Problem-Solving Process

Problem-Solving Process

There is a variety of problem-solving processes. But each process consists of a series
of steps - identifying the problem, searching for possible solutions, selecting the most
optimal solution and implementing a possible solution. It is useful to view problem
solving as a cycle because, sometimes, a problem needs several attempts to solve it
or the problem changes.

 Identifying the Problem: 

The first step in the problem solving process is sizing up

the situation to identify the problem. That sounds simple enough, but sometimes
managers might be uncertain about what the problem is; they might just feel general
anxiety or be confused about what is getting in the way of their objectives. If that is the
case, they can ask themselves or their friends or a professional expert. Other useful
techniques for identifying the problem include-

• Comparison with others
• Monitor for weak signals
• Comparison of current performance with objectives or past performance
• Checklists
• Brainstorming
• Listing complaints
• Role playing

Exploring the Problem: 

Having identified the problem, managers should analyze
it to see what the root cause is. Often people get caught up in symptoms or effects of
a problem or issue and never get down to the real cause. They get mad at someone’s
attitude, anger, or actions, which are not the cause of the problem. The key here is to
focus on analyzing the problem for the real cause without being affected by emotional
issues. Seeing answers for questions such as the following will help explore the problem:

Identify the Problem – Ask Who?
• Who says that this is a problem?
• Who caused or is causing the problem?
• Whom does it or will it affect?
• Who has done something about the problem?

Identify the Problem – Ask What?
• What happened or will happen?
• What are the symptoms?
• What are the consequences for others?
• What circumstances surround the occurrence of the problem?
• What is not functioning as desired?

Identify the Problem – Ask When?
• Did it or will it happen?
• Why did it happen?
• When did it first occur?

Identify the Problem – Ask Where?
• Where is the problem occurring?
• Did it or will it have an impact?
• Where did it have an impact?

Identify the Problem – Ask Why?
• Why is this, a problem?
• Did it or will it occur?
• Why did it occur?
• Why was nothing done to prevent the problem from occurring?
• Why did no one recognize and do something about the problem at the
earliest?
• Why is a response needed now?

Identify the Problem – Ask How?
• How should the process be working?
• How are others dealing with this or similar problems?
• How do you know this is a problem; what supporting information do you
have?

Once the cause is found, plans can be made to fix it. Analyzing implies gathering
information. If there is not enough information, they should figure out how to research
and collect it

Approach for Problem-Solving

Approach for Problem-Solving

Lateral or Creative Problem-Solving

During 1950 -1960, some significant research was done by Roger Sperry, which won
him the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1981. Sperry’s work demonstrated that human
brain is divided into two major parts or hemispheres - the right brain and the left brain.

The left brain is associated with verbal, logical, and analytical thinking. It excels in
naming and categorizing things, symbolic abstraction, speech, reading, writing and
arithmetic. The left brain is very linear: it places things in sequential order - first things
first and then second things second, etc. Left brain engages in a very systematic,
sequential and exact approach to getting the job done. The left brain strives for accuracy
in the process of the job being done.

The right brain, on the other hand, functions in a non-verbal manner and excels in visual,
spatial, perceptual, and intuitive information. It is associated with the realm of creativity.
The right brain processes information differently than the left brain. The processing
happens very quickly and the style of processing is non-linear and non-sequential. The
right brain looks at the whole picture and quickly seeks to determine the spatial
relationships of all the parts as they relate to the whole. This component of the brain is
not concerned with things falling into patterns because of prescribed rules.

So, lateral or creative problem solving does not follow a standard set of procedures. It
is a ‘subconscious process based on past distilled experiences’. It is based more on
the gut feeling of the manager than on an objective process of weighing alternatives.

