Track 2: Problem Framing

(From the series 'How I Approach Solutioning')

Description

In this track I suggest we ask ourselves: if I were working in the client's organisation, how would I ask for better value? Effective problem framing often involves choosing whether to accept, refine, or fundamentally rethink the client's original framing based on what will lead to the most impactful, achievable outcomes. Is the problem shared with us the real issue, or only part of it? The point of reframing is to see if there are ways to amplify value within the scope or adjacent needs.

Here's a range of examples:

• A client seeks training for a new role which needs to serve internal customers. However, there are no clear guidelines for role practitioners to follow. This is can be an opportunity to develop both individual skills and organisational insights that could feed into broader processes.
• A tech client seeks training to reduce support tickets during customer onboarding. This can often be approached more broadly, exploring opportunities to improve feature accessibility or even providing tailored quick-start resources.
• An organisation asks to update their training program. The designer can verify if the audience, objectives and so on still align with present day business goals.

Useful capabilities

Knowledge of multiple problem patterns and solutions from different points of view like training, organisational, domain and operations

Exploring possible questions

What are 'problem patterns and solutions from different points of view'?

When faced with an application training, we immediately realise that the module design must have something like a ‘show me-try me-test me’. The problem here is ‘how to teach an application’ and the solution is 'show-try-test'. This is from a training perspective. The domain pov will likely have an impact on the training side too. For instance, there is a difference between a standalone application, an enterprise application and a software tool. Knowing these variations and what they mean for training project scope is important and relevant.

Why does it matter for problem framing? Sometimes we spot opportunities for better framing based on solution option availability. By definition, you can only have a strategy if you have equally viable, competing options you need to select from.

What if training is not part of the problem frame?

A legit worry to have! There are two parts to this. First, a client is seldom totally off-base. Before a requirement comes to us training vendors, multiple people and validations are usually involved. You can still encounter a problem of a training department trying to use up its funds and therefore insisting on a pointless training module. But in this case, you’re not likely to find a profound framing that deviates from the ask because you’ll simply not have that rich a brief to work with.

Now let’s consider the situation where training is genuinely not part of your problem frame. This is now guided by your negotiation ability, internal environment, professional goals, etc etc. I don’t like pushing stuff at clients in bad faith. I’m not claiming that refusing to do so is always an easy conversation. But, in mature companies, I’ve found that the attitude is “let’s earn the client’s trust because we want a lasting relationship.” And I’ve never met a client who got mad that we were truthful and tried to save them money!

Am I overcomplicating or adding value?

Reframing is not always about making the matter bigger. The basic litmus test is whether there is clear and obvious benefit. If you’re suggesting the ultimate bulldozer to move a stack of papers, that’s not value addition.

Doing it better

Intelligently explore constraints

A consultative approach is not just about using a mix of open-ended and close-ended questions, as so many web articles claim! Instead, it is about being able to use expert knowledge to identify how more value can be created and about communicating these opportunities effectively. Consultants don’t just ask questions. They also offer guidance, thought process, analysis and ideas.

‘So that’ your thinking

‘So that’ is one of the most helpful ways to think through your considerations. Why is something important? It needs to be done so that xyz can happen. This step needs to be taken so that that step is possible. Once of the simplest ways to stop ourselves from thinking in fragments without adequate reasoning is to force ourselves to narrate things with coherent causal reasoning. ‘So that’ is the thinking complement of asking ‘why’.

Embrace the grunt work

Even though we're in problem framing, it can be really useful to have a clear idea of the eventual solution. Do whatever it takes to get into the details the way you would need to for implementing the actual solution. This is a basic feasibility and effectiveness check. It helps convince you if your framing is correct or wildly off the mark.

I’ve noticed a common tendency to think that seniors will do the high-level abstract work and that the detailed stuff, like actually going through 20 input documents, can be delegated to a junior. Don’t do that. Be absolutely familiar with the details. You won’t believe how useful it is when you’re presenting to the project sponsor and SME. If in the middle of a conversation, you’re able to cite a content example or detail to illustrate your point, you’ll have your SME in your corner from the get-go.

?

