The human condition is one that seeks order from randomness and chaos. We like the fabric of the familiar. We look for patterns that fit our experiences, or experiences that fit our patterns as part of our ongoing efforts to make sense of the world. The same is true for business leaders: we frequently rely on analysis of past problems, prior risk-based assessments and solutions that have worked earlier in our careers to solve current challenges.
The issue with this type of framing is that it sometimes works. The solutions may not reach new heights of creativity and fresh insights, but they are not inaccurate enough, often enough to move us away from the mental shortcuts we have created over many years. Behavioral scientists have done a lot of work on both the benefits and limitations of these heuristics. At their best, they save time and energy and ease the decision-making process. At their worst, they leave us subject to individual biases and cause faulty cognition, sometimes when the stakes are highest.
Problems Clearly Stated, More Easily Solved
The bottom line is that how we frame a problem matters. We need to know when we’re mentally shortcutting and when we’re stating the problem in the proper form to generate an optimal solution. Getting the problem well defined and well framed – accurately stated in clear, simple terms – is one of the best ways to de-risk potential solutions.
In their work Evolution of Physics, Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld put it this way:
“The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle requires creative imagination and marks real advances in science.”
Substitute the word “business” for “science” in the above quotation: the importance of the thought applies in multidisciplinary ways. It is not unwise to allocate more time to properly framing a problem than to solving it. And the framing should ultimately be stated as simply as possible. Challenge your team to express the core issue in a single sentence, and in as few words as possible (understanding that a lot of thought, time and effort can be invested in making the complex simple). If you can’t express it both clearly and in very brief form, odds are it is not a problem well enough defined to solve effectively.
See the Problem From Another Direction
What other ways can you look at a problem as you frame it? Can you take either a broader or more narrow view? Can you come at it from a different angle or from the perspective of another stakeholder?
Here’s an example. Someone shared an old logic problem with me last week that took me back to middle-school days. A person pays $1 dollar to enter a fairground, then $1 dollar each to sequentially enter four different game booths at the fair, and another $1 to get out of each booth. While inside each of those four booths, our unlucky fair goer loses half of her remaining money before moving on to the next booth. There is also a fee of $1 required to get out of the fairground (it’s a very unusual fair, and based on the facts outlined above, probably poorly attended). The fair goer exits the fair (after paying her final $1) with no money. How much did she have when she entered?
Typically, problem solvers would start noodling at the key question first: how much money did the fair goer have starting out? The same way we tend to read from left to right, we tend to start work on our solution at the top of the narrative. That leaves us trying to create some complex equation to solve for a series of unknowns as we work our way through the permutations at the various booths at the fair. Instead, simply frame the problem in reverse, and focus on the knowns: where are the places where we can be sure how much money the fair goer had? We know for certain she had $1 dollar left as she paid to exit the fair. We know she had $2 left when she exited the final booth ($1 to get out of the booth, $1 to get out of the fair). We know she had $4 after she paid to enter the final booth, because she lost half of her remaining stake there. We then know she had $5 going into the last booth, because she had to pay $1 to enter, and so forth. The reverse framing makes the problem easy to solve in your head. Alter the perspective, and issues can become easier to address.
Choose Your Framing Language Carefully
Language matters, and the way we talk about a problem colors our thinking around it. Consider the investment challenge of beating market averages, for example. Long-term investing performance is not well served by the language used on televised, all-day investment programs. While investing and gambling are two very different pursuits, you’ll frequently hear phrases such as “I took some off the table today;” or “I sold half my position after the stock ran up and am playing with the house’s money now.” The second phrase is a particularly ridiculous construct, of course: the money belongs to the investor, regardless of how it was made. There is no “house.” But somehow using that language gives the investor permission to view one dollar differently from another, even though they have equal economic value. The wrong framing language can have dangerous consequences.
With any business problem, presumptive language in the framing is another area to avoid. Any foreshadowing of a preferred or assumed solution path when describing the challenge can limit the range and creativity of the solutions your team produces.
Avoid Jumping to Solutions
“We need to hire new call center representatives,” for instance, is not an effective problem statement; it is a solution masquerading as a problem. The real question is why you might think you need more staffing in customer care roles: what issue in the business are you really working to solve?
There’s a common methodology called “the five whys” that might be helpful in getting to the root of an issue. State what you think is the problem, then ask a series of five “why” questions to get to the more foundational challenge. In the example above, the dialogue might go something like this:
Why do you need more call center staff? Because our phone wait times are too long, and customers are becoming frustrated
Why are wait times too long? Because our sales volumes have gone up, and customers have questions they need answered
Why do customers have questions? Because they don’t always understand which of our products would best fit their needs
Why do they not understand which products are the best fit? Because the solution sets we sell are highly customized and complex, often confusing customers
Why are the solution sets you offer so confusing? Because we have not packaged them with a clear product/need diagnostic that any customer could easily apply
It’s just an example, but you get the idea: the root problem to solve may be very different from the initially outlined solution.
Analogies Can Lead to Innovative Framing
Another way to energize your team as they seek new ways of framing problems is to use analogous situations from other industries. If you operate in a B2B business, how would a consumer franchise state the problem differently? If you are in manufacturing, how would a financial services firm think about a similar challenge? The broader the perspective, the more interesting the framing can become.
If you’re interested in reframing some of your business challenges and coming up with fresh solutions, please reach out to us via info@riverfall.is. We look forward to meeting with you!