There are a set of conditions and it is accepted that under those conditions intuitive
approach is generally preferred to rational approach. Intuitive method is preferred when:

• a high level of uncertainty exists,
• there is little precedence to draw on,
• variables are not reliably predictable,
• facts are limited or facts are contradictory,
• analytical data are of little use,
• there are several plausible solutions; and
• time is limited and decision must be made

The creative problem-solving is flexible. So it can be used to examine real problems
and issues. According to ‘brainstorming’ creator Alex Osborn and Dr Sidney Parnes,
creative problem-solving process involves six steps, which together provide a structured
procedure for identifying challenges, generating ideas and implementing innovative
solutions. Following are the six steps:

1. Objective (Mess) Finding: The problem solver discusses the situation about
the problem and brainstorms a list of objectives or goals which he/she might
have for him/her creative effort. Through some process, arrive at consensus on
one or more objectives the group is willing to attempt.

2. Fact Finding: The problem-solver brainstorms all the facts which might even
remotely be related to the objective. S/he has made sure that each perspective
and participant is represented on the listing. S/he has to take some time for the
participants to point out which facts they feel are most relevant to the objective
and its eventual solution.

3. Problem-Solving: One of the most powerful aspects of creativity is rephrasing
the problem definition to one which is both closer to the real problem and reveals
more obvious solutions. One technique for this is to brainstorm different ways
to state the problem. Most people recommend that the problem statement be
written as: “In what ways might we...” One has to pay particular attention to
changing the verbs and the nouns in the problem statement. Asking “Why?” and
“How?” will also result in some interesting problem statements. Let the owner of
the problem select the statement or statements which seem to best capture the
“real” problem.

4. Solution Finding: In this step, the ideas with the greatest potential are evaluated
and the problem owner selects an idea or set of ideas to take action on. One of
the most effective methods for this step is to brainstorm the criteria which
determine the best idea, like cost, appearance, etc., then select the most useful
criteria. These criteria are then used in a decision matrix in which every idea is
evaluated on every criterion and the judgments combined to select the idea
worth putting into action.

5. Acceptance Finding: In this phase, the problem solvers consider the real world
issues of the change from the old way to the proposed new way as well as
issues that are likely to have a bearing upon the acceptance and implementation
of the envisaged change. The ideas developed in this step are then integrated
into the plan, increasing it’s likeliness of success.
Unlike many other problem-solving methods, the process emphasizes the need to defer
judgment on possible ideas and solutions until a final decision is made. In this way, the
flow of ideas in the third step is not interrupted, and possible solutions, however, bizarre,
are accepted.

Problem-Solving

Approaches to Problem-Solving

There are several different ways of problem-solving – all with their own advantages
and disadvantages. The process an individual adopts as a managing person will be influenced
by organizational policies, the kind of information available about the problem and his/
her own personality and communicative style.

Rational Problem-Solving

The brain can think in two ways - emotionally (governed by instinctive feelings) and
rationally (governed by acquired knowledge and beliefs).
Emotional thinking happens in the limbic system - an interconnected system of brain
nuclei associated with basic needs and emotions, for example, hunger, pain, pleasure,
satisfaction, sex, and instinctive motivation”). When something catches one’s attention,
the brain, in a lightning flash, looks through all the inherited and remembered patterns
to see if there is a match, and responds with the closest pattern that it can find. Emotional
thinking is very clear-cut, black and white, all or nothing. For example, when a black
shape on the path looks like a snake, one feels frightened and runs away.
Rational thinking, on the other hand, is a function of the part of the brain called the
neocortex - the wrinkled outer layer of the front parts of the brain (the cerebral
hemispheres), the functions of which include the perception of sensations, learning,
reasoning and memory. The power to think rationally gives an individual greater flexibility
of response. One has a lot more control over what one does. So that one realizes that
the black shape on the path, though it looks like a snake, could also be a stick, examines
it more closely before deciding what to do.
Rational problem solving rests on the following principles (R. K. Wagner - “Learning to
solve practical problems”):
• Problems are identified by comparing actual performance with an expected
standard performance
• Problems are deviations in actual performance from the expected standard
• A precise and complete description of the problem is needed to identify a
solution:

a) What is happening?
b) Where is it happening?
c) When is it happening?
d) To what extent is it happening?

