structured problem solving training

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

• Quality Improvement
• Talk To Minitab

The Basics of Structured Problem-Solving Methodologies: DMAIC & 8D

Topics: Minitab Engage

When it comes to solving a problem, organizations want to get to the root cause of the problem, as quickly as possible. They also want to ensure that they find the most effective solution to that problem, make sure the solution is implemented fully, and is sustained into the future so that the problem no longer occurs. The best way to do this is by implementing structured problem-solving. In this blog post, we’ll briefly cover structured problem-solving and the best improvement methodologies to achieve operational excellence. Before we dive into ways Minitab can help, let’s first cover the basics of problem-solving.

WHAT IS STRUCTURED PROBLEM-SOLVING?

Structured problem-solving is a disciplined approach that breaks down the problem-solving process into discrete steps with clear objectives. This method enables you to tackle complex problems, while ensuring you’re resolving the right ones. It also ensures that you fully understand those problems, you've considered the reasonable solutions, and are effectively implementing and sustaining them.

WHAT IS A STRUCTURED PROBLEM-SOLVING METHODOLOGY?

A structured problem-solving methodology is a technique that consists of a series of phases that a project must pass through before it gets completed. The goal of a methodology is to highlight the intention behind solving a particular problem and offers a strategic way to resolve it. WHAT ARE THE BEST PROBLEM-SOLVING METHODOLOGIES?

That depends on the problem you’re trying to solve for your improvement initiative. The structure and discipline of completing all the steps in each methodology is more important than the specific methodology chosen. To help you easily visualize these methodologies, we’ve created the Periodic Table of Problem-Solving Methodologies. Now let’s cover two important methodologies for successful process improvement and problem prevention: DMAIC and 8D .

8D is known as the Eight Disciplines of problem-solving. It consists of eight steps to solve difficult, recurring, or critical problems. The methodology consists of problem-solving tools to help you identify, correct, and eliminate the source of problems within your organization. If the problem you’re trying to solve is complex and needs to be resolved quickly, 8D might be the right methodology to implement for your organization. Each methodology could be supported with a project template, where its roadmap corresponds to the set of phases in that methodology. It is a best practice to complete each step of a given methodology, before moving on to the next one.

MINITAB ENGAGE, YOUR SOLUTION TO EFFECTIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING

Minitab Engage TM was built to help organizations drive innovation and improvement initiatives. What makes our solution unique is that it combines structured problem-solving methodologies with tools and dashboards to help you plan, execute, and measure your innovation initiatives! There are many problem-solving methodologies and tools to help you get started. We have the ultimate end-to-end improvement solution to help you reach innovation success.

Ready to explore structured problem-solving?

Download our free eBook to discover the top methodologies and tools to help you accelerate your innovation programs.

See how our experts can train your company to better understand and utilize data. Find out more about our Training Services today!

You Might Also Like

• Trust Center

© 2023 Minitab, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookies Settings

Serving technical professionals globally for over 75 years. Learn more about us.

MIT Professional Education 700 Technology Square Building NE48-200 Cambridge, MA 02139 USA

Accessibility

Solving Complex Problems: Structured Thinking, Design Principles, and AI

Sang-Gook Kim

Download the Course Schedule

How do you solve important, large-scale challenges with evolving and contradictory constraints? In this 5-day course, transform your approach to large-scale problem solving, from multi-stakeholder engineering projects to the online spread of misinformation. Alongside engineers and leaders from diverse industries, you’ll explore actionable innovative frameworks for assessing, communicating, and implementing complex systems—and significantly increase your likelihood of success.

THIS COURSE MAY BE TAKEN INDIVIDUALLY OR AS PART OF THE  PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATE PROGRAM IN INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY  OR THE  PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATE PROGRAM IN DESIGN & MANUFACTURING .

Engineering projects with shifting goals. Inefficient national healthcare systems. The online spread of misinformation. Every day, professionals are tasked with addressing major challenges that present opportunities for great triumph—or significant failure. How do you approach an important, large-scale challenge with evolving and contradictory constraints? Is the solution a new technology, a new policy, or something else altogether? In our new course Solving Complex Problems: Structured Thinking, Design Principles, and AI , you’ll acquire core principles that will change the way you approach and solve large-scale challenges—increasing your likelihood of success. Over the course of five days, you will explore proven design principles, heuristic-based insights, and problem-solving approaches, and learn how to persuasively present concepts and system architectures to stakeholders. Methods utilize recent developments in AI and Big Data, as well as innovative strategies from MIT Lincoln Laboratory that have been successfully applied to large and complex national defense systems. By taking part in interactive lectures and hands-on projects, you will learn to think through and leverage important steps, including problem abstraction, idea generation, concept development and refinement, system-level thinking, and proposal generation. Alongside an accomplished group of global peers, you will explore the strategies and frameworks you need to implement large-scale systems that can have a significant positive impact—and minimize the probability of failure.

Certificate of Completion from MIT Professional Education  

• Approach and solve large and complex problems.
• Assess end-to-end processes and associated challenges, in order to significantly increase the likelihood of success in developing more complex systems.
• Implement effective problem-solving techniques, including abstracting the problem, idea generation, concept development and refinement, system-level thinking, and proposal generation.
• Utilize system-level thinking skills to evaluate, refine, down select, and evaluate best ideas and concepts.
• Apply the Axiomatic Design methodology to a broad range of applications in manufacturing, product design, software, and architecture.
• Generate and present proposals that clearly articulate innovative ideas, clarify the limits of current strategies, define potential customers and impact, and outline a success-oriented system development and risk mitigation plan.
• Effectively communicate ideas and persuade others, and provide valuable feedback.
• Confidently develop and execute large-scale system concepts that will drive significant positive impact.

Edwin F. David Head of the Engineering Division, MIT Lincoln Laboratory

Jonathan E. Gans Group Leader of the Systems and Architectures Group, MIT Lincoln Laboratory

Robert T-I. Shin Principal Staff in the Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Tactical Systems Division, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Director, MIT Beaver Works

This course is appropriate for professionals who design or manage complex systems with shifting needs and goals. It is also well suited to those who want to improve the quality and performance of their operations and decision-making in a large-scale system environment. Potential participants include engineers, group leaders, and senior managers in government and industries including automotive, aerospace, semiconductors, engineering, manufacturing, healthcare, bio-medical, finance, architecture, public policy, education, and military.

Computer Requirements

A laptop with PowerPoint is required.

Guide: A3 Problem Solving

Author: Daniel Croft

Daniel Croft is an experienced continuous improvement manager with a Lean Six Sigma Black Belt and a Bachelor's degree in Business Management. With more than ten years of experience applying his skills across various industries, Daniel specializes in optimizing processes and improving efficiency. His approach combines practical experience with a deep understanding of business fundamentals to drive meaningful change.

Problem-solving is one of the key tools a successful business needs to structure improvements and one I have been using to solve problems in a structured way in my career at a range of businesses over the years. When there is a problem in business that is leading to increased costs, waste , quality issues, etc., it is necessary to address these problems. A3 structured problem solving is a Lean Six Sigma methodology that has been designed and developed to support continuous improvement and solve complex business problems in a logical and structured process. 

The guide will give you a full understanding of what A3 Problem solving is and a breakdown of all the steps of how to apply it within your business with an example of where I have made improvements with it previously.

Importance of A3 in Lean Management

The A3 problem-solving method is a key tool in Lean Six Sigma and continuous improvement in business, and in my experience, it is often the standard approach all improvement activities must follow and is particularly popular in the automotive industry. This is because of the following:

Focus on Root Causes : Rather than applying a quick fix to a problem or jumping to conclusions and solutionizing, A3 requires gaining a deep understanding of the root causes of the problem. By addressing these root causes, the chances of recurrence is reduced.

Standardization : With a consistent format, the A3 process ensures that problems are approached in a standardized way, regardless of the team or department. This standardization creates a common language and understanding across the organization and ensures all problems are addressed to the same standard and approach.

Team Involvement : An A3 isn’t an individual process. It requires a cross-functional team to work together on problem-solving, ensuring that a range of perspectives and expertise is considered. This collective approach builds a stronger understanding of the problem and ensures that solutions are well-rounded and robust.

Visual Storytelling : The A3 report serves as a visual storyboard, making it easier for stakeholders at all levels to understand the problem, the analysis, and the countermeasures. This visualization enhances communication and drives alignment.

The 6 Steps of A3 Problem Solving (With Real Example)

The A3 problem-solving process can initially seem difficult if you have never done one before and particularly if you have never been a team member in one. To help you with this we will break down the 6 steps into manageable activities, followed by a real-life example to help you apply this method within your business.

As a side note, the A3 problem-solving process was actually one of the first Lean Six Sigma tools I learned to use three weeks into my continuous improvement career after being thrown into the deep end due to resource availability, so I can understand how difficult it can be to understand. 

Step 1: Describe the problem

Problem description.

The problem description is an important first step in the process as it ensures a common understanding with the team of what the issue is that needs to be addressed. This can be done by using a technique called the 5W1H Is/Is Not method to help gain a clear understanding of the problem. 

To understand the 5W1H Is/Is Not the Process, check out our guide for details of that technique. However, in short, it’s about asking key questions about the problem, for example, “What IS the problem?” and “What IS NOT the problem?”

Let’s say you have been asked to look into a problem where “Machine downtime on the automotive assembly line has increased by 30% over the past three months, leading to production delays and increased costs.”

An example of a 5W1H Is/Is Not on this may result in the following output:

 Based on this we can create a clear problem description as the focus of the project that give the team a clear and common understanding of the issue looking to be resolved in the next steps of the process. The problem description could then be written as:

“Over the past three months, machine downtime on Automotive Assembly Line No.3 has increased by 30%. This has predominantly affected the assembly line workers and leads, leading to production delays and higher labour costs. “

Current Condition

Next is demonstrating the current condition and demonstrating the impact on the business. This can often be done with data and charts to back up the problem that might show trends or changes in outputs.

This might look something like the below and demonstrate a good baseline for confirming the improvement at the end of the A3

Containment Actions

Next is containment actions. Since you have identified a problem, there is likely an impact on the business or the customer. As a team, you should consider what can be done to limit or eliminate this problem in the short term. Remember this is just a containment action and should not be seen as a long-term fix. 

In our situation we decided to “Implement temporary overtime shifts to meet production goals, leading to an increase in labor costs.”

At this stage, the A3 should look similar to the one below; you can use charts and graphics to represent the current state as well if they fit within the limit area. Remember, we must include the content of the A3 within the 1-page A3 Document.

Step 2: Set the A3 Goals

The next step of the A3 is to, as a team, set the goal for the project. As we have a clear understanding of the current condition of the problem, we can use that as our baseline for improvement and set a realistic target for improvement. 

A suggested method for setting the Target condition would be to use the SMART Target method.

If you are not familiar with SMART Targets , read our guide; it will cover the topic in much more detail. In short, a SMART target creates a goal statement that is specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. 

By doing this you make it very clear what the goal of the project is, how it will be measured, it is something that can be achieved, relevant to the needs of the business and has a deadline for when results need to be seen.

For our A3 we decided that the goal would be “Our goal is to achieve at least a 20% reduction in machine downtime on Automotive Assembly Line No.3, lowering it from 90 minutes to no more than 72 minutes per day per machine, within the next 60 days. This reduction is crucial for increasing productivity and reducing labour costs, aligning with our overall business objectives.”

I also recommend using charts in this section to visualize the benefit or improvement to ensure you have stakeholder and sponsor support. Visuals are much easier and faster for people to understand.

