Are we solving the right problems? : Mike's Design Thinking Commentary
This week I was posed with the question, are we even solving the right problem. With perfect timing, HBR addresses the topic in an article from Thomas Weddell-Weddellsborg. When you get a moment, give it a read (the link is at the bottom). However, for those with short attention spans here is my summary:
“..when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead, usually without noticing the substitution.” By Daniel Kahneman of ‘Thinking, fast and slow’
1. TRIZ, Six Sigma, Agile and other frameworks help with execution, not conception.
There is a HUGE difference between strategic thinking and design thinking. These frameworks serve an awesome purpose. However, they do not enable us to play in dark, fuzzy, unstructured space of problem diagnosis. A design thinker and practitioner is trained to be comfortable in GREY and spending enough time in this space before concluding a problem/solution. When we use the right tool at the right time we can unlock greatness.
2. Whys and root cause analysis –
In short, asking why (over and over again) helps us dig deeper. We live in a world which is not linear or predictable. Notions of boundaries are blurring. Businesses need newer skills not only to solve the problem but predict it. Ability to connect the dots and make sense is critical and a must have in today’s fast paced technology driven world. Design Thinking, being a discipline that has been delivering unimaginable solutions so far, needs to do the same to businesses.
3. The elevator problem –
Reframing a problem helps in finding opportunities. A faster or efficient motor would be an obvious improvement to an elevator. However, it would have only reduced the time without touching upon the other ‘behavior’ aspects such as a mirror. Finding unique solutions is rooted in ‘understanding people, their needs, behaviors, attitudes’
4. America’s Dog-Adoption Problem –
It is important to spend time in getting to know the obvious problem leading to a non-obvious problem. Then collaboratively explore various solutions another principle of Design thinking.
5. Seven Practices for Effective Reframing-
Has been beautifully articulated which touches upon some of the non-obvious challenges in implementing this approach such as convincing the stakeholder!
6. Get people’s definitions in writing.-
This is the exact reason why David Kelly does not approve of conducting Focus Groups for insights!! When we are talking about pain points, it is important that each stakeholder articulates his/her version. Superficially even if people agree to the same problem, the reality is that there are finer nuances which are missed in the traditional approach.
7. Ask what's missing –
Only when we change the frame of vision, can we see things differently. Once you’ve reached a point of satisfaction take a step back and look at it from a ‘birds eye view’.
As promised a link to the referenced article
We are not solving the right problems or the most important, because we worry about the wrong issues.
Information Security Officer/Senior Project Manager at Bureau Veritas
7 年So true. In today's fast pace environment where solutions need to be delivered at light speed, so often do you find negligible time spent on understanding the requirement or finding the root cause of the problem.
I enjoyed your article
Definitions in writing is a great idea. Thank you for the summary and the link.