• The cause of the problem will be found by comparing problem and non-problem
situations.
• Recent problems are a result of some change in the situation that has caused
an unwanted deviation from expectations.
The Rational Decision-Making Model requires the following steps which, if followed,
are assumed to lead to “value-maximizing choices.” The steps are as follows:

• define the problem,
• identify the decision criteria,
• weigh the criteria to determine rank of importance,
• generate possible alternative solutions,
• rate each alternative on each criteria, and
• compute the optimal decision.

The case again rational problem-solving is the flawed assumption that every problem
is defined clearly and precisely, which might not be always possible. Also, rating each
of the alternative problem-solutions relatively in terms of set or predetermined criteria
can be a tricky task.

Problem-solving Obstacles

Problem-solving Obstacles 

 Fixation is the inability to see a problem from a fresh perspective. Again,
initial perceptions and structuring of a problem often determine the approaches people
use to solve that problem. Structuring a problem incorrectly is a prime contributor to
the inability to solve a problem correctly. To overcome fixation, people should see the
problem with “fresh eyes” - allow time for reflection and incubation. They should focus
on other issues, and then return to the original problem. Time away from a problem
allows one to forget incorrect solutions and focus on developing new ideas.

 Problem-solving can be impaired by biases of personal beliefs,
a misunderstanding of information relevant to solving problems, and overconfidence.
The solution is to study a problem objectively with all available accurate information
and use objective reasoning to achieve a reasonable, sound decision. People should
be sure that they understand the problem and find what constitutes a solution. They
should obtain as much accurate and comprehensive information from unbiased sources
possible and maintain objectivity in evaluating ideas to minimize personal bias. They
should assess their decisions critically and be able to defend their ideas.

Poor Problem-Solving

Poor Problem-Solving - Insufficiency of Hypotheses

Often, while solving problems, a solver seizes upon the first explanation that comes to mind and stops thinking about the problem. This difficulty is related to confirmation bias, but reflects insufficient thought applied to a problem. Many times, the immediate answer is sufficient. Other times, however, only a careful analysis of a situation beyond the immediate response is necessary to ensure a correct solution.

To avoid poor problem-solving resulting from insufficiency of
hypothesis, people should develop alternative ideas, rather than seizing upon the first
idea as the solution. They should spend time thinking about the issues - allow time for
reflection and avoid framing the problem so that only one idea emerges.

Poor problem solving

Poor problem solving - Conformation Bias 

Confirmation bias is the tendency on the part of the people to search for only the information that supports their perceived notions. Initial perceptions and ideas of people about a problem often shape the search process for information.

It is important to maintain objectivity in evaluating ideas so that they are not biased
toward their initial perceptions.

The possible solutions include:
• Considering alternative hypotheses - view the problem from different
perspectives.
• Looking for evidence to disprove their ideas - showing that a particular idea is
incorrect is as important as showing an idea is correct.
• Maintain objectivity while evaluating ideas to minimize personal bias.
• Drawing conclusions based upon the evidence, not upon their personal beliefs.

Problem-Solving

Problem-Solving-Group shift

: ‘Group shift’ is a phenomenon in which the initial positions of individual
members of a group are exaggerated toward a more extreme position. More often,
however, the shift is toward greater risk. What happens in groups is that the discussion
leads to a significant shift in the positions of members toward a more extreme position
in the direction in which they were already leaning before the discussion. Conservatives
become more cautious, and the more aggressive take on more risk.
The ‘Groupshift’ can be viewed as actually a special case of ‘groupthink’. The decision
of the group reflects the dominant decision-making norm that develops during the
group’s discussion. The greater occurrence of the shift toward risk can be due to any
of the following reasons:
• Discussion creates familiarization among the members. As they become more
comfortable with each other, they also become more bold and daring.
• People admire individuals who are willing to take risks. Group discussion
motivates members to show that they are at least as willing as their peers in
terms of taking risks.
• The most plausible explanation of the shift toward risk, however, seems to be
that the group diffuses responsibility.
• Group decisions free any single member from accountability for the group’s
final choice.

