In my last two entries I shared my view of the importance of Problem Solving and a few reasons why it’s so difficult. But does this mean we’re destined to analytical mediocrity? Can we improve? Can Problem Solving be taught? I believe it can.
Problem Solving is a process – a process through which we discover new knowledge, and apply that knowledge to improve our decision making, and thus our results.
The process of Problem Solving begins with an idea – an idea that we could improve the world in which we exist, if only we better understood, and acted on, some key factor that helped define it. “How much better our pricing would be if we were better negotiators?” “How good are we at negotiating?” “How much better can we be?” “How would we get there?” This defines the problem or opportunity, which typically centers on a gap in our knowledge, often involving an important assumed causal relationship.
Once we’ve defined this knowledge gap, we need a plan to close it, an analytical plan. This requires creative, often far-reaching speculation. “What defines a great negotiator?” “Do results vary by approach (collaborative vs. combative)?” “What negotiation techniques are most effective?” It also requires organization and planning. “How do we answer these questions?” “Can we do so quantitatively?” This step, in which we structure the problem, requires that we engage both the left and right halves of our brains. It’s the most challenging – and important – step in the process.
Next, we act on our analytical plan, beginning with the gathering of data we’ll need to analyze the issues. But the data we need often doesn’t exist – we’re exploring uncharted territory – or isn’t sufficiently detailed, or has other holes. So we find “surrogate” data, information that, while not perfect, sheds at least some light on our issues. And we “create” data. We don’t make it up, rather that we experiment thoughtfully. “Let’s be more aggressive in these negotiations, more collaborative in those, and see the difference.” We build information through field work.
And as we collect the data, we begin to analyze it, from multiple perspectives, looking for reliable, repeatable patterns – for enlightening insight. “Every time we walked away from the bargaining table, we ended up with 5% better pricing.” “In comparable situations, we did 4% better when we negotiated at a neutral site.” But we also look critically at our findings, searching for alternate explanations. “Yes, but 9 of those 10 cases involved long term agreements, perhaps that was the determining factor?” And we revisit our initial assumptions to consider new ideas spurred by our analysis. Problem Solving is iterative and at times circuitous – in a good way.
Finally, we interpret our body of findings, objectively and logically, to create a thoughtful plan of action. “We need a more structured negotiations preparation process.” “We need to negotiate in teams.” “All negotiations must be preceded by a phone call from one of our Vice Presidents.” “We need to negotiate with a broader range of prospective business partners.” Our plan of action applies our new knowledge and improves the results we seek.
In less than five hundred words, this is Problem Solving as a process. Processes can be taught, including Problem Solving, so the answer to our headline is ‘yes.’ But we can’t underestimate the complexity of Problem Solving. Problem Solving is as much art as it is science. Mastering it requires far more than following a set of steps. It takes commitment, repetition and dedication. In my next post I’ll focus on the characteristics of great Problem Solvers. What we need to aspire to as we practice the process of Problem Solving.