Just what's your problem?

Welcome to These Three Things - protein snacks for the business mind. And especially to those who've recently subscribed.

Today we turn to problems, their diagnosis, and the craft of reframing.?

One of my favourite moments in qualitative research was standing beside a man called Paul as he stared at a car and after a long pause, said? “I’m not being funny but I think this is the solution to a problem nobody has.” He was, of course, being very funny, and since you ask, it was a Vauxhall Meriva.

It's very easy to define a problem in a way which reflects your own assumptions. It's then a short hop to solution which uses your particular expertise or resources. It's also seductive, because white collar professionals are answer producing machines and we feel a certain pleasure in generating ideas that other people nod at.??

The problem is that we end up with dodgy ideas, products and projects. ‘Clearly, the answer is or is in the metaverse’ or ‘What if there was a lager, that was kind of an ale, that was kind of a lager?’? or ‘A ruinously expensive train line bisecting the country should do the trick’.?

To avoid this, do these three things.

1 Get a pen: write a problem statement.

I mean write it out using one clear sentence. Show it to people and see if they agree with it. And work it till it squeals the truth.?

Here’s a couple of examples:?

Not great. People are under-motivated around here and this needs addressing.?

(Which people?? How do you know? ‘Re-motivating’ people is baked into the problem statement.)?

Much better: Our distribution partners don’t value our offer the way they used to and this threatens access to our end-customers.

(It’s clear where the problem is and what the consequences might be.)?

You want the following criteria for your problem definition:

• Is it true?
• Is it clear what the problem is??
• It is clear who has it / where it sits?

(Watch out for is the solution baked into the problem framing.)?

2 Press pause: explore the frame?

Here’s a counterintuitive hint. Hit pause. Stop looking for solutions. Find some patience, even if your organisation is performatively impatient. (‘It’s the metaverse you asshole!’)

Exploring the frame is when you broadly accept the problem statement and dig deeper or seek overlooked aspects of the problem at hand.??

For example, if you’re a cinema marketer, you’re working the problem of the price barrier. (Hang on, I've just paid ￡14?)? So you develop alternative pricing models to lessen the pain: ￡4.99 if you’re 18-25 Monday to Thursday, membership tiers, ￡19.99 unlimited visits. If you’re a pub, you’ve got underused space in the day so you offer a ￡10 workers’ playtime day pass with good wifi and a ‘free’ pint. (Cheers, Brewdog).?

There are many ways to go about this, but I’d recommend these as a starter.?

• Go and visit the problem.? Speak to people involved. Visit the contact centre. Go full detective.? As a team, use your notes from visits to generate sticky notes about struggles, motivations or needs.?

• Draw the problem. Sketching out the steps or facets of what’s going on is revealing and instructive. Stick people are good.??

3 Try the side door : change the frame

Rather than keep knocking at the front door to gain entry, try a different entrance.??

Changing the frame is when you don’t accept the problem statement and insist on a different perspective. Dyson’s original genius was to change the frame that dust was dirty and you should hide it: a Dyson vacuum showed the stuff you were living in.?

But often the frame to change is the psychological one. Rather than trying to manufacture or code your way to a solution,? home in on the human problem and how it might be addressed imaginatively.

At Houston Airport, they were getting increasing numbers of complaints about the wait at the baggage carousels for domestic flight arrival. It was averaging 8 minutes. They tried workarounds, extra shifts, improved digital signage and got it down to 6 minutes but the number of complaints just increased.?

So they broke the frame. What if the problem wasn’t the actual time, but the ‘felt’ time: everyone hates waiting around. The solution was to create a (rationally) pointless diversion between the flight and the baggage areas, adding five minutes walking time.? No one minds walking that much because they feel like they’re doing something, and by the time you got to your bags you had about a minute to wait.

Rory Sutherland is an excellent guide to the psy-ops of frame breaking.? Around the time of plans for the first high speed train (HS1), he pointed out that if the framing of the problem was reducing journey time by 40m, then you should build an expensive new railway of ￡6 billion.? But if the frame was journey satisfaction, you could save two thirds of the budget by having supermodels serve champagne on the trains for the life of the railway.? And people would complain that the journey was too short.

For more on this fascinating area, do read Thomas Wedell-Wedellsborg’s excellent ‘What’s Your Problem’.