Poor Problem Solving

Poor Problem Solving-Group think

Group think

 ‘Group think’ is a term coined by psychologist Irving Janis. ‘Groupthink’
is a phenomenon in which the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of
alternative courses of action. It describes situations in which group pressures for
conformity discourage the group from critically appraising unusual, minority, or
unpopular views. ‘Groupthink’ is a bug that strikes groups and can dramatically hinder
their performance.

Some of the symptoms of ‘Groupthink’ are:
• Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk
and are overly optimistic.
• Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warning
contrary to group thinking.
• Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct,
ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.
• Excessive Stereotyping: The group constructs negative stereotypes of rivals
outside the group.
• Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express
arguments against the group’s stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing
such opposition as disloyalty.
• Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counterarguments.
• Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with
the group’s decision; silence is seen as consent.
• Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the
group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

Poor Problem-Solving

Poor Problem-Solving-Satisficing

Satisficing implies identifying and implementing a solution that is “good
enough.” According to Herb Simon, who coined the term, the tendency to ‘satisfice’
results in solving problems which do not lead to optimal solutions. Most often, people
look for solutions that had worked for them before. There may be better ways to reach
the outcome, but they simply ignore them. Searching for alternative and superior
solutions might entail an extra cost. The alternative solution might not prove worthy
enough, if the extra costs are not justified. On the other hand, the implicit costs of
ignoring the alternative solution can be relatively greater if the chosen solution, based
on prior experience, fails to deliver the expected outcome.

Michael Slote (“Satisficing Consequentialism”) gives the following examples of
satsificing. One involves a fairy-tale hero who, when rewarded by the gods with whatever
he asks for, just asks for himself and his family to be comfortably well-off. Another
involves a motel owner who gives some stranded motorists the first available room
rather than the best available room.

Causes of Poor Problem-Solving

Causes of Poor Problem-Solving

Ineffective or poor problem-solving can be the result of any of the following factors.
These factors act like blinkers, constricting the perspective of person in the process of
problem-solving.

 Bounded Rationality:

 Propounded by Herbert Simon, the concept of bounded
rationality assumes that individuals make decisions by constructing simplified models
that extract the essential features from problems without capturing all their complexity.
Simon remarks that a majority of the people are only partly rational, and are in fact
emotional/irrational in the remaining part of their actions. He indicates two major causes
of bounded rationality:

a. Limitations of the human mind
b. The structure within which the mind operates

He states that boundedly rational people experience limits in formulating and solving
problems. As a result, when calculating expected utility, people do not make the best
choices.

For example, a person may choose to buy a particular brand of new cell-phone, based
on the information he gathered from advertisements and friends. Constrained by
bounded rationality, he will turn down even if he is offered a better bargain. Often,
bounded rationality could also be caused by “inverted intelligence” - clever people
who can easily argue that the information must be wrong.

Problem-solving Skills

Problem-solving Skills

Just ask ‘Why?’
Sometimes, as we look for approaches to creative thinking, we forget that many of the
most powerful techniques are also the simplest...
Leonardo da Vinci, one of the most creative thinkers in history, says of his inspiration:
“I roamed the countryside searching for answers to things I did not understand. Why
shells exist on the tops of mountains along with imprints of plants usually found in the
sea. Why thunder lasts longer than that which causes it. How circles of water form
around the spot which has been struck by a stone. And how a bird suspends itself in
the air. Questions like these engaged my thought throughout my life”.
It is easy to forget, as we rush through our lives, that curiosity is an essential foundation
for creativity.
Look around the world, keep asking ‘Why?’ and ‘Why not?’, and you will soon
see new opportunities.
Source: Idea Champions

Problem-solving Skills

Problem-solving Skills - What is a Problem?

When confronted with problem, according to Robert Harris (“Introduction to Problem
Solving”), people are likely to adopt either of the two approaches – spot it or mop it -
when confronted with a problem.

1. Stop It
A stop-it approach seeks to solve a problem, so that the problem no longer exists. Its
three forms are prevention, elimination, and reduction.

