Problem-Solving “Framework”
Introduction
Without a problem-solving methodology/system, people will likely make more mistakes or repeat (some) mistakes, again and again. The methods contained herein reduce the likelihood of the occurrence of either of the foregoing outcomes, but they will not eliminate all negative outcomes. However, the more you practice one (or more) of the three methods outlined in this article, the better your prospects of obtaining the results you desire. Alternatively, there are a couple of not-so-effective problem-solving methods that are used by many people, they are 1) trial and error 2) opiates like alcohol and drugs.
It appears that “trial and error” is a common method of “problem-solving”. My experience in observing people who use this method is summed up in the words “I want to make my own mistakes”. Unfortunately, life may not be long enough to solve (successfully) all the problems we face using this perspective on life.
The widespread use of “opiates” may be another less-than-optimal way to solve problems as it seems to create a new “cluster” of problems including physical or psychological dependence; criminal justice entanglements; family upheavals; and reduced productivity – just to name a few interrelated or problem clusters.
One of the aims of this article is to feature viable problem-solving and decision-making alternatives so that readers can learn and teach others to learn the lessons of problem-solving and decision-making, vicariously, i.e. through someone else’s experience or training. The three featured problem – solving methods are not panaceas or fool-proof. However, these methods have been tested by academia and/or business and each is worth a closer look.
Sources
The source of the three problem-solving methods [Systems 1-3] in this article are:
- Kleindorfer, P. R. K., Howard, C.; Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1993).
Decision Sciences - An Integrative Perspective. Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press.
2. Anderson, D. R. S., Dennis, J.; Williams, T. A. (2000). An Introduction to Management Science - Quantitative Approaches to Decision Making. Cincinnati, South-Western College Publishing.
3. Scholtes, P. R. (1998). The Leader's Handbook. New York, McGraw-Hill.
In the Kleindorfer et al book, we find a list of three types of errors that are common to the problem-solving process, they are:
- Type I Error: Detecting a problem when there isn’t one.
- Type II Error: Not detecting a problem when there is one.
- Type III Error: Solving the wrong problem.
A solution to these errors, can be found in the following “abridged” version of the much more detailed system outlined in the book, it is:
Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Steps – System 1
Problem finding may seem like a no-brainer to many people, but finding the problem is just part of the process as once a problem is found or identified, other steps are required to resolve the problem. Below, is a three step process that may best be used by an individual or group with some experience in problem-solving. If you have little or no experience in a formal process to resolve problems, systems 2 and 3, below, may work better.
Problem Identification ***
- Individual
- Group (two or more people)
Identifying a problem or problem finding might entail determining what is wrong, what went wrong, or what might go wrong. Sometimes, it is more complex and might require engaging an expert’s help as with many medical, legal, tax, electrical, or automotive problems, etc.
Obtaining agreement or consensus within a group may be a problem unto itself depending on the group process skills of the members.
Problem Acceptance ***
Acceptance entails agreeing that the problem that has been identified is indeed the “real” problem. In a group, one typically sees either an autocratic or democratic process of identifying and “accepting” the problem. You might hear someone say “it’s my way or the highway” or “because I said so” in an autocratic or I’m the boss environment. But, in a democratic environment, one might find more “trouble-shooting” or brainstorming at each step – criticism of another’s input is minimized or non-existent.
Problem Representation ***
*** This process applies to organizations and to society
Representation means putting the accepted problem in terms that will communicate the real problem to another person. Some people will use words, some will use pictures or a combination of both, and some people will use kinesthetic or touch / motion to communicate the problem. Often times it is best to represent the problem in different ways in order to bring someone on board that has a different learning style than you.
Other Possible Errors
Perhaps, the following observations can be placed under the category of “heuristics” as they are based on 30 years of professional experience and even more years of personal and family experience. There are at least two additional types of errors.
Type IV Error: Failure to execute the solution (or decision alternative) – due to:
- Lack of time
- Lack of resources - money, car, tools, computer, home, etc.
- Lack of will – fear or threats may contribute to this situation. There is the potential for or actual “blowback” – blowback entails real or imaged negative consequences from pursuing a given course of action
Type V Error: Problem Nesting / Clusters. Typically, these are multi-faceted or complex problems. For example, some of the social services clients that I provided job search training for faced problem clusters, e.g.
- loss of job and a divorce…
- substance abuse and a criminal record…
- lack of GED and no work experience…
- illness or disability and job obsolescence…
- permutations of the foregoing problems…
On the surface, Type V errors can best be met with an intervention by professionals in social services and/or health services. And to some extent Type IV errors may also benefit from a third party – friend, family, or professional.