Iโve been participating in a number of peer-to-peer case practices and have observed a wide range of approaches when it comes to asking clarifying questions. Some individuals spend a considerable amount of time, ranging from 5 to 10 minutes, posing numerous questions and almost extracting information that would later be provided in the case exhibits. Others, however, ask a single question before diving straight into their framework. I am convinced that the optimal balance lies somewhere in between, but Iโm uncertain about the precise point of equilibrium.
I've noticed that those who ask numerous questions tend to pose relevant and insightful ones, making the process seem natural and justified. This leads me to wonder: Is there such a thing as asking too many questions? At what point does it become excessive?