• Prevent It. Preventing a problem from occurring or recurring is the most ideal
solution. The prevention approach is often a difficult one to apply because it
requires predictive foresight (“this might be a problem someday if we don’t act
now”). For example, by preventing a cold, or an automobile accident, one can
avoid the need to deal any further with a problem or its effects.
• Eliminate It. Eliminating a problem once and for all is also an ideal way of
attacking a problem. If a tank were leaking, an elimination solution would be to
plug/seal or otherwise repair the leak, the cause of the problem. To solve by
eliminating should be considered in nearly every problem situation.
• Reduce It. The magnitude of any problem can be lessened by reducing its
size. Suppose the tank is leaking and a repair (an elimination-solution) is not
possible until a day or two later. The problem could be reduced by turning off
the incoming water. Without line pressure on the tank, the leak would slow down;
that would be better than a full force leak.

2. Mop It
A mop-it approach focuses on the effects of a problem. Instead of treating the leak
itself, the water on the floor is mopped up - the effects of the problem.
• Treat It. Here the damage caused by the problem is repaired or treated. The
water on the floor is mopped up and the damaged floor is fixed. But, it should
be noted that: (1) by itself a treat-it solution is not going to be nearly as effective
as some form of stop-it solution and (2) treat-it solutions are often needed in
addition to an elimination or reduction form of solution.
• Tolerate It. In this form of mop-it approach, the effects of the problem are put
up with. In the leaky water example, one might install a drain in the floor, or
waterproof the floor. The effects are taken for granted and measures are taken
to endure them.
• Redirect It. Here the problem is deflected. Sometimes the problem will simply
be redefined as not a problem. It is hard to think of a legitimate redirection for
the leaking water problem, but suppose that the leak is small and the floor is not
being damaged. One might say, “Well, I need the humidity; the leak is actually a
good thing.” It should be remembered that a problem is a problem only when
someone defines it as such.

we must take cognizance of the fact that problem solving is an ongoing activity.
Prof. Jeff Malpas (“Problem solving for Managers”) says: “No problem is ever totally
solved. Every problem has a solution, but every solution with it brings a new problem.
Some well-known management techniques emphasize the idea of continuous
improvement and successful problem-solving is seen as part of such continuous
improvement.”
we should know that problem-solving is less a matter of continuous improvement
as of continuous adjustment. Every solution will have unintended consequences. Every
effective system gives rise to friction and failure. Good management and effective
problem-solving depend upon a willingness to adapt to the situation and recognize the
ongoing and partial character of all attempts to manage or to solve.

Problem-solving Skills

Problem-solving Skills

“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than in trying to
solve them.” Henry Ford

Good problem solving skills empower individuals in their professional and personal
lives. Good problem solving skills seldom come naturally; they are consciously learnt
and nurtured. The repertoire of good problem solving skills includes:
• developing creative and innovative solutions;
• developing practical solutions;
• showing independence and initiative in identifying problems and solving
them;
• applying a range of strategies to problem-solving;
• applying problem-solving strategies across a range of areas;

What is a Problem?

1. A problem is an opportunity for improvement. “Every problem has a gift for you
in its hands,” says Richard Bach. Someone coined the word “probortunity” – an acronym
combining the words “problem” and “opportunity”. A probortunity is a reminder to look
at problems as possible opportunities. An optimist looks at challenging or problematic
events as potential opportunities for improvement. He is seen always seeking answers
for the questions such as:
• Is there more than one probortunity?
• Is it my personal probortunity? Is it the organization’s probortunity?
• Is it an actual probortunity or just an annoyance?
• Is this the real probortunity, or merely a symptom of a larger one?

2. A problem is the difference between the actual state and desired state. A
problem could also be the result of the knowledge that there is a gap between the
actual and desired or ideal state of objectives. Clarity of the problem is determined by
the clarity of the knowledge of what precisely one wants and what one has. Greater
clarity of the problem helps in finding a better and effective solution.

3. A problem results from the recognition of a present imperfect and the belief
in the possibility of a better future. The belief that one’s hopes can be achieved will
give one the will to aim towards a better future. Hopes challenge one’s potential, and
challenge is another definition of a problem.