Some things that help

1. Don’t be inhibited by raw content or initial learning objectives. A part of the service you can offer already (as well as incidentally demonstrate your design intelligence, understanding of client needs and business drivers, etc.) is to even re-ideate the objectives for the business outcome actually required.
2. Don’t focus on just the wording. I have to add this because I did mention re-ideating objectives and in general, we’re all guilty of misusing Bloom’s taxonomy as a mere thesaurus of learning verbs! Problem framing is about substance, not just form.
3. Develop judgment of what’s a good kind of basic question to ask. Pay attention to the responses your questions evoke from clients. One of the largest, deepest problem reframes I came up with was on account of asking, “You mentioned it’s vital to understand the business. What does that look like?”
4. Gauge which clients will be receptive to your reframing the problem. A dramatic reframe is anyway not likely a solo judgment you’ll make in your role as a learning consultant; you'll probably need the buy-in of various stakeholders in your own organisation. Consult them, use these discussions to refine your own judgment.

?

I trust you're starting to get a sense of why I consider these 'tracks' than 'steps': to become clearer about the problem, you may need to ask further questions and collect more information. As you gain clarity in your problem framing you may put it aside and quickly do the solution check before coming back to finesse the problem frame.

Some elements to keep in mind

• I’m often enviously asked, “how do you get all the cool projects?!”, so let me share a secret. Consulting opportunities and good projects don’t drop into your lap; you have to materialise them. How well you do your problem-framing and solutioning decides how meaningful the project will be.
• Every training vendor wants to be a partner and talks about moving up the value chain. This 2nd track is an amazing opportunity to create value for your internal team as much as for the client. Help your company do more intelligent design so that you can compete on the basis of talent rather than low cost offerings. Doing the latter invariably squeezes team members into long hours of low-satisfaction work and forces us to just offer free rounds of rework as client PR. You’re enabling your company to set a completely different, mature dynamic when you start coming up with great problem framing.
• Offer samples or portions of your thinking for free: I just think generosity of thought is a wonderful thing, and when you’re a generous expert people are more ready to approach you, talk to you... they remember you. Even if you don’t get the pitch you put in the effort for, the client will remember you for their next requirement and come back.
• RFPs are usually not the time for radical reframing. Organisations’ Procurement teams are mainly just trying to do an apples-to-apples comparison during an RFP that goes to multiple vendors, so completely changing the rules of the game may not be feasible. That said, you may still get a sense from the RFP language at times that the client is looking for someone to do exactly that. Seize the chance!
• Usually by the time you get to do real solutioning in presales work, you’ve had a fair amount of practice with straightforward presales. You’re probably already in the habit of 'reading' your stakeholders to gauge how much sway they have in their organisation. If your point of contact doesn’t have a degree of power to make things happen, this whole exercise is a non-starter. In a related vein, consider that there is always history, culture and politics. If you’re offering a radical change, expect resistance and every form of objection.
• Don’t reinvent the client’s business! Sometimes it’s easy for us to get carried away with the prescriptive spirit. No matter how much we research the focus at hand, there’s always going to be a ton more to the client’s business and pressures that we’re ignorant of. We need to stay humble and realistic about that and not put off the very client we’re trying to help!
• Domain depth is part of the deep end of design work. If we’re solutioning, the problems we’re addressing are partially rooted in business and not just training matters. We do need to be willing to develop our business knowledge, knowledge of the industry, the subject, etc. We can’t expect to solve complex problems in domains we’ve no clue of. We can’t restrict ourselves to being shallow learners who try to get away with knowing as little as possible or who will try to survive on exclusively ‘tips and tricks’. We need to be absolutely comfortable with serious effort and heavy content.

This is a complex track, so here is a summary of some things it may be helpful to remember when you're in the middle of problem framing. :)

Other articles in this series:

• Solutioning vs TNA - Yes, There Is a Difference!
• Track 1: Understanding the Ask

#ProblemFraming #StrategicReframing, #Solutioning #Consulting #ProblemSolving #EffectiveSolutioning #TrainingDesign #LearningConsultant #ValueCreation #ValueChain #Strategy