What constitutes a “problem” in an organisation or group?
A problem is a situation where things are not as they should be. Such situations can cause frustration, anxiety, and tension in the group, prompting managers to take problem-solving actions.
2. Series Agenda
This article is part of a series on complex problem-solving. The list below will guide you through the different subtopics.
In my own experience in solving problems and watching other others solve them, by all odds the most difficult step in the process is the first one — defining the problem. The difficulty arises in part because of a confusion between symptoms and the problem.
Richard Wallen, a researcher and expert in problem-solving methodologies, proposed a model for Problem Solving. This model describes the iterative process individuals and groups go through when tackling complex problems. Wallen identified six key stages divided into two cycles. The first cycle concerns problem identification and has the following stages:
Cycle 1: Problem Formulation
Stage 1: Problem Formulation. This initial stage involves identifying and defining the problem. It requires gathering relevant information, clarifying the objectives, and understanding the context of the problem.
Stage 2: Generating Proposals for Solutions. Once the problem is understood, the next step is to brainstorm potential solutions. This stage involves creativity and divergent thinking to explore various approaches or strategies that could address the problem.
Stage 3: Evaluating Options. After generating a list of possible solutions, the next stage evaluates each option based on feasibility, effectiveness, efficiency, and potential risks. This evaluation process helps to narrow down the options and select the most suitable solution.
Cycle 2: Solution Implementation
Stage 4: Action Planning. Once the chosen solution is identified, it is implemented or put into action. This stage involves planning the implementation process and allocating resources.
Stage 5: Action Steps. In this stage, the plan is put into action. The solution steps are executed. If any challenges arise, the solution plan is revisited and might be discarded in favour of another option.
Stage 6: Reviewing outcomes. The final stage of Wallen’s problem-solving cycle involves reflecting on the outcome of the implemented solution. This includes assessing its effectiveness, identifying lessons learned, and making necessary adjustments or improvements for future problem-solving endeavours.
4. The Problem Formulation Cycle
Problem formulation deserves special attention because all solutions and outcomes will derive from the chosen diagnosis. This section will discuss issues commonly faced during problem formulation.
4.1 Addressing the Problem vs Its Symptoms
People often confuse problems with symptoms due to several cognitive biases and communication challenges. Here are some reasons why this confusion occurs:
Surface-Level Observation:
Symptoms are often more visible than the underlying problems, prompting people to focus on them without fully understanding the root cause of the issue.
Lack of Root Cause Analysis (RCA):
RCA often requires critical thinking skills, first-hand information, and expertise in the field. While expertise and critical thinking skills may be readily available in senior managers or technical staff, quality information requires effort to obtain and analyse.
Problems in complex systems are often interconnected, and their effects can manifest as multiple symptoms. This complexity can make distinguishing between symptoms and the underlying problem challenging, leading to confusion.
Confirmation Bias:
People may interpret information in a way that confirms their preconceived beliefs or assumptions. This bias can lead individuals to focus on symptoms that align with their existing views rather than considering alternative perspectives or underlying causes. People may also not notice certain evidence, particularly if they are not expecting it.
Time Pressure and Urgency:
In situations with a sense of urgency or pressure to find a solution quickly, individuals may prioritize addressing symptoms to alleviate immediate issues, even if it means neglecting deeper problem-solving efforts.
4.2 Premature Selection of Candidate Solutions
The premature adoption of a diagnosis or solution can be prompted by various factors, often cognitive biases, situational pressures, or communication challenges. Here are some common reasons why this premature adoption occurs:
Availability Heuristic:
People tend to rely on readily available or easily recalled information. If a diagnosis or solution comes to mind quickly, individuals may be inclined to adopt it without fully considering alternative options or conducting a thorough analysis.
Anchoring Bias:
This bias occurs when individuals rely too heavily on initial information or impressions when making decisions. If an early diagnosis or solution is suggested, it may serve as an anchor point, influencing subsequent judgments and leading to premature adoption.
Confirmation Bias:
Individuals may seek information confirming their initial diagnosis or solution while disregarding contradictory evidence. This bias can reinforce premature adoption by selectively focusing on data that supports the chosen course of action.
Overconfidence:
Excessive confidence in one’s own judgment or expertise can lead to premature adoption without adequately considering alternative perspectives or seeking additional input from others.
Sunk Cost Fallacy:
Suppose significant time, resources, or effort have already been invested in a particular diagnosis or solution. In that case, individuals may feel compelled to stick with it, even if evidence suggests it is not the most effective option. This can lead to the premature adoption of a suboptimal course of action.
Pressure to Act Quickly:
Situational pressures, such as tight deadlines or urgent circumstances, can prompt individuals to prematurely adopt a diagnosis or solution to address immediate concerns, even if it means sacrificing thorough analysis or consideration of alternatives.
Incomplete Information:
If critical information is missing or unavailable, individuals may make assumptions or premature judgments based on limited data, leading to a flawed diagnosis or solution.
Factors specific to group dynamics and decision-making processes are presented below:
Groupthink:
Groupthink occurs when a group strongly desires consensus, leading members to prioritize harmony and conformity over critical evaluation of alternatives. The pressure to conform in group settings can influence individuals to prematurely adopt a diagnosis or solution without thoroughly examining other options.