At this point, your A3 might look something like the one below, with the first 1/4 or section complete. The next step is to move on to the root cause analysis to get to the root of the problem and ensure the improvement does not focus on addressing the symptoms of the problem.

Step 3: Root Cause Analysis

Root cause analysis is the next step in the process, often referred to as gap analysis, as this step focuses on how to get to the goal condition from the current condition.

Tip: If at this point you find the team going off-topic and focusing on other issues, Ask the question, “Is this preventing us from hitting our goal statement?”  I have found this very useful for keeping on track in my time as an A3 facilitator.

For root cause analysis, a couple of key tools are usually used: a fishbone diagram and a five-why Analysis . Again, we won’t go into the full details of these tools within this guide, as they have been covered in extensive detail in their own guides.

But the aim at this point is as a team, to brainstorm what is preventing us from achieving our target condition. This is done by allowing all members of the team to input the reasons they think it is not being achieved. These inputs are often written on sticky notes and placed on the fishbone diagram. Following this, you may have results similar to the ones below.  Note: it is important that the inputs are specific so they can be understood. e.g. “Calibration” alone is not specific to how it’s causing the problem; specify it with “Calibration: Inaccurate measurements affecting machine settings.”

After the fishbone diagram has been populated and the team has exhausted all ideas, the team should then vote on the most likely cause to explore with a 5 Whys analysis. This is done because, due to resource limitations, it is unlikely all of the suggestions can be explored and actioned.

In this situation the team decided the “lack of preventative machines: machines not being serviced regularly” was the cause of increased downtime. This was explored with the 5 Whys to get to the root cause of why Assembly Line 3 did not have preventative maintenance implemented.

The result of this root cause analysis can be seen below, and you may end up with more ideas on the fishbone, as generally there are a lot of ideas generated by a diverse team during brainstorming.

Step 4: Solutions and Corrective Actions

Now that we understand what the root cause of the problem is, we need to address it with solutions and corrective actions. Again, as a team, consider the root cause of the problem and discuss what actions need to be taken by the team, who will do them, and when they will be done. The result should be an action plan, for example, like the one below:

This action plan needs to be carried out and implemented.

The result of this section will likely just be an action list and look like the below section.

Step 5: Validate Solution and Standardize

Within step 5 it is time to collect data to validate and confirm the actions that have been implemented resulting in solving the problem and meeting the target state of the problem. This is done by continuing to collect data that demonstrates the problem in the baseline to see if the problem is being reduced.

For example, below, the project team continued to collect Assembly Line 3 downtime data on a weekly basis. Initially, there was a steady reduction, likely due to the focus of the project on the problem, which had some impact. However, once the majority of the action was implemented, a huge drop in product downtime was seen, exceeding the target. This showed the actions have been successful

If, in the validation stage, you find that the improvement required is not being made, you should go back to step 3 and reconsider the root cause analysis with the team, pick another area to focus on, and create an action plan for that following the same steps.

Step 6: Preventive Actions and Lessons Learned

In step 6 after the confirmation of project success you should look at preventive actions and lessons learned to be shared from this project:

• Preventive Action: The new preventive maintenance schedule will be standardized across all assembly lines. This will prevent other lines having similar issues and make further improvements
• Lessons Learned: A formal review will be conducted to document the process, including challenges faced and how they were overcome, which will then be archived for future reference.

In our project, this looked like the one below and will be used as a reference point in the future for similar issues. 

And that is the successful completion of a structured A3 problem-solving technique.

The complete A3 looks like the below image. Yours may slightly differ as the problem and information vary between projects.

Downloadable A3 Reporting Template

To support you with your A3 problem solving, you can download our free A3 problem solving report from the template section of the website.

Problem-solving is important in businesses, specifically when faced with increased costs or quality issues. A3 Structured Problem Solving, rooted in Lean Six Sigma, addresses complex business challenges systematically.

Originally from Toyota’s lean methodology, A3, named after the 11″x17″ paper size, visually maps problem-solving processes. This method ensures concise communication and focuses on crucial details, as illustrated by the provided example.

Emphasized in Lean Management, A3 stresses understanding root causes, standardization across teams, team collaboration, and visual representation for clarity. This tool is not only a guide to understanding the issue but is a standardized format ensuring robust solutions. Particularly for novices, breaking down its six steps, from problem description to setting A3 goals and root cause analysis, provides clarity. Visual aids further enhance comprehension and alignment across stakeholders.

• Sobek II, D.K. and Jimmerson, C., 2004. A3 reports: tool for process improvement. In  IIE Annual Conference. Proceedings  (p. 1). Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE).
• Matthews, D.D., 2018.  The A3 workbook: unlock your problem-solving mind . CRC Press.

Q: What is A3 problem solving?

A: A3 problem solving is a structured approach used to tackle complex problems and find effective solutions. It gets its name from the A3-sized paper that is typically used to document the problem-solving process.

Q: What are the key benefits of using A3 problem solving?

A: A3 problem solving provides several benefits, including improved communication, enhanced teamwork, better problem understanding, increased problem-solving effectiveness, and the development of a culture of continuous improvement.

Q: How does A3 problem solving differ from other problem-solving methods?

A: A3 problem solving emphasizes a systematic and structured approach, focusing on problem understanding, root cause analysis, and the development and implementation of countermeasures. It promotes a holistic view of the problem and encourages collaboration and learning throughout the process.

Q: What are the main steps in the A3 problem-solving process?

A: The A3 problem-solving process typically involves the following steps: problem identification and description, current condition analysis, goal setting, root cause analysis, countermeasure development, implementation planning, action plan execution, and follow-up and evaluation.

Q: What is the purpose of the problem identification and description step?

A: The problem identification and description step is crucial for clarifying the problem, its impact, and the desired outcome. It helps establish a common understanding among the team members and ensures everyone is working towards the same goal.

Daniel Croft

Hi im Daniel continuous improvement manager with a Black Belt in Lean Six Sigma and over 10 years of real-world experience across a range sectors, I have a passion for optimizing processes and creating a culture of efficiency. I wanted to create Learn Lean Siigma to be a platform dedicated to Lean Six Sigma and process improvement insights and provide all the guides, tools, techniques and templates I looked for in one place as someone new to the world of Lean Six Sigma and Continuous improvement.

Free Lean Six Sigma Templates

Improve your Lean Six Sigma projects with our free templates. They're designed to make implementation and management easier, helping you achieve better results.

Was this helpful?

Continuous Improvement Toolkit

Effective Tools for Business and Life!

A3 Thinking: A Structured Approach to Problem Solving

• 5 MINUTES READ

Also known as A3 Problem Solving.

Variants include 8D and CAPA.

A significant part of a leader’s role involves addressing problems as they arise. Various approaches and tools are available to facilitate problem-solving which is the driving force behind continuous improvement. These methods range from the advanced and more complex methodologies like Six Sigma to the simpler and more straightforward A3 thinking approach.

The power of the A3 approach lies in its systematic and structured approach to problem-solving. Although it appears to be a step-by-step process, A3 is built around the PDCA philosophy. It relies on the principle that it is much better to address the real root-cause rather than trying to find a solution. Hence, it’s important not to jump to the solution when solving a problem as it is likely to be less effective.

A3 thinking provides an effective way to bring together many of the problem-solving tools into one place. For example, techniques such as the 5 Whys and fishbone analysis can be used during the ‘Analysis’ stage to help identifying the root causes. Additionally, visual aids and graphs are highly recommended in the A3 report, as they are more effective than text in communicating ideas and providing concise project updates.

A3 thinking involves the practice of consolidating the problem, analysis, countermeasures, and action plan onto a single sheet of paper, commonly an A3-sized sheet. This brief document serves as a summary of the project at hand and is regarded as a valuable storytelling tool for project communication. Utilizing the A3 approach doesn’t require any specialized software or advanced computer skills. You may however use readily available A3 templates , or rely on basic tools such as paper, pencil and an eraser as you will need to erase and rewrite several times.

One of the characteristics of the A3 approach is that it does not get into specific details. Detailed documents are usually attached to the A3 report to prevent overwhelming the reader with an excess of information.

The A3 process is typically structured in multiple stages based on the PDCA model. The primary focus is on developing understanding of the current situation and defining the desired outcome before thinking about the solution. While the exact number of stages may vary depending on the preference of the company, what truly matters is adhering to a structured approach to problem-solving.

A3 Seven Stages Model

An A3 process is often managed by an individual who should own and maintain the A3 report. This individual takes the lead in steering the process, facilitating team involvement, and preparing the A3 report with team input. One of the most common models for A3 thinking is the seven stages model which is described in the following.

1. Background – The first step is to identify the business reason for choosing this problem or opportunity. In this stage, you need to identify the gap in performance and the extent of the problem.

2. Current situation – The purpose of this stage is to document the current state of the problem. You may need to refer to the process map or go to the Gemba to truly understand the current situation.

3. Target – The purpose of this stage is to define the desired future state. Clearly identify the expected benefits from solving the problem, the scope, and the key metrics that will help measure the success of the project.

4. Analysis – The objective of this stage is to conduct an in-depth analysis of the problem and understand why it’s happening. It might involve tools like the 5 Whys and cause-and-effect analysis, as well as advanced statistical methods.

5. Countermeasures – Countermeasures are the actions to be taken to eliminate root causes or reduce their effects. The team should brainstorm and evaluate possible countermeasures based on the analysis conducted earlier.

6. Implementation Plan – To achieve the target, develop a workable plan to implement the countermeasures. Gantt charts are great ways to manage implementation plans very simply and easily. Once the action plan is finalized, the team should begin working on the activities needed to implement the countermeasures.

7. Follow-up – The final stage involves evaluating the implementation of the plan and the results achieved. Follow-up actions are important to ensure the benefits extend beyond the project’s completion.

A3 thinking is considered to be the practical form of the PDCA model.

There are many online templates that can be used to manage your problem-solving efforts. One of the simplest and most straightforward ways is to use this A3 problem solving template .

Wrapping Up

A3 thinking represents a logical and structured approach for problem solving and continuous improvement. This approach can be used for most kinds of problems and in any part of the business. Originating from the Toyota Production System (TPS), it has been adopted by many Lean organizations around the world.

A3 thinking not only provides a systematic approach for problem-solving. The development of a continuous improvement culture is at the core of A3 thinking. It has become one of the most popular Lean tools today where people and teams work together to solve problems, share results and learn from each other.

Other Formats

Do you want to use the slides in your training courses?

A3 Thinking Training Material – $18.85

Related Articles

Project Charter

Gantt Chart

Related Templates

A3 Problem Solving

Written by:

CIToolkit Content Team

Critical Thinking and Structured Problem Solving

Effective critical thinking and problem-solving skills are indispensable for professionals who strive to help their organizations make well-informed business decisions rooted in robust evidence. While the complexity of problems may vary, a structured approach can be applied to nearly all situations, bolstering the prospects of long-term organizational success. In this intensive course, participants will learn about various analytical thinking techniques that can mitigate the influence of cognitive biases in decision-making.

Course Methodology

This course structure emphasizes a hands-on, practical approach to learning critical thinking and problem-solving skills, with activities designed to be directly applicable in a professional context.

Course Objectives

By the end of the course, participants will be able to:

• Apply critical thinking models to understand problems accurately and develop reasoned arguments
• Evaluate and synthesize information to devise innovative solutions to complex problems
• Implement developed solutions into organizational processes and measure their impact

Target Audience

This course is suitable for analysts, professionals, managers, and leaders at all levels within the organization.

