.
Jane Doe / DSARFictional workflow
Request received
Start with a reason for the work.
An officer opens an investigation in response to a data subject access request from Jane Doe. The request and the assigned officer become the starting context for the case.
The officer's rationale
“I was assigned this DSAR by intake. I am opening the case so I can record the reasoning as I work.”
Kept with the caseThe request, opening time and responsible officer.
Intake notes
Keep the original question in view.
An intake conversation identifies an HR grievance from June 2025. That context informs the scope of the search and the later relevance review.
The officer's rationale
“The subject mentioned an HR grievance involving their manager. Keep that context with the evidence, rather than in a separate notebook.”
Kept with the caseThe intake note and the steps that draw on it.
Evidence scope
Record why these records belong.
The officer scopes the subject's mailbox from 1 March to 30 September 2025, including correspondence around the events described in the request.
The officer's rationale
“The request concerns HR events in summer 2025. Include March through September to preserve the surrounding correspondence.”
Kept with the caseThe custodian, date range and explanation for the scope.
Classification & review
Give the review the right context.
Classification considers whether material is about the subject, with the HR context carried forward from intake. Uncertain items remain available for review.
The officer's rationale
“Use the HR context from intake so relevant material is not missed simply because it uses different wording.”
Kept with the caseThe classification context, outcomes and deferred items.
Third-party information
Understand who else is in the record.
Relevant documents are examined for people, organisations and dates. This gives the officer context for reviewing third-party information and making redaction choices.
The officer's rationale
“I need a clear view of the other individuals in these records before deciding what needs to be redacted.”
Kept with the caseThe identified entities and the rationale for this step.
Review decision
A flag starts a review, not a conclusion.
Potentially privileged material is referred for legal review before a disclosure decision is made. The reason for the referral stays connected to the affected records.
The officer's rationale
“These communications need a legal review. Keep them out of the disclosure bundle until the review decision is recorded.”
Kept with the caseThe flagged material, referral reason and subsequent review.
Case output
Carry the reasoning into the hand-off.
The officer prepares a reviewed, redacted disclosure bundle alongside an account of how the evidence was scoped, reviewed and used in the response.
The officer's rationale
“Use a format the recipient can open, include the reviewed material and retain the reasoning behind the response.”
Kept with the caseThe output choice, review context and account of the case.
An illustrative workflow, not a live case or legal advice. The evidence, judgement and review requirements depend on the request.
03 / A shared language for the work
Four building blocks.
One connected case.
Start with a template for familiar work or a blank canvas for a new matter. Connect the steps, carry the context forward and make room for the reasoning.
Trigger
Why work starts.
A request, policy match or incoming event establishes the reason to open or advance the work.
Transform
How it develops.
Scope, classify and examine material. Keep the context behind each change in view.
Action
What happens next.
Refer, redact, export or respond, with the rationale for the action connected to the case.
Reference
What informs it.
Bring notes, instructions and supporting material into the steps that depend on them.
04 / An explanation, not a log dump
A record someone
else can read.
The aim of narrative reporting is straightforward: bring the sequence, the outcomes and the officer's own rationale into a readable account of the case.
- Follow how the work developed.
- Distinguish the officer's reasoning from the recorded outcome.
- Connect the account back to its supporting material.
This fictional excerpt illustrates the intended reporting approach. Reporting availability is subject to the capabilities enabled for your deployment.
Illustrative reasoning recordJane Doe / Subject access request
- Case
- 2026-DSR-00412
- Officer
- A. Halford
- Opened
- 14 March 2026
- Closed
- 2 April 2026
01 / Request & context
The case was opened following a data subject access request. Intake identified an HR grievance from June 2025 as relevant context.
02 / Evidence scope
The officer scoped the subject's mailbox from 1 March to 30 September 2025, recording the following reason:
“The request concerns HR events in summer 2025. Include March through September to preserve the surrounding correspondence.”
03 / Relevance review
Classification identified 147 emails as about the subject and 43 as irrelevant. A further 18 were deferred for review rather than treated as settled decisions.
05 / Designed around the people doing the work
A considered approach.
Room for individual judgement.
The process owner shapes repeatable work. The case officer applies it to the matter in front of them. Both need the reasoning to remain visible.
Senior analyst / Process owner
Make experience reusable.
Turn a well-considered approach into a starting point the team can use again.
- Shape templates for recurring DSARs, FOI requests and review patterns.
- Connect supported policy events to the relevant case work.
- Version an approach for new cases without rewriting existing ones.
- Promote useful one-off investigations into repeatable patterns.
Case officer / Investigator
Keep judgement in the case.
Follow a familiar approach or develop the work as the evidence changes.
- Start from a suitable template or a blank canvas.
- Expand the investigation as questions and evidence emerge.
- Record the reason for a step while the context is fresh.
- Prepare a narrative account for review and hand-over.
A few useful distinctions
Reasoning Canvas,
explained.
What is Reasoning Canvas?
Reasoning Canvas is Simply Discover's approach to connecting case steps, source material and the rationale behind decisions. It is designed for investigations, DSARs, FOI work, legal review and compliance workflows.
How is it different from an audit log or a workflow diagram?
An activity log records events. A diagram shows a sequence or relationship. Reasoning Canvas is designed to keep the explanation for each step with the case work itself, so a reviewer can follow the evidence and the reasoning together.
Does a reasoning record replace human review?
No. It supports professional judgement by making the evidence, context and rationale easier to inspect. Recording a reason does not, on its own, make a decision correct.
Are all the capabilities available together?
Reasoning Canvas is being introduced in stages. Confirm the available authoring, templates, triggers and narrative reporting capabilities for your deployment before planning a rollout.
Make the work easier to explain.
Evidence. Judgement.
A connected record.
Reasoning Canvas is being introduced in stages. We can discuss the case work you need to support and confirm which capabilities are available in your deployment.