Individuals within a group may be influenced by the opinions or actions of others, leading them to adopt a diagnosis or solution prematurely to align with the perceived consensus or to avoid deviating from the group norm.
Diversity of Perspectives:
Groups composed of individuals with diverse backgrounds, experiences, and expertise may benefit from a wider range of perspectives. However, if group members fail to consider or integrate these diverse viewpoints fully, they can prematurely adopt a diagnosis or solution that reflects a narrow subset of perspectives.
Group Polarization:
Group discussions have the potential to amplify pre-existing tendencies within individual members. If group members initially lean towards a particular diagnosis or solution, group discussions may intensify these inclinations, leading to premature adoption without adequate consideration of alternative viewpoints.
The dynamics of group decision-making, such as the presence of a dominant leader, consensus-seeking behaviour, or the influence of group norms, can impact the likelihood of premature adoption. Groups prioritising efficiency or conformity may be more susceptible to premature adoption without thorough analysis.
4.3 Solution Evaluation Techniques
Various solution evaluation techniques exist to assess the effectiveness, feasibility, and suitability of potential solutions to a problem. Here are several commonly used techniques, along with their strengths and weaknesses:
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA):
Strengths: CBA quantifies the costs and benefits of different solutions, allowing for direct comparison and informed decision-making. It provides a systematic approach to evaluate the financial implications of each option.
Weaknesses: CBA may overlook difficult-to-quantify non-financial factors, such as social or environmental impacts. Additionally, it relies on accurate cost and benefit estimations, which can be challenging to obtain.
Strengths: Risk assessment identifies potential risks associated with each solution, allowing for proactive risk management and mitigation strategies. It helps stakeholders make informed decisions by considering the likelihood and impact of various risks.
Weaknesses: Risk assessment relies on assumptions and predictions, which may not accurately reflect real-world outcomes. It can also be time-consuming and resource-intensive, particularly for complex problems with numerous risk factors.
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA):
Strengths: MCDA considers multiple criteria or objectives simultaneously, providing a structured framework for evaluating complex solutions. It allows stakeholders to weigh the relative importance of different criteria and rank options accordingly.
Weaknesses: MCDA requires clear criteria and reliable data for each criterion, which may be challenging to define or obtain. It can also be subjective, as stakeholders may have varying interpretations of the importance of different criteria.
Decision Trees:
Strengths: Decision trees visualize the decision-making process by mapping out various options and potential outcomes. They help stakeholders understand the consequences of different choices and identify optimal paths.
Weaknesses: Decision trees rely on assumptions and probabilities, which may introduce uncertainty into the evaluation process. They can also become overly complex, particularly for decisions with numerous branches and potential outcomes.
Benchmarking:
Strengths: Benchmarking compares proposed solutions to industry standards or best practices, providing a benchmark for performance evaluation. It helps identify areas for improvement and opportunities for innovation.
Weaknesses: Benchmarking may not account for unique contextual factors or specific organizational requirements. The availability and relevance of benchmarking data can also limit it.
5. The Solution Implementation Cycle
5.1 Challenges to Solution Implementation
The phase of action planning can be treated as a new problem requiring its own problem formulation […], idea production […], and idea testing.
Several challenges may arise during Cycle 2 of Wallen’s problem-solving model, which involves solution implementation. These challenges can impede the successful execution of the chosen solution and require careful navigation to ensure effective implementation. Here are some of the challenges expected during Cycle 2:
Resource Constraints:
One common challenge is the availability of the financial, human, and material resources necessary to implement the solution.
Limited resources may hinder the implementation process and require creative resource allocation solutions.
Resistance from stakeholders affected by the proposed solution can pose a significant challenge.
Resistance may stem from fear of the unknown, scepticism about the solution’s effectiveness, or concerns about how the solution will impact existing processes or roles.
Lack of Stakeholder Buy-In:
Engaging stakeholders and securing their buy-in is crucial for successful implementation.
However, gaining consensus and alignment among stakeholders with diverse interests and priorities can be challenging, particularly if competing agendas or conflicting viewpoints exist.
Technical Complexity:
Solutions that involve technological changes or require specialized expertise may face challenges related to technical complexity.
Implementation may be delayed or compromised if difficulties arise in understanding or integrating new technologies or systems.
The existing organizational culture can influence the implementation process.
If the culture does not support innovation, collaboration, or change, it may create barriers to successful implementation and require efforts to shift mindsets and behaviours.
Communication Breakdowns:
Effective communication ensures clarity, alignment, and transparency throughout implementation.
Communication breakdowns, such as unclear instructions, inconsistent messaging, or inadequate feedback mechanisms, can hinder progress and lead to misunderstandings.
Unforeseen Challenges:
Despite careful planning, unforeseen challenges and obstacles may arise during implementation.
These challenges could include external factors such as changes in market conditions, regulatory requirements, unexpected disruptions, and internal factors such as technical failures or human errors.
Monitoring and Evaluation:
Monitoring progress and evaluating the effectiveness of the implemented solution is critical for identifying issues early and making necessary adjustments.
However, challenges may arise in establishing appropriate metrics, collecting relevant data, and ensuring that feedback mechanisms are robust and responsive.
