Without strong problem solving skills, organizations either fail to thrive or wither when conditions change. A study of hundreds of problem solving efforts at medium and large companies found that more than half fail to reach their problem solving goals, the Harvard Business Review recently reported. The good news is that problem solving and decision making skills can be improved with a structured approach.
There are a variety of problem solving techniques, including design thinking, which stresses prototyping and testing to arrive at the best solutions. This article will examine a three step process that starts by accurately framing the problem to be solved, digging into root causes, and creating a testable action plan.
“What problem are you trying to solve?” The question – posed by a top Toyota consultant – is at the heart of a problem-solving analysis published in the MIT Sloan Management Review. The author had been charged with implementing a new production system for Harley-Davidson. He wanted answers, not questions. How much will the project cost? How soon can it start? What results can we expect?
The consultant insisted on having his own question answered first. The author thought the consultant was simply playing word games, but later realized he was trying to teach problem framing.
Too often leaders and teams skip this step, considering the problem to be obvious. They rely on experience and fall back on old solutions instead of breaking new ground. Here are two ways of framing a problem to avoid that trap:
“Frame-storming.” A Harvard Business Review article suggests “frame-storming” – or looking at a problem from different angles – to achieve better results. The author writes, “Frame-storming helps teams identify assumptions and blind spots, mitigating the risk of inadequate or biased solutions.”
Storytelling. Another approach, published in a different MIT Sloan Management Review, is to create a story centered around a quest. The story needs just three elements: (1) a hero, (2) a dragon, and (3) a treasure. The hero must reach the treasure by overcoming the dragon. “The story framework helps get to the heart of the challenge. It highlights the critical pain points and lays bare assumptions,” the authors write.
In the words of Steve Jobs: “If you define the problem correctly, you almost have the solution.”
With the problem properly framed, the team needs to investigate its cause or causes. Root cause analysis is a technique designed to peel back the layers of a problem to reach “proximate” (or ultimate) cause. Root cause analysis is used in a variety of fields with many variations. Some techniques include:
The “five whys”: The “five whys” is a method adopted by the Toyota corporation. For each problem, ask a series of five “why” questions – each succeeding question being prompted by the previous answer. The “whys” are designed to probe ever more deeply to reveal otherwise hidden issues. For example, if the answer to the first question is X, then ask: Why does X exist? And so on.
The “fishbone diagram”: The “fishbone diagram” is often used in product development and manufacturing. The branches of the diagram help visualize the different elements of a process to identify both primary and contributing causes.
The “iceberg model”: The “iceberg model” was proposed in a Harvard Business Review article. It seeks to uncover deeper reasons for a problem by considering, in turn, the events surrounding the problem, the reactions of stakeholders, the processes involved, and the contributing assumptions or mental models.
Whichever method you choose, the root cause analysis should dig beneath the surface to find the “problems behind the problem”, and highlight the steps needed to develop a solution.
“Structured problem solving is nothing more than the essential elements of the scientific method” applied to business, according to MIT. The authors propose an “iterative method” borrowed from Total Quality Management: “Plan-Do-Check-Act.” Teams develop a solution (Plan), try the solution (Do), evaluate the results (Check), and modify the solution as needed (Act).
Limited scope. Solutions should be narrowly tailored to the problem. “The needed changes will rarely be an entirely new program or initiative[.]” Instead, they should be “specific, targeted modifications” based on the root cause analysis.
Goals and guidelines. The solution should set a specific overall goal, which the authors call a “prediction” about how much improvement the changes will make. The solution also needs guidelines – boundaries the solution cannot cross – like reducing product quality or increasing customer wait times.
Test and evaluate. Finally, observe the solution in action and make changes if needed. The plan should be “broken into a set of clear and distinct activities” that can be observed and measured. Track the results and modify any activities that fail to produce the desired results.
Problem solving is a team effort, particularly when consequential, “bet the company” issues arise. Leaders need the best insights from their team members, but team dynamics can make the process difficult to manage. Below are practical tips to get the most out of teams.
Cognitive diversity and psychological safety. A study published in the Harvard Business Review found that the most successful problem solving teams shared two traits.
The first trait of successful teams is having a mix of problem solving “behaviors,” which the authors call “cognitive diversity.” These behaviors include collaboration, maintaining discipline, breaking rules, inventing new approaches, and more. The key to success was not to allow one type of behavior to dominate the others.
The second trait of successful teams is “psychological safety,” which the authors describe as, “the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes.” The authors found that even cognitively diverse teams failed to complete their tasks when team members did not feel psychologically safe and became reluctant to contribute.
Methodical meetings. The most practical tip for problem solving teams is to be methodical, according to another Harvard Business Review article. The author writes that individuals solve problems intuitively, through strategies developed over a lifetime.
But because individuals don’t move through the stages of problem solving in a sequential fashion, it can be difficult to keep teams on track. “In order for groups to collaborate effectively and avoid talking past one another, members must simultaneously occupy the same problem-solving stage.”
The solution is the “methodical meeting,” in which team members expressly identify each stage of the process and complete that stage before moving on. While the approach may seem slow and plodding, it can have an unexpected benefit: “[T]horoughly conquering any individual problem-solving stage . . . frequently allows you to leapfrog ahead, sometimes to the very end of the problem-solving cycle.”
With a structured approach and a bit of practice, organizations can become expert problem solvers. If you would like to learn more about problem solving, please contact us.
Copyright ©️ 2025 by Stephen Wullschleger. All rights reserved.
Leave a Reply