Target Competencies

• Critical thinking
• Problem solving   
• Solution implementation
• Results based decision-making
• Understanding how we think and reason
• Confirmation bias
• Critical thinking principles
• Models and frameworks for critical analysis
• Defining the right issue
• Structuring complex problems
• Using logic trees in problem solving
• Data gathering and synthesis
• Evaluating solutions
• Feasibility analysis
• Translating outcomes into actionable plans
• Monitoring and measuring implementation outcomes

2024 Schedule & Fees

Per participant.

Fees + VAT as applicable

(including coffee breaks and a buffet lunch daily)

Location & Date

There are no public sessions remaining for the course this year. Please contact us if you wish to have a customized in-house session, or to find out how an additional public session can be scheduled.

Meirc reserves the right to alter dates, content, venue, trainer, and to offer courses in an integrated virtual learning (IVL) format whereby face to face classroom participants and virtual learners participate simultaneously in the same course in an interactive learning experience.

Tax Registration Number: 100239834300003

Course Outline

Schedule & fees.

Search Here

Call me back.

Give us your details and we’ll call you!

Quick Enquiry

Download brochure.

• 1st Floor, Building 13, Bay Square, Business Bay
• PO Box 5883, Dubai, UAE
• +971 4 556 7171 | 800 7100
• [email protected]
• Offices 901 & 902, Sultan International Tower, Corniche Road
• PO Box 62182, Abu Dhabi, UAE
• +971 2 491 0700 | 800 7100

UAE Tax Registration Number

100239834300003

• Al Awad Building, RUQA 7523 (DMS), Said bin Zaid Street, Qurtubah
• PO Box 220460, Riyadh 11311, KSA
• +966 11 451 7017 | 9200 13917
• Office 206, Sultana Square, Prince Sultan Road
• PO Box 1394, Jeddah 21414, KSA

KSA Tax Registration Number

311655469100003

Other Links

• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Course Selector

© 2024 Meirc Training & Consulting. All rights reserved.

McKinsey Problem Solving: Six steps to solve any problem and tell a persuasive story

The McKinsey problem solving process is a series of mindset shifts and structured approaches to thinking about and solving challenging problems. It is a useful approach for anyone working in the knowledge and information economy and needs to communicate ideas to other people.

Over the past several years of creating StrategyU, advising an undergraduates consulting group and running workshops for clients, I have found over and over again that the principles taught on this site and in this guide are a powerful way to improve the type of work and communication you do in a business setting.

When I first set out to teach these skills to the undergraduate consulting group at my alma mater, I was still working at BCG. I was spending my day building compelling presentations, yet was at a loss for how to teach these principles to the students I would talk with at night.

Through many rounds of iteration, I was able to land on a structured process and way of framing some of these principles such that people could immediately apply them to their work.

While the “official” McKinsey problem solving process is seven steps, I have outline my own spin on things – from experience at McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group. Here are six steps that will help you solve problems like a McKinsey Consultant:

Step #1: School is over, stop worrying about “what” to make and worry about the process, or the “how”

When I reflect back on my first role at McKinsey, I realize that my biggest challenge was unlearning everything I had learned over the previous 23 years. Throughout school you are asked to do specific things. For example, you are asked to write a 5 page paper on Benjamin Franklin — double spaced, 12 font and answering two or three specific questions.

In school, to be successful you follow these rules as close as you can. However, in consulting there are no rules on the “what.” Typically the problem you are asked to solve is ambiguous and complex — exactly why they hire you. In consulting, you are taught the rules around the “how” and have to then fill in the what.

The “how” can be taught and this entire site is founded on that belief. Here are some principles to get started:

Step #2: Thinking like a consultant requires a mindset shift

There are two pre-requisites to thinking like a consultant. Without these two traits you will struggle:

• A healthy obsession looking for a “better way” to do things
• Being open minded to shifting ideas and other approaches

In business school, I was sitting in one class when I noticed that all my classmates were doing the same thing — everyone was coming up with reasons why something should should not be done.

As I’ve spent more time working, I’ve realized this is a common phenomenon. The more you learn, the easier it becomes to come up with reasons to support the current state of affairs — likely driven by the status quo bias — an emotional state that favors not changing things. Even the best consultants will experience this emotion, but they are good at identifying it and pushing forward.

Key point : Creating an effective and persuasive consulting like presentation requires a comfort with uncertainty combined with a slightly delusional belief that you can figure anything out.

Step #3: Define the problem and make sure you are not solving a symptom

Before doing the work, time should be spent on defining the actual problem. Too often, people are solutions focused when they think about fixing something. Let’s say a company is struggling with profitability. Someone might define the problem as “we do not have enough growth.” This is jumping ahead to solutions — the goal may be to drive more growth, but this is not the actual issue. It is a symptom of a deeper problem.

Consider the following information:

• Costs have remained relatively constant and are actually below industry average so revenue must be the issue
• Revenue has been increasing, but at a slowing rate
• This company sells widgets and have had no slowdown on the number of units it has sold over the last five years
• However, the price per widget is actually below where it was five years ago
• There have been new entrants in the market in the last three years that have been backed by Venture Capital money and are aggressively pricing their products below costs

In a real-life project there will definitely be much more information and a team may take a full week coming up with a problem statement . Given the information above, we may come up with the following problem statement:

Problem Statement : The company is struggling to increase profitability due to decreasing prices driven by new entrants in the market. The company does not have a clear strategy to respond to the price pressure from competitors and lacks an overall product strategy to compete in this market.

Step 4: Dive in, make hypotheses and try to figure out how to “solve” the problem

Now the fun starts!

There are generally two approaches to thinking about information in a structured way and going back and forth between the two modes is what the consulting process is founded on.

First is top-down . This is what you should start with, especially for a newer “consultant.” This involves taking the problem statement and structuring an approach. This means developing multiple hypotheses — key questions you can either prove or disprove.

Given our problem statement, you may develop the following three hypotheses:

• Company X has room to improve its pricing strategy to increase profitability
• Company X can explore new market opportunities unlocked by new entrants
• Company X can explore new business models or operating models due to advances in technology

As you can see, these three statements identify different areas you can research and either prove or disprove. In a consulting team, you may have a “workstream leader” for each statement.

Once you establish the structure you you may shift to the second type of analysis: a bottom-up approach . This involves doing deep research around your problem statement, testing your hypotheses, running different analysis and continuing to ask more questions. As you do the analysis, you will begin to see different patterns that may unlock new questions, change your thinking or even confirm your existing hypotheses. You may need to tweak your hypotheses and structure as you learn new information.

A project vacillates many times between these two approaches. Here is a hypothetical timeline of a project:

Step 5: Make a slides like a consultant

The next step is taking the structure and research and turning it into a slide. When people see slides from McKinsey and BCG, they see something that is compelling and unique, but don’t really understand all the work that goes into those slides. Both companies have a healthy obsession (maybe not to some people!) with how things look, how things are structured and how they are presented.

They also don’t understand how much work is spent on telling a compelling “story.” The biggest mistake people make in the business world is mistaking showing a lot of information versus telling a compelling story. This is an easy mistake to make — especially if you are the one that did hours of analysis. It may seem important, but when it comes down to making a slide and a presentation, you end up deleting more information rather than adding. You really need to remember the following:

Data matters, but stories change hearts and minds

Here are four quick ways to improve your presentations:

Tip #1 — Format, format, format

Both McKinsey and BCG had style templates that were obsessively followed. Some key rules I like to follow:

• Make sure all text within your slide body is the same font size (harder than you would think)
• Do not go outside of the margins into the white space on the side
• All titles throughout the presentation should be 2 lines or less and stay the same font size
• Each slide should typically only make one strong point

Tip #2 — Titles are the takeaway

The title of the slide should be the key insight or takeaway and the slide area should prove the point. The below slide is an oversimplification of this:

Even in consulting, I found that people struggled with simplifying a message to one key theme per slide. If something is going to be presented live, the simpler the better. In reality, you are often giving someone presentations that they will read in depth and more information may make sense.

To go deeper, check out these 20 presentation and powerpoint tips .

Tip #3 — Have “MECE” Ideas for max persuasion

“MECE” means mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive — meaning all points listed cover the entire range of ideas while also being unique and differentiated from each other.

An extreme example would be this:

• Slide title: There are seven continents
• Slide content: The seven continents are North America, South America, Europe, Africa Asia, Antarctica, Australia

The list of continents provides seven distinct points that when taken together are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive . The MECE principle is not perfect — it is more of an ideal to push your logic in the right direction. Use it to continually improve and refine your story.

Applying this to a profitability problem at the highest level would look like this:

Goal: Increase profitability

2nd level: We can increase revenue or decrease costs

3rd level: We can increase revenue by selling more or increasing prices

Each level is MECE. It is almost impossible to argue against any of this (unless you are willing to commit accounting fraud!).

Tip #4 — Leveraging the Pyramid Principle

The pyramid principle is an approach popularized by Barbara Minto and essential to the structured problem solving approach I learned at McKinsey. Learning this approach has changed the way I look at any presentation since.

Here is a rough outline of how you can think about the pyramid principle as a way to structure a presentation:

As you build a presentation, you may have three sections for each hypothesis. As you think about the overall story, the three hypothesis (and the supporting evidence) will build on each other as a “story” to answer the defined problem. There are two ways to think about doing this — using inductive or deductive reasoning:

If we go back to our profitability example from above, you would say that increasing profitability was the core issue we developed. Lets assume that through research we found that our three hypotheses were true. Given this, you may start to build a high level presentation around the following three points:

These three ideas not only are distinct but they also build on each other. Combined, they tell a story of what the company should do and how they should react. Each of these three “points” may be a separate section in the presentation followed by several pages of detailed analysis. There may also be a shorter executive summary version of 5–10 pages that gives the high level story without as much data and analysis.

Step 6: The only way to improve is to get feedback and continue to practice

Ultimately, this process is not something you will master overnight. I’ve been consulting, either working for a firm or on my own for more than 10 years and am still looking for ways to make better presentations, become more persuasive and get feedback on individual slides.

The process never ends.

The best way to improve fast is to be working on a great team . Look for people around you that do this well and ask them for feedback. The more feedback, the more iterations and more presentations you make, the better you will become. Good luck!

If you enjoyed this post, you’ll get a kick out of all the free lessons I’ve shared that go a bit deeper. Check them out here .

Do you have a toolkit for business problem solving? I created Think Like a Strategy Consultant as an online course to make the tools of strategy consultants accessible to driven professionals, executives, and consultants. This course teaches you how to synthesize information into compelling insights, structure your information in ways that help you solve problems, and develop presentations that resonate at the C-Level. Click here to learn more or if you are interested in getting started now, enroll in the self-paced version ($497) or hands-on coaching version ($997). Both versions include lifetime access and all future updates.

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Get the Free Mini-Course

Learn to solve complex problems, write compellingly, and upgrade your thinking with our free mini-course.

Work With Us

Join 1,000+ professionals and students learning consulting skills and accelerating their careers

The Lean Post / Articles / How to A3: Resources for Developing Structured Problem-Solving and Leadership Skills

Problem Solving

How to A3: Resources for Developing Structured Problem-Solving and Leadership Skills

June 18, 2020

As LEI prepares its next course on Managing to Learn, here's a popular article rounding up a wealth of resources about practicing A3 Thinking by Tom Ehrenfeld

A3 reports have become one of the most popular lean tools today, a way for people and teams to work together to solve problems; and their widespread adoption could easily be viewed in lean terms as…a problem.

Tools often provide traction for getting started with lean practice, and A3s often deliver immediate results. The A3 ‘problem’ (a gap, in this case, between the intended purpose and actual usage) echoes the broader challenge facing widespread adoption of any proven TPS methodology: moving from lean tools to lean management , according to Jim Womack. As he notes, “Tools—for process analysis and for management—are wonderful things. And they are absolutely necessary. And managers love them because they seem to provide shortcuts to doing a better job. But they can’t achieve their potential results, and often can’t achieve any results, without managers with a lean state of mind to wield them.”

Let’s keep in mind the purpose of A3s, from the Introduction to John Shook’s key book on the topic, Managing to Learn   ( MtL ).

“Writing an A3 is the first step toward learning to use the A3 process, toward learning to learn. Some benefits in improved problem-solving, decision-making, and communications ability can be expected when individual A3 authors adopt this approach.”

All well and good. Unfortunately most organizations stop there, and don’t proceed to the next step. As Shook cautions, “unless the broader organization embraces the broader process, the much greater benefit will be unrealized. The entire effort may degenerate into a ‘check-the-box’ exercise, as A3s will join unused SPC charts, ignored standardized work forms, and disregarded value-stream maps as corporate wallpaper.”

So what exactly are A3 reports? A3 reports are a way of structuring and sharing knowledge that enables teams and their members to practice scientific thinking as a way of discovering and learning together. The tool promises immediate benefits by helping people structure and design more effective approaches to problems (framing them in solvable ways, taking a data-based approach, using root-cause-analysis to find the point of origin for problems (gaps), encouraging careful problem analysis over quick abstract “solutions,” and so forth).

Definitions include:

• A storyboard
• 5S for information
• Standardized story-telling
• A “visual manifestation of a problem-solving thought process involving continual dialogue between the owner of an issue and others in an organization.”

They are all that, and more. Essentially, A3 reports, named for the international-sized A3 paper (a larger page of roughly 11 by 17 inches), enable people in organizations to capture issues through a commonly understood template, permitting people to see problems through the same lens. The sequence is designed along the logic of scientific thinking—the PDCA cycle at the heart of lean thinking. You can download A3 templates from LEI here .

The basic thinking process captured by this format is relatively simple, and has been around in many other forms and formats for a long time. There are different types of A3s , according to the situation. But don’t work too hard to find the precisely right format; in fact, veterans such as David Verble stress the importance of starting your A3 not by writing but by thinking .

“The most fundamental use of the A3 is as a simple problem-solving tool. But the underlying principles and practices can be applied in any organizational setting. Given that the first use of the A3 as a tool is to standardize a methodology to understand and respond to problems, A3s encourage root cause analysis, reveal processes, and represent goals and actions in a format that triggers conversation and learning,” says John Shook in this piece sharing his purpose for writing MtL .

There’s no doubt that those with deep experience have found great power in A3 practice. For example, lean veteran Gary Convis says that he, “used the A3 format as a way of seeing inside the minds of the 113 plant managers,” citing his experience at Dana Holdings Corp , as well as elaborating on using A3 problem solving to make the thinking process visible .

Toyota veteran Tracey Richardson shares a hugely practical step-by-step tour of the A3 thinking process in her great article Create a Real A3, Do More than Fill In Boxes . In so doing she explains how an A3 is “a way of thinking with deeper benefits, a process based on the PDCA (plan, do, check, adjust) cycle designed to “share wisdom” with the rest of the organization.” Another terrific A3 “stroll” is provided in this recent piece by Jon Miller .

Tracey complements her brief user’s guide with a piece that suggests you Test Your PDCA Thinking By Reading Your A3 Backwards as a way of avoiding a common A3 hazard—jumping to conclusions.

When given a problem to solve, most individuals rush to provide the bestest solution the fastest. Yet the nature of A3 thinking requires careful framing of the problem, rigorous analysis of a clearly defined (and improvable “gap”), patient observation at the source, and real dialogue with the people touching the problem.

The A3 form exists to capture and document this material; it is not a formal document in and of itself. “If you’re ‘doing’ or ‘filling out’ an A3 behind your desk, I can say most of the time you will not be able to answer the questions above [listing the cause and effect logic of an A3],” says Tracey.

It’s worth noting that while there are different types of A3 reports, it’s useful to recognize that “not every situation requires an A3,” according to Norbert Majerus of Goodyear. In  To A3 or Not to A3 , he proposes a situational application that avoids a one-size-fits-all tool mindset. Specifically, he explains how the cynefin framework developed by Dave Snowden and Mary Boone can help navigate the different situations in one might apply A3 thinking.

Some argue that good problem-solving is not about having the right answers; it’s about practicing a useful, and commonly understood approach to thinking about thinking (learning). “Never lose sight of the thinking process that enables you to complete an A3—which then serves as a way of capturing, communicating, and building on what was learned,” says Tracey in A3: Tool or Process? Both…

In deepening this thinking-process through “A3 Mind,” you and your teammates can learn to activate what Daniel Kahneman calls both “fast” and “slow” thinking, says Michael Balle. “The key is to look at A3s as a physical support for managerial relationships based on expertise and teaching,” as a way to sustain A3 thinking in your organization , he notes. Such a shared approach can bring about a core lean goal: helping a problem-solving culture take root .

Managing to Learn

An Introduction to A3 Leadership and Problem-Solving.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Revolutionizing Logistics: DHL eCommerce’s Journey Applying Lean Thinking to Automation  

Podcast by Matthew Savas

Transforming Corporate Culture: Bestbath’s Approach to Scaling Problem-Solving Capability

Teaching Lean Thinking to Kids: A Conversation with Alan Goodman 

Podcast by Alan Goodman and Matthew Savas

Related books

A3 Getting Started Guide

by Lean Enterprise Institute

The Power of Process – A Story of Innovative Lean Process Development

by Eric Ethington and Matt Zayko

Related events

October 02, 2024 | In-Person (Oakland University in Rochester, MI) OR Coach-Led Online

November 05, 2024 | Redmond, WA or Morgantown, PA

Building a Lean Operating and Management System 

Explore topics.

Subscribe to get the very best of lean thinking delivered right to your inbox

Privacy overview.

Structured Problem-Solving in Quality Training

Systematic approach to Identify, Analyze, and Solve Quality Issues

Program Overview

The Structured Problem-Solving in Quality Training addresses continuous improvement in the realm of quality problem resolution, providing tools to identify and address root causes in a structured manner.

Training Topics

Reasons to take this training.

• Common Quality Problem-Solving Methodologies: 8D, A3, PDCA, Kobetsu KAIZEN™
• Problem Selection and Breakdown
• Quantification of each type of problem
• Definition of objectives
• Root Cause Analysis: Ishikawa, Regression Curves, Pareto
• Hypothesis Validation and Design of Experiments
• Root Cause Detection: 5 Whys, Hypothesis Testing
• Action Plans and Standardization
• Communication & Solution Extension
• Six Sigma & SPC Statistical Process Control
• Simulation Exercises
• Case Studies
• Understand the benefits of applying the KAIZEN methodology in the structured resolution of quality problems;
• Acquire skills to handle repetitive or highly complex quality issues efficiently;
• Learn advanced techniques to identify the root cause of quality-related problems;
• Develop knowledge on the best ways to manage daily challenges related to quality.

Target Audience

Professionals involved in quality management, quality engineers, and members of quality control teams who wish to optimize their skills in the identification and structured resolution of quality-related problems.

Want to know more?

Connect with one of our experts to learn about Structured Quality Problem Resolution Training adjusted to your organization’s needs

Build a training course targeted to your team

Training sessions

8 hours of group training in your facilities*

Certification

To get certified, an online test assessment must be completed

* Other formats, such as online training, may be available depending on your team’s characteristics and needs

Our material was developed through years of experience in classrooms and executive training rooms. Both Lynne and Patrick are available to create and deliver workshops for your organization or university.

Patrick’s consulting and executive education clients have included Microsoft, Bertelsmann, News Corp, New York Daily News, Occidental Petroleum, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merrill Lynch, the CDC, Dow Chemical, Sandia National Laboratories, INFORMS, Alcon, the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, Sea-Land, Central Bank of Nigeria, Cox Communications, Accenture, Johns Hopkins and Greenpeace.

Lynne’s consulting and executive education clients have included UPS, the US Army Rangers, Lowe’s, Georgia Power, Delta Air Lines, Fujitsu, Lucent Technologies, Warner Media, OneDigital, TD Bank, BTS Consulting, Crumbl Cookies, Insight Sourcing Group, Midtown Consulting Group, and Roark Capital.

5W2H Problem-Solving Method: Free Online Training

Provided By: Management and Strategy Institute

Table of Contents

Session 1: understanding the basics - introduction to problem-solving methodologies.

Welcome to the Management and Strategy Institute 5W2H Problem-Solving Method Training!  In this session, we will embark on a journey to explore the fundamental concepts of problem-solving and structured methodologies’ role in effectively addressing challenges.

Why Problem-Solving Matters:

Problem-solving is an integral part of our daily lives, both personally and professionally.  Whether it’s resolving conflicts, improving processes, or making critical decisions, we encounter problems regularly.

These problems come in all shapes and sizes, from simple puzzles to complex organizational issues.

Understanding how to approach and solve these problems is essential for personal growth and career development.  Effective problem-solving can increase productivity, improved decision-making, better relationships, and innovative solutions to long-standing challenges.

Common Challenges in Problem-Solving:

Before delving into structured methodologies, it’s crucial to recognize the common challenges we face when trying to solve problems:

• Complexity : Real-world problems are often multifaceted, involving numerous factors and stakeholders.  It’s easy to become overwhelmed by their intricacies.
• Biases : Cognitive biases , such as confirmation bias and anchoring, can cloud our judgment and lead us astray during problem-solving.
• Symptom-Focused : We tend to treat symptoms rather than address root causes, leading to temporary solutions that don’t address the underlying issues.

The Role of Structured Problem-Solving Methodologies:

Structured problem-solving methodologies provide a systematic approach to addressing challenges.  They offer a clear framework, step-by-step guidance, and tools to ensure that problems are thoroughly analyzed and solutions are based on evidence and data.

Examples of well-known structured methodologies include the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle, the Define – Measure – Analyze – Improve – Control (DMAIC) framework, and the Eight Disciplines (8D) problem-solving process.

Structured approaches help break down complex problems into manageable steps and foster team collaboration, communication, and accountability.

Introduction to 5W2H:

In this training program, we will focus on the 5W2H problem-solving method.  But what exactly is 5W2H?

• 5W : Stands for “What, Who, Where, When, Why.” These questions are used to understand a problem’s context and scope thoroughly.
• 2H : Represents “How and How Much.” These questions dig deeper into the problem by examining the processes, actions, and quantities involved.

The 5W2H method helps us dissect problems effectively and ensures we leave no stone unturned when identifying root causes and developing solutions.

Before we conclude this section, let’s recap the key takeaways:

• Problem-solving is essential in both personal and professional contexts.
• Common challenges in problem-solving include complexity, biases, and symptom-focused approaches.
• Structured methodologies offer a systematic approach to problem-solving.

For those who want to take their learning a step further, we invite you to think of a real problem you’ve encountered recently and consider how the 5W2H method might be applied.

Thank you for joining us for this introductory session.  We look forward to exploring the 5W2H method and its practical applications in the sections ahead.  Get ready to enhance your problem-solving skills and make more informed decisions!

Session 2: Overview of the 5W2H Method: A Framework for Effective Problem-Solving

The 5W2H method is a systematic and structured approach to problem-solving and decision-making.  This technique provides a clear framework for analyzing issues, identifying root causes, and developing actionable solutions.

The name “5W2H” stands for seven critical questions: What, Who, Where, When, Why, How, and How Much.  By asking and answering these questions, individuals and teams can comprehensively understand a problem or situation and make informed decisions.

The Seven Questions of 5W2H:

• What: This question seeks to define the problem or issue at hand.  What is happening, or what is the nature of the challenge?  What are the symptoms or manifestations of the problem?
• Who: Understanding the individuals, teams, or stakeholders involved is essential.  Who is affected by the problem, and who plays a role in its resolution?  Identifying key players helps allocate responsibility and resources effectively.
• Where: The “where” question examines the location or context of the problem.  Where does the issue occur, and are there specific geographic or environmental factors contributing to it?
• When: Timing is crucial in problem-solving.  When did the problem first arise, and how has it evolved?  Understanding the timeline helps prioritize actions and responses.
• Why: This question delves into the root causes of the problem.  Why is the issue occurring, and what factors or events have led to its existence?  Identifying the underlying causes is central to finding practical solutions.
• How: Exploring the “how” question involves understanding the processes, actions, or mechanisms contributing to the problem.  How does the issue manifest, and how do various elements interact to create it?
• How Much: This question focuses on quantitative aspects.  How much of the problem exists, or to what extent does it impact different aspects of the organization or situation?  Quantifying the issue aids in prioritizing efforts and measuring improvements.

Key Features and Benefits of the 5W2H Method:

• Structured Approach: The 5W2H method provides a step-by-step framework for problem-solving, ensuring no crucial aspects are overlooked.
• Comprehensive Analysis: By addressing the seven questions, individuals and teams gain a holistic understanding of the problem’s scope, causes, and effects.
• Clarity: The method encourages clear and concise communication, making it easier for team members to collaborate and share insights.
• Effective Decision-Making: Informed decisions are based on a thorough problem analysis, leading to more precise and impactful solutions.
• Applicability: The 5W2H method can be applied in various contexts, from troubleshooting technical issues to addressing complex organizational challenges.
• Continuous Improvement: Once solutions are implemented, the method can be used to measure the effectiveness of actions and make further adjustments if necessary.

Applications of the 5W2H Method:

The 5W2H method can be applied in a wide range of settings, including:

• Quality control and process improvement
• Project management and planning
• Root cause analysis for accidents or incidents
• Marketing strategy development
• Conflict resolution and team problem-solving
• Identifying opportunities for innovation

In summary, the 5W2H method is valuable for problem-solving and decision-making.  By systematically addressing the seven critical questions, individuals and teams can gain a comprehensive understanding of problems, identify root causes, and develop effective solutions.  This method promotes clarity, collaboration, and continuous improvement, making it an essential skill for individuals in various personal and professional roles.

Session 3: Benefits and advantages of the 5W2H method

The benefits and advantages of the 5W2H method are far-reaching, providing individuals and organizations with a powerful tool for addressing challenges of all sizes and complexities.  From fostering clarity and communication to facilitating informed decision-making and problem prioritization, the 5W2H method is a versatile and indispensable asset in the problem-solving toolkit.

In this exploration of the benefits and advantages of the 5W2H method, we will delve into why this structured approach has gained widespread acclaim.  We will uncover how it promotes comprehensive understanding, enhances accountability, and drives continuous improvement.

Whether you’re a professional seeking to improve your decision-making skills or an organization striving for efficiency and effectiveness, understanding the merits of the 5W2H method is the first step towards harnessing its full potential.  Join us as we unlock the power of structured problem-solving and discover how 5W2H can become your ally in tackling challenges head-on.

• Systematic Approach to Problem-Solving:
• The 5W2H method provides a structured and systematic approach to problem-solving.  By following a set of well-defined questions, individuals and teams can methodically analyze complex issues, ensuring that no critical aspect is overlooked.
• Comprehensive Understanding:
• By addressing the seven key questions (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How, and How Much), the method encourages a comprehensive understanding of the problem or situation.  This thorough analysis helps identify both the symptoms and root causes of issues.
• Clarity and Communication:
• The 5W2H method promotes clear and concise communication within teams or among stakeholders.  When everyone is on the same page regarding the problem’s scope and details, it becomes easier to collaborate effectively and share insights.
• Informed Decision-Making:
• Informed decisions result from a deep and structured analysis of the problem.  The 5W2H method empowers decision-makers to base their choices on data and evidence, leading to more precise and impactful solutions.
• Problem Prioritization:
• By asking “How Much,” the method allows individuals to quantify the extent and impact of the problem.  This quantification helps prioritize actions and resources, focusing on the most critical issues first.
• Applicability in Various Contexts:
• The 5W2H method is versatile and can be applied across different domains and industries.  It is equally valuable in technical troubleshooting, project management, marketing strategy development, root cause analysis, conflict resolution, and more.
• Continuous Improvement:
• Once solutions are implemented, the 5W2H method can be used to measure the effectiveness of actions.  If the problem persists or new issues arise, the method can be revisited to make further adjustments and improvements.
• Facilitation of Root Cause Analysis:
• Identifying the root causes of problems is a critical step in problem-solving.  The “Why” question in 5W2H focuses on uncovering these underlying factors, helping organizations address issues at their source rather than merely treating symptoms.
• Time and Resource Efficiency:
• By following a structured approach, organizations can save time and resources that might otherwise be wasted on trial-and-error solutions.  The 5W2H method encourages efficient problem-solving by guiding efforts in the right direction.
• Enhanced Accountability: – The method allocates responsibility and accountability by identifying the “Who” involved in the problem. This ensures that individuals or teams are accountable for specific actions and outcomes.
• Problem Prevention: – By understanding the “When” and “Why” aspects of problems, organizations can work proactively to prevent issues from occurring in the future.  This shift towards prevention can lead to long-term sustainability and reduced crisis management.

The 5W2H method offers numerous benefits and advantages for individuals and organizations seeking to improve their problem-solving and decision-making processes.  Its structured approach, comprehensive analysis, and versatility make it a valuable tool for tackling a wide range of challenges effectively and efficiently.

Session 4: The 5W2H Method: A Deep Dive into Each "W"

The 5W2H method is a systematic approach to problem-solving and decision-making that revolves around seven critical questions: What, Who, Where, When, Why, How, and How Much.  In this section, we will take a comprehensive look at each ” W ” question and explore their significance in the problem-solving process.

1. What: Defining the Problem

The first “W” stands for “What.” This question seeks to define the problem or issue at hand.  What is happening, or what is the nature of the challenge?  This is the starting point for any problem-solving endeavor, as it sets the stage for understanding the scope of the problem.  By clearly defining the “What,” individuals and teams can avoid confusion and ensure everyone is on the same page.

2. Who: Identifying the Stakeholders

The second “W” is “Who.” Understanding the individuals, teams, or stakeholders involved is essential.  Who is affected by the problem, and who plays a role in its resolution?  Identifying key players helps allocate responsibility and resources effectively.  It also facilitates communication and collaboration among team members, as everyone knows their part in the solution.

3. Where: Examining the Context

The third “W” represents “Where.” This question examines the location or context of the problem.  Where does the issue occur, and are specific geographic or environmental factors contributing to it?  Understanding the spatial and situational aspects of the problem can reveal crucial insights, particularly in cases where location plays a significant role.

4. When: Timing Is Key

Timing is crucial in problem-solving, and that’s where the fourth “W,” “When,” comes into play.  When did the problem first arise, and how has it evolved?  Understanding the timeline helps prioritize actions and responses.  It also enables individuals and organizations to assess whether the issue is an isolated incident or a recurring problem.

5. Why: Uncovering Root Causes

The fifth “W,” “Why,” is perhaps the most critical.  This question delves into the root causes of the problem.  Why is the issue occurring, and what factors or events have led to its existence?  Identifying the underlying causes is central to finding effective solutions.  It shifts the focus from treating symptoms to addressing the fundamental issues that give rise to the problem.

6. How: Understanding Processes and Mechanisms

“How” is the sixth “W” in the 5W2H method.  This question delves into understanding the processes, actions, or mechanisms contributing to the problem.  How does the issue manifest, and how do various elements interact to create it?  Analyzing the “How” provides insights into the mechanics of the problem, helping individuals and teams pinpoint areas for intervention.

7. How Much: Quantifying the Impact

The final “W,” “How Much,” focuses on quantitative aspects.  How much of the problem exists, or to what extent does it impact different aspects of the organization or situation?  Quantifying the issue aids in prioritizing efforts and measuring improvements.  It provides a basis for setting goals and benchmarks for the solution.

Each ” W ” question in the 5W2H method plays a crucial role in the problem-solving process.  Together, they form a comprehensive framework for understanding and dissecting challenges effectively.  By asking and answering these questions, individuals and teams gain a holistic perspective, from defining the problem’s scope to uncovering its root causes, all while fostering clear communication and informed decision-making.

Whether you’re troubleshooting a technical issue, optimizing a business process, or addressing a complex organizational challenge, the 5W2H method equips you with the tools to approach problems confidently and precisely.

Session 5: How to Formulate Relevant Questions for Effective Problem-Solving

Formulating relevant questions is a fundamental skill in problem-solving and decision-making.  In the context of the 5W2H method (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How, How Much), crafting well-thought-out questions is essential for gaining a deeper understanding of issues and ultimately arriving at effective solutions.  In this section, we’ll explore some guidelines and strategies for formulating relevant questions for your problem-solving endeavors.

Start with the Basics:

Begin by considering the basic “W” questions:

• What: What is the problem or issue you are trying to address?  Define the problem clearly and concisely.  Make sure your question encompasses the essence of the problem.
• Who: Who is involved or affected by the problem?  Identify the key stakeholders and individuals relevant to the issue.
• Where: Where does the problem occur?  Determine the location or context in which the problem is most prominent.
• When: When did the problem first arise, and how has it evolved over time?  Understand the timeline and any relevant historical context.

Dig Deeper with "Why" and "How" Questions:

• Why: To uncover the root causes of the problem, ask “Why” repeatedly.  This technique, often referred to as the “5 Whys,” involves asking “Why” multiple times to peel back the layers of causation.  For example, if the problem is a decrease in product quality, ask, “Why did the quality decrease?” and continue probing until you reach the underlying issues.
• How: To understand the mechanisms and processes contributing to the problem, ask “How.” This question explores the actions and interactions that lead to the issue.  For instance, if you’re dealing with a decrease in sales, ask, “How do our sales processes work, and where are they breaking down?”

Be Specific and Precise:

Relevance often hinges on specificity.  Avoid vague or ambiguous questions.  Instead, aim for precision.  Instead of asking, “Who is responsible for this issue?” ask, “Which department or individual owns the process related to this problem?”

Consider Multiple Perspectives:

Take into account different viewpoints and angles when formulating questions.  Consider the perspectives of various stakeholders, as they may offer unique insights.  For instance, when addressing a customer service issue, ask questions from the perspectives of both customers and customer service representatives.

Stay Open-Minded:

Don’t limit your questions to preconceived notions.  Maintain an open mind and allow the questions to guide your exploration.  Sometimes, unexpected questions can lead to breakthroughs in problem-solving.

Prioritize Key Questions:

Recognize that not all questions are equally important.  Prioritize your questions based on their relevance and potential impact to the problem.  Identify the “must-answer” questions that will provide the most critical insights.

Test Your Questions:

Before fully committing to a set of questions, test them with colleagues or team members.  Get feedback on whether the questions adequately address the problem and if they are clear and understandable.

Adapt and Iterate:

Problem-solving is often an iterative process .  As you gather information and insights, be prepared to adapt and refine your questions.  New information may lead to the formulation of additional questions or the modification of existing ones.

Effective problem-solving begins with asking the right questions.  By following these guidelines and strategies for formulating relevant questions, you can embark on a structured and insightful journey toward understanding complex issues, uncovering root causes, and ultimately arriving at well-informed and impactful solutions.  Remember that the art of asking relevant questions is a skill that improves with practice and experience, so don’t hesitate to apply it in your personal and professional problem-solving endeavors.

Session 6: The 2Hs - How and How Much: A Deeper Dive into "How" and "How Much" in the 5W2H Method

While the first five “Ws” help define the problem, its context, and its root causes, the last two “Hs” – How and How Much – are instrumental in diving deeper into the mechanics and quantifiable aspects of the problem.  In this section, we’ll explore the significance of “How” and “How Much” and how they contribute to a comprehensive problem-solving process.

Understanding "How":

The sixth “W,” “How,” delves into the processes, mechanisms, actions, and interactions that contribute to the problem.  This question seeks to uncover how the problem manifests and operates.  By understanding the “How,” individuals and teams gain insights into the dynamics at play and can pinpoint specific areas where interventions may be necessary.

Consider the following examples:

• Technical Troubleshooting: When addressing a technical issue, understanding “How” it occurs requires a detailed examination of the equipment, software, or systems involved.  It entails dissecting the steps and conditions leading to the problem’s occurrence.
• Process Improvement: In process improvement efforts, asking “How” helps identify bottlenecks, inefficiencies, or workflow breakdowns.  It encourages a step-by-step analysis of the current process to determine areas for optimization.
• Organizational Conflict Resolution: When dealing with conflicts within a team or organization, asking “How” explores communication dynamics, power structures, and interpersonal relationships.  It aids in understanding the underlying mechanisms contributing to the conflict.

Asking “How” can be a powerful tool for problem-solving, as it encourages a detailed and systematic examination of the problem’s inner workings.  It provides a foundation for designing targeted solutions and process improvements.

Exploring "How Much":

The seventh “W,” “How Much,” focuses on quantifiable aspects of the problem.  This question seeks to determine the extent and impact of the issue in terms of numbers, quantities, or measurements.  Quantification is essential for prioritizing actions and resources, setting benchmarks, and measuring the effectiveness of solutions.

Examples of “How Much” questions include:

• Financial Analysis: In financial problem-solving, understanding “How Much” involves quantifying losses, expenses, or revenue impacts.  It may also involve calculating return on investment (ROI) for potential solutions.
• Quality Control: When addressing quality issues, asking “How Much” may involve measuring defect rates, error frequencies, or customer complaints.  Quantifying the problem helps in setting quality improvement goals.
• Resource Allocation: In project management, understanding “How Much” can determine resource allocation, such as the number of team members needed, the time required, and the budget constraints.

Quantification through “How Much” questions provides a basis for decision-making.  It helps individuals and organizations allocate resources effectively, set realistic goals, and evaluate the progress and impact of implemented solutions.

The Synergy of "How" and "How Much":

“How” and “How Much” questions work in tandem to provide a holistic view of a problem.  While “How” uncovers the processes and mechanisms, “How Much” quantifies the problem’s scope and impact.  Together, they offer a complete understanding, from the internal dynamics to the external consequences of the issue.

In conclusion, the 2Hs – How and How Much – in the 5W2H method are integral components of effective problem-solving.  They allow individuals and teams to delve deep into the mechanics of a problem and quantify its significance.  By asking these questions, you can gain a more nuanced understanding of the challenges you face and develop targeted and measurable solutions.

Whether you’re troubleshooting technical issues, optimizing processes, or making data-driven decisions, the 2Hs enhance your problem-solving toolkit and empower you to tackle complex issues precisely.

Session 7: Crafting Meaningful "H" Questions: A Guide to Asking Effective "How" and "How Much" Questions

In the 5W2H problem-solving method, the final two “H” questions, “How” and “How Much,” play a pivotal role in gaining deeper insights and quantifying various aspects of a problem.  Crafting meaningful “H” questions is an essential skill that enhances your problem-solving capabilities and helps you identify the mechanics and quantifiable elements of the issue.  In this section, we’ll explore how to formulate effective “How” and “How Much” questions that drive your problem-solving process forward.

How to Formulate "How" Questions:

Be Specific: When crafting “How” questions, precision is key.  Aim for specific, actionable inquiries that delve into the processes, actions, or mechanisms underlying the problem.  For example:

• Instead of asking, “How is productivity affected?” ask, “How do interruptions during work hours impact productivity?”
• Rather than “How does customer satisfaction decline?” inquire, “How do response times to customer inquiries affect satisfaction?”

Consider Sequencing: “How” questions can often be sequenced to dig deeper into a problem’s layers.  Use the “5 Whys” technique, repeatedly asking “How” to explore causation and uncover root causes.  For instance:

• Start with, “How did the product defect occur?”
• Follow with, “How did the quality control process miss this defect?”
• Continue with, “How were the quality control procedures designed, and what steps were overlooked?”

Involve Stakeholders: Include input from relevant stakeholders when formulating “How” questions.  Different perspectives can shed light on various aspects of a problem and ensure a more comprehensive analysis.

How to Formulate "How Much" Questions:

Define the Metrics: For “How Much” questions, defining the metrics or units of measurement is crucial.  This ensures clarity and consistency in quantifying the problem.  For instance:

• Instead of asking, “How much money are we losing?” specify, “How much revenue have we lost in the past quarter?”
• Rather than, “How much time is wasted on this process?” inquire, “How many labor hours are expended on this process each week?”

Establish Baselines: Before asking “How Much” questions, establish baselines or benchmarks against which you can measure the impact of the problem and the effectiveness of solutions.  This enables data-driven decision-making and progress tracking.

Consider Relative Measures: Sometimes, “How Much” questions benefit from relative measures.  Compare current figures to historical data, industry standards, or competitors to assess the issue’s significance.  For example:

• Ask, “How much longer does it take us to respond to customer inquiries compared to industry averages?”
• Inquire, “How much more energy is consumed by this manufacturing process compared to our more efficient competitors?”

Seek Expertise: If you are unsure about the appropriate metrics or units for quantifying the problem, consult with subject matter experts or data analysts who can provide valuable insights.

Combine "How" and "How Much":

To comprehensively understand a problem, consider combining “How” and “How Much” questions.  For example:

• Ask, “How does the manufacturing process affect product quality, and how much does it cost to rectify defects?”
• Inquire, “How do communication breakdowns impact project timelines, and how much extra labor is required to catch up?”

Crafting meaningful “H” questions – “How” and “How Much” – is an art that requires precision, consideration of metrics, and collaboration with stakeholders.  These questions are invaluable tools for dissecting complex issues, uncovering root causes, and quantifying the scope and impact of problems.  By incorporating well-crafted “H” questions into your problem-solving process, you can enhance your ability to make data-driven decisions and develop targeted solutions that address the core issues effectively.

Session 8: Case Study: Analyzing Use Cases Using the 5W2H Method

Click image to download .pdf informational flyer

Effective problem-solving and decision-making often hinge on a thorough understanding of the problem.

In complex scenarios, gathering all the necessary information systematically can be challenging.

This is where the 5W2H method (What, Who, Where, When, Why, How, How Much) comes into play.

This case study will explore how the 5W2H method can be applied to analyze use cases, helping businesses and individuals make informed decisions and optimize their processes.

Case Study: Improving Customer Support Services

Background:

A multinational e-commerce company has been experiencing a rise in customer complaints related to the customer support services provided.  Customer satisfaction scores have dipped, and the company is keen on identifying the underlying issues and optimizing its customer support operations.

1. What - Defining the Problem:

What is the problem?  The problem is a decrease in customer satisfaction scores and an increase in customer complaints regarding customer support services.

2. Who - Identifying Stakeholders:

Who are the stakeholders?  The stakeholders include the customer support team, customers, management, and the technical team responsible for the support tools.

3. Where - Examining the Context:

Where is the issue occurring?  The problem primarily happens within the customer support department, but its effects are felt across the organization.

4. When - Timing of the Problem:

When did the problem first arise?  The problem started becoming noticeable three months ago and has been steadily worsening.

5. Why - Uncovering Root Causes:

Why is customer satisfaction declining?  There could be several root causes, including long response times, inadequate training of support agents, technical issues with support tools, and inconsistent customer communication.

6. How - Understanding Processes and Mechanisms:

How are support requests handled?  The current process involves customers submitting support tickets assigned to support agents.  The agents then respond to the tickets, and a back-and-forth communication occurs until the issue is resolved.

7. How Much - Quantifying the Impact:

How much has customer satisfaction declined, and how many complaints have been received?  Customer satisfaction scores have dropped by 15%, and complaints have doubled over the past three months.

Analysis and Recommendations:

• Address Response Times (How): One of the major issues is the time it takes to respond to customer inquiries. Implementing a system to prioritize urgent inquiries and setting response time targets can improve the situation.
• Enhance Agent Training (How): Invest in additional training for support agents to improve their product knowledge and communication skills. This can lead to quicker issue resolution and higher customer satisfaction.
• Technical Tools Assessment (How): The technical team should investigate any potential issues with the support tools. Ensure that they are functioning optimally to prevent delays and errors.
• Communication (Why): Analyze the communication process between support agents and customers to identify bottlenecks or inconsistencies. Streamline the communication process for efficiency.
• Monitoring and Feedback (How Much): Continuously monitor customer satisfaction scores and track the number of complaints.  Set targets for improvement and regularly gather feedback from customers to gauge progress.

Conclusion:

This case study demonstrates how the 5W2H method can be effectively applied to analyze complex use cases.  By systematically addressing the seven key questions, businesses and individuals can gain a comprehensive understanding of the problem, identify root causes, and develop targeted solutions.  Whether you’re optimizing customer support services, streamlining processes, or making data-driven decisions, the 5W2H method equips you with the tools to approach challenges with precision and achieve meaningful improvements.

Session 9: Identifying Root Causes and Contributing Factors: A Comprehensive Approach

Effective problem-solving requires going beyond surface-level analysis and uncovering the underlying causes and contributing factors that give rise to issues.  Identifying root causes and contributing factors is crucial in addressing problems at their source, preventing recurrences, and implementing lasting solutions.  This section will explore a systematic approach to uncovering these critical elements in problem-solving.

Begin with the Problem:

Start by clearly defining the problem or issue you wish to address.  Understand its symptoms, manifestations, and any immediate causes that may be apparent.  This is the foundation for your investigation into root causes and contributing factors.

Ask the “Why” Question:

The “Why” question is a powerful tool for delving deeper into the problem.  Ask “Why did this problem occur?” repeatedly to peel back the layers of causation.  As discussed, this approach encourages you to dig beyond surface explanations and uncover root causes.

Use Fishbone Diagrams (Ishikawa Diagrams):

A Fishbone diagram, also known as an Ishikawa diagram , is a visual tool that helps identify potential root causes and contributing factors.  Start with the problem statement as the “fish’s head” and draw “bones” representing categories of factors that could lead to the problem.  Then, brainstorm specific factors within each category.

Categories often include People, Processes, Equipment, Materials, Environment, and Management.  Analyzing each category systematically can reveal hidden causes.

Conduct Root Cause Analysis (RCA):

Root Cause Analysis is a structured method for identifying the root causes of a problem.  Techniques like the “5 Whys,” Fault Tree Analysis, and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) can help you pinpoint the underlying issues.  RCA involves collecting data, analyzing trends, and considering the historical context of the problem.

Utilize Data and Metrics:

Data-driven analysis is essential in identifying root causes and contributing factors.  Collect and analyze relevant data and metrics related to the problem.  This data can highlight patterns, anomalies, and correlations that may lead to root causes.

Consider Contributing Factors:

While root causes are the primary culprits behind a problem, contributing factors are conditions or elements that facilitate the occurrence of the problem or exacerbate its effects.  Identify these factors, as addressing them can prevent the problem’s recurrence.

Collaborate and Seek Diverse Perspectives:

Involve cross-functional teams and individuals with diverse expertise in your analysis.  Different perspectives can uncover nuances and insights that a single perspective might miss.

Document Your Findings:

Keep thorough investigation records, including the identified root causes and contributing factors.  Clear documentation aids in communication and serves as a reference for implementing solutions.

Prioritize and Implement Solutions:

Once you’ve identified the root causes and contributing factors, prioritize them based on their impact and feasibility of addressing them.  Develop and implement targeted solutions to mitigate or eliminate these elements.

Monitor and Evaluate:

Continuously monitor the effectiveness of your solutions and evaluate whether they have successfully addressed the root causes and contributing factors.  Adjust your strategies if necessary.

Identifying root causes and contributing factors is a vital aspect of effective problem-solving.  It requires a systematic and thorough approach, combining techniques like the “5 Whys,” Fishbone diagrams, Root Cause Analysis, data analysis, and collaboration.  By uncovering the underlying issues and addressing them comprehensively, you can resolve immediate problems, prevent their recurrence, and improve overall processes and outcomes.

Session 10: Generating Actionable Solutions Based on Analysis: Turning Insights into Results

Problem-solving doesn’t end with the identification of issues or the analysis of root causes.  It reaches its pinnacle when actionable solutions are crafted, implemented, and proven effective.  In this section, we’ll explore the crucial phase of generating actionable solutions based on thorough analysis, ensuring that insights are translated into tangible results.

Understanding the Problem:

Before generating solutions, a deep understanding of the problem is essential.  This involves knowing its symptoms and root causes and grasping its broader context and impact.  Consider all aspects, from the who, what, when, where, why, and how, as well as the extent of the issue (how much).  Clarity at this stage sets the foundation for effective solutions.

Brainstorming and Ideation:

Once the problem is well-defined, engage in a brainstorming and ideation process.  Encourage diverse perspectives, creativity, and out-of-the-box thinking.  Generate a wide range of potential solutions without prematurely dismissing any ideas.  Quantity often precedes quality in this stage.

Prioritization and Selection:

Not all solutions are created equal.  Prioritize potential solutions based on their feasibility, potential impact, and alignment with your goals and resources.  Consider short-term and long-term solutions and the anticipated costs and benefits associated with each option.

Root Cause Addressing:

Effective solutions address root causes rather than merely treating symptoms.  Ensure your chosen solutions target the core issues identified during the analysis phase.  This strategic focus leads to sustainable results.

Data-Driven Decision-Making:

Leverage data and metrics to inform your decision-making process.  Quantify the problem and its impact, and use data to set benchmarks for success.  Data-driven decisions are more likely to produce measurable results.

Pilot and Testing:

Before fully implementing a solution organization-wide, consider piloting it on a smaller scale.  Testing allows you to identify potential issues, gather feedback, and make necessary adjustments.  Pilots provide a valuable opportunity to refine your solution.  Apply design thinking principles to ideate, prototype, and test potential solutions while keeping the end-user’s needs and experiences at the forefront.  This combination allows for a holistic problem-solving approach that addresses the core issues and fosters creativity, empathy, and collaboration, leading to more effective and impactful outcomes.

Collaboration and Cross-Functional Teams:

Engage cross-functional teams and collaborate with relevant stakeholders.  Different perspectives can contribute valuable insights and uncover potential pitfalls that might be overlooked in isolation.

Accountability and Ownership:

Assign clear ownership for each solution.  Define responsibilities and timelines for implementation and establish mechanisms for tracking progress and accountability.  Ownership ensures that actions are taken and results are achieved.

Communication and Change Management:

Effective solutions often require changes in processes, behaviors, or systems.  Communicate the changes clearly and transparently to all stakeholders.  Implement change management strategies to facilitate a smooth transition and minimize resistance.

Continuous Improvement and Iteration:

The journey doesn’t end with solution implementation.  Continuously monitor the outcomes, gather feedback, and evaluate the effectiveness of your solutions.  Be prepared to iterate and adjust your approach based on new insights and changing circumstances.

In Six Sigma projects, the 5W2H methodology serves as a fundamental tool for problem-solving and process improvement.  As highly trained experts in the Six Sigma methodology , Six Sigma Black Belts utilize the 5W2H approach to thoroughly analyze and understand the various dimensions of a problem or process.

Certified Black Belts systematically dissect the problem, identify root causes, and develop targeted solutions.  They define project goals and objectives (What), assign responsibilities to team members (Who), consider the context and location of the problem (Where), establish timelines and milestones (When), uncover the underlying causes of the issue (Why), outline the execution steps (How), and quantify the scope and impact of the problem (How Much).

Celebrate Success and Learn from Failures:

Acknowledge and celebrate successes along the way to motivate teams and reinforce positive behaviors.  Don’t shy away from acknowledging failures either; they offer valuable lessons for future problem-solving endeavors.

Generating actionable solutions based on thorough analysis is the essence of effective problem-solving.  It requires a structured approach, creative thinking, data-driven decision-making, collaboration, and a commitment to continuous improvement.  By following these steps and embracing a results-oriented mindset, you can turn insights into actions, drive positive change, and achieve meaningful results in your personal and professional endeavors.

Session 11: Prioritizing Solutions: Making Informed Choices in Problem-Solving

With 5W2H, it’s not just about generating solutions; it’s about choosing the right ones to implement.  Prioritizing solutions is a critical step that involves evaluating options, assessing their potential impact, and making informed decisions.  In this section, we’ll delve into the importance of prioritization and explore effective strategies for making choices that lead to successful outcomes.

1. The Significance of Prioritization:

Prioritizing solutions is essential for several reasons:

• Resource Allocation: Resources such as time, money, and staffing are limited. Prioritization helps allocate these resources effectively, ensuring that the most pressing issues are addressed first.
• Maximizing Impact: Not all problems or solutions are of equal importance. Prioritization ensures high-impact solutions receive the attention they deserve, leading to meaningful results.
• Focus and Clarity: A well-defined priority list provides clarity and direction. It helps teams stay focused on the most crucial tasks and minimizes distractions.
• Measurable Progress: Prioritization allows for establishing clear benchmarks and goals, making it easier to measure progress and success.

2. Strategies for Prioritizing Solutions:

Now, let’s explore some effective strategies for prioritizing solutions:

Impact vs. Feasibility:

One common approach is to assess solutions based on their potential impact and feasibility.  High-impact solutions that are also feasible to implement should be given top priority.  Consider the resources, time, and effort required for each solution and weigh them against the expected outcomes.

Urgency vs. Importance:

Another strategy involves distinguishing between urgent and important solutions.  Urgent solutions address immediate problems but may not necessarily have a significant long-term impact.  Important solutions, on the other hand, have a lasting effect and contribute to overall objectives.  Striking the right balance between these categories is crucial.

Cost-Benefit Analysis:

Conduct a cost-benefit analysis for each solution.  Estimate the costs associated with implementation and compare them to the expected benefits.  Prioritize solutions that offer a favorable cost-benefit ratio, ensuring that resources are used efficiently.

Stakeholder Input:

Engage stakeholders and gather their input on solution prioritization.  Different perspectives can provide valuable insights and help identify solutions that align with the organization’s goals and values.

Leverage data and metrics to inform your prioritization process.  Quantify the impact of solutions and use data to set benchmarks for success.  Data-driven decisions are more likely to produce measurable results.

3. The Role of Pilot Projects:

Pilot projects can be a valuable tool in the prioritization process.  Consider implementing selected solutions on a smaller scale before rolling them out organization-wide.  Pilots allow you to test the feasibility and effectiveness of solutions, identify potential issues, and make adjustments as needed.

4. Communication and Transparency:

Transparent communication is essential when prioritizing solutions.  Ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the prioritization criteria and the reasons behind the choices made.  Transparency builds trust and fosters alignment.

5. Continuous Evaluation and Adaptation:

Prioritization is not a one-time task; it’s an ongoing process.  Continuously evaluate the progress of implemented solutions, gather feedback, and be prepared to adapt your priorities based on new insights and changing circumstances.

Prioritizing solutions is a crucial step in effective problem-solving.  It requires a systematic approach, critical thinking, data analysis, and stakeholder collaboration.  By following these strategies and maintaining a results-oriented mindset, you can ensure that your efforts are focused on the most impactful and feasible solutions, leading to successful outcomes in your personal and professional endeavors.

Session 12: Making Informed Decisions Using 5W2H Insights

The 5W2H method is a powerful tool that provides valuable insights and a structured framework for decision-making.  In this section, we’ll explore how to harness the insights gained from applying the 5W2H method to make well-informed and effective decisions.

Let’s explore how to use the insights gained from the 5W2H analysis to make informed decisions:

Clarity and Problem Definition (What):

The “What” question helps you define the problem accurately.  Decision-making begins with a well-defined problem statement.  Once you’ve clarified the problem, you can set clear goals and objectives for your decision-making process.

Stakeholder Consideration (Who):

Identifying the key stakeholders involved or affected by the problem is crucial.  Consider their perspectives, interests, and concerns.  Decision-makers should consider the potential impacts on these stakeholders when evaluating options.

Contextual Awareness (Where and When):

Understanding the context in which the problem occurs (Where) and the timeline (When) is essential.  This information provides context for decision-making.  It helps you assess whether certain decisions are time-sensitive or location-specific and whether external factors might influence your choices.

Root Cause Analysis (Why):

The “Why” question uncovers the root causes of the problem.  When making decisions, addressing these root causes rather than just treating symptoms leads to more effective and sustainable solutions.  Decisions should target the underlying issues to prevent recurrence.

Process and Mechanism Understanding (How):

The “How” question explores the processes, actions, and mechanisms contributing to the problem.  Consider how changes in these processes or mechanisms might lead to desired outcomes when making decisions.  Decision-makers should be well-informed about the intricacies of the problem’s operation.

Data-Driven Decisions (How Much):

Quantifying the scope and impact of the problem (How Much) provides a basis for data-driven decisions.  When choosing among solutions, prioritize those supported by data and evidence.  Metrics and measurements can guide decision-makers toward options with a higher likelihood of success.

Collaborative Decision-Making:

Incorporate cross-functional teams and stakeholders in the decision-making process.  Diverse perspectives enrich the decision-making discussions and contribute to a well-rounded evaluation of options.

Continuous Evaluation and Adaptation:

Decision-making doesn’t end with the implementation of a solution.  Continuously monitor the outcomes of your decisions, gather feedback, and be prepared to adapt your approach based on new insights and changing circumstances.

The 5W2H method is a valuable tool for comprehensively understanding complex problems.  By leveraging the insights obtained through this method, decision-makers can make informed choices rooted in a thorough analysis of the problem’s dimensions and intricacies.  Whether you’re addressing organizational challenges, personal dilemmas, or strategic decisions, the 5W2H insights provide a structured foundation for making decisions that lead to positive outcomes.

Earn a FREE 5W2H Problem-Solving Training Certificate of Completion

• All Certifications
• Accessibility

Connect With Us

Copyright © 2022 MSI. All Rights Reserved.

The Complete Guide to Structured Problem Solving

When you are looking to thoroughly solve a pesky problem, structured problem solving is the way to go. Structured problem solving allows you to explore the problem, get to the heart of the issue, and develop a creative solution that finally solves the issue.

To illustrate this example, Takashi Amano was a nature photographer and avid aquarist. He started developing art in the form of fish tanks – which he called nature aquariums. The problem was algae would grow in his tanks and ruin his art. Not deterred, Mr. Amano found a shrimp distributor who bred, small, and clear micro-shrimp which were various algae eaters. Mr. Amano ordered thousands of them and promoted them in the hobby – to the point where the shrimp are now called Amano Shrimp.

He got creative. Knowing he needed a lasting solution to his algae problem, a clear shrimp that would eat the algae and not detract from his art was perfect.

The Basic idea of Structured Problem Solving

Professionals who solve complex problems for a living all start from the same place. They need to understand the actual problem they are solving. They ask themselves questions to get to the heart of the problem.

Usually promoting thinking with questions like what is the real problem, how can we gather data about the root problem, brainstorm solutions, test a solution and monitor it?

Why Structured Problem-Solving Works

Often, we are eager to jump into solving the first apparent problem with a variety of solutions. Why structured problem-solving works is because it forces us to slow down. By slowing down, we understand the problem first, without leaping into “fix-it” mode with preconceived notions of how the problem should be solved.

Studies have also found that having explicit techniques (methods for problem-solving) in the structured problem-solving workflow not only improves the problem-solving process but also increases the knowledge base all individuals can pull from.  Basically, using structured problem solving allows better solutions to be developed while ensuring everyone participates in sharing their own unique knowledge.

The two ideas translate into the problem-solving principles of:

• Seek to understand before we seek to solve
• Search early, search often

By understanding the problem inside and out, the individual, or team can make more informed decisions and generate appropriate solutions.

There are a variety of techniques to work through the process. Below are some sample ways to do structured problem solving before getting into the walk-through further down in the article.

Multiple Ways of Structured Problem Solving

There are many techniques to perform structured problem solving, or at least get more in-depth in certain aspects of the process. Some of my favorite ones include

Pre-mortem analysis: Instead of working through a project and assessing what went wrong at the end, run through a simulation of the project to see where the project could fail before you even start. Where and why did it fail? Then brainstorm solutions to avoid those issues without creating new ones.

The Hat Technique: There are 6 colored hats, all with different roles. Whether alone or in a group, assign some time or a specific person to that role. Having a person designated to each role means that all ideas are validated through six different lenses. Plus, everyone has a designated role which helps keep people engaged, and limits feelings getting hurt since everyone is simply doing their assigned role.

PDCA Cycle: An easy way to remember the process is the PDCA cycle. Which stands for Plan-Do-Check-Act. PDCA is a high-level way to remember how the structured problem-solving process works. 

You can also use the PDCA Model to manage your personal development too !

Get the Creative Juices Flowing

I like to start all my structured problem-solving sessions with some fun at the beginning of the session to get everyone’s creative juices flowing. By taking the 5 minutes to have a little fun, it is surprising how much more creative and engaged people are with the structured problem-solving process!

Problem-solving can be a stressful process, and it can even be high-stakes with the future of the group’s work hanging in the balance. However, laughing together helps relieve stress, makes people more creative, and improves social bonding.

The New Idea: One creative thinking exercise to start your session in a fun way, the goal is to split into two groups. Each group generates two dissimilar words. Then they swap words. For instance, “bug” & “sky-diving” and “winter” and “bikinis” for the other. Then the groups must devise the best ideas for those two words. For the bugs, you could make parachute designs that are themed after a different butterfly, and for the other, you could make a winter work-out with the goal have bikini-ready bodies by the summer. Silly ideas but shows there is a solution to even the weirdest problems.

Horrible idea challenge: Think of your problem. Then have everyone compete to come up with the worst idea. The practical part is that it helps to see what not to do – plus, part of the fun is seeing how creative people can be!

Beyond the two creative ideas, there are also 13 mental models which make work easier overall as well.

The Structured Problem Solving Process

1. define the problem statement.

The first step is defining what the real problem is. Below are some prompts to get the right decision-makers and problem-solvers sent in the right direction to tackle the challenge.

• Is the problem many problems?
• What requirements must a solution meet?
• Which problem solvers should we engage?
• What information and language should the problem statement include?
• Tip: To engage the largest number of solvers from the widest variety of fields, a problem statement must meet the twin goals of being extremely specific but not necessarily technical.
• What do solvers need to submit?
• What incentive do solvers need?
• How will solutions be evaluated, and success measured?

Problem statements are a statement of a current issue or problem. For example , Problem: Voter turnout in the southwest region of Florida has been significantly decreasing over the past decade, while other areas of the state continue to see increasing numbers of voters at the polls.

Writing one or two sentences takes the whole issue and makes it very clear what the issue is.

2. Root Cause Analysis

After getting the foundation set, an understanding of the root problem is critical. If you want to go through all the effort of structured problem solving, you might as well get to the real problem in the end.

Think of weeds in a garden. A potential solution is to mow over the weeds and they are gone. However, every few days the weeds keep coming back. That is because the root is the root issue in this scenario. You need to get the whole root system of the weed out to stop those pesky weeds in your garden.

Below are three techniques to help with Root-Cause Analysis

5 whys: When a problem occurs, drill down to its root cause by asking “Why?” five or more times. Then, when a counter-measure becomes apparent, you follow it through to prevent the issues from recurring.

Fishbone diagram: (Also called Ishikawa diagram named after Kaoru Ishikawa) is a cause-and-effect diagram that helps managers track down the reasons for imperfections, variations, defects, or failures.

Cause mapping: a cause map provides a visual explanation of why an incident occurred. It connects individual cause-and-effect relationships to reveal the system of cause within an issue.

3. Gather Data

After analyzing the problem and getting to the root cause – you need to gather information to understand why the problem and situation are happening. Doing the research and understanding how the different forces are interacting lets you understand why the problem is happening and how the overall solution is occurring.

Below are three different methods for gathering data to understand the context and interplaying forces in the current problem.

Gemba walk: The purpose is to allow managers and leaders to observe actual work process, engage with employees, gain knowledge about the work process, and explore opportunities for continuous improvement

Process mapping: A process map is a planning and management tool that visually describes the flow of work. Allowing you to see hiccups, bottlenecks, or high-failure points in the process.

Focus groups : Asking open-ended questions to a group of individuals ranging from 6-10 people. Letting you get different perspectives on the same issue.

4. Develop Potential Solutions

The next part is the fun part. You take all the research you’ve gathered in the first three aspects and put them together to come up with a solution to solve the problem. The common way is do Brainstorming.

Harvard Business Review sites that traditional brainstorming, in groups trying to answer the question, isn’t as effective as individuals coming up with ideas on their own first. Working in a big group doesn’t work for many reasons. Working in groups encourages social loafing (coasting on other’s ideas), some members experience social anxiety (introverted members feeling self-conscious of throwing in ideas), and it focuses too much on the solutions over the problem.

The better way to brainstorm is to have everyone work on the main problems and their solutions alone, and then reconvene after twenty minutes. Then everyone shares their top one or two ideas and what features of the problem it tackles.

This method gives everyone time to think about their solutions, present their ideas, and lets all the voices be heard. Plus, all the ideas can then smashed together to come up with a solution based on everyone’s input.

Remember, the solution has to solve the core of the issue and get to the root cause. Plus, it must be feasible in terms of the money, time, and manpower allocated to the project. Use the constraints as a guide to direct the project!

5. Implement a Solution

After running through the potential solutions – pick one and trial run it. Think of the minimum viable product to get to the root cause. You won’t know if you are alleviating the problem until a potential solution is out in the field.

For example , Airbnb founders, Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia could not afford the rent for their apartment (the problem). They decided to put an air mattress in their living room and turn it into a bed and breakfast (MVP solution). The goal was to make a few bucks, but instead, they discovered the idea the connect Bed and Breakfasts to people looking for renters. They started advertising on Craiglist, then their website, and the story continues.

The point of the story is to illustrate that small tests can be done to see if you are solving the main issue! Their issue was not that someone needed to stay in their apartment for them to make rent – the issue was there was no service that easily let Bed and Breakfasts work with potential clients.

6. Monitor for Success

Once a solution is implemented, that is not the end. You must make sure the solution works. Keeping in mind the below questions

• Who is responsible for the solution?
• What are the risks of implementing the solution?

Some ways to monitor for success are:

Failure mode and effect analysis: A step-by-step approach for identifying all possible failures in a design, a manufacturing process, product, or service.

Impact analysis: A detailed study of business activities, dependencies, and infrastructure. It reveals how critical products and services are delivered and examines the potential impact of a disruptive (or additive solution) event over time

Kaizen : The Japanese term for “continuous improvement”. It is a business philosophy regarding the process that continuously improves operations and involves all employees.

Illustrated Example

A often find it helpful to see someone do the process as well. Here is a great video of IDEO re-working the shopping cart.

Key Take-Aways

What sets apart okay problem solvers from great problem solvers is the ability to think in repeatable, useful frameworks.

Structured Problem Solving is a general concept used to solve challenging problems, and there are hundreds of different methods that fall underneath it.

Action Item

Think of a tough challenge you are facing at work or in your personal life. Test run your problem through the structured problem-solving process with a few of the above techniques, and see what solution you can generate to get to the root of the issue!

Share this:

• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Post navigation

Previous post.

I do agree with all of the ideas you’ve presented in your post. They’re really convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are too short for starters. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.

Hello, I love hearing the feedback. I will write a follow-up post the structured problem solving that dives into more detail!

Thank you for some other fantastic article. The place else could anyone get that kind of information in such an ideal method of writing? I have a presentation subsequent week, and I am at the search for such info.

Hello – for similar content, the perspective and ambition parts of the blog have similar content! Some posts to investigate are “A 4 Step Plan to Better Goal Setting (WOOP)” ( https://themobiusstripblog.com/4-step-process-to-better-goal-setting/ ) and “How to Give a Better Presentation” ( https://themobiusstripblog.com/better-presentation/ ). Let me know how your presentation goes!

Hey there! I know this is kinda off topic nevertheless I’d figured I’d ask. Would you be interested in exchanging links or maybe guest authoring a blog post or vice-versa? My blog covers a lot of the same subjects as yours and I feel we could greatly benefit from each other. If you might be interested feel free to shoot me an email. I look forward to hearing from you! Great blog by the way!

Hello, I am always interested in providing valuable content to my readers! Send me an email either directly from the “Contact Us” page or fill-out the interest form and I can get back to you!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

• Data, AI, & Machine Learning
• Managing Technology
• Social Responsibility
• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• AI & Machine Learning
• Hybrid Work
• Big ideas Research Projects
• Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
• Responsible AI
• Future of the Workforce
• Future of Leadership
• All Research Projects
• AI in Action
• Most Popular
• Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
• Measuring Culture

MIT SMR ’s fall 2024 issue highlights the need for personal and organizational resilience amid global uncertainty.

• Past Issues
• Upcoming Events
• Video Archive
• Me, Myself, and AI
• Three Big Points

Saving Money Through Structured Problem-Solving

Closely observing how work really gets done in your organization can yield numerous opportunities for improvements..

• Workplace, Teams, & Culture
• Leadership Skills
• Financial Management & Risk
• Organizational Behavior

Executives can’t lead effective organizational change just by sitting in their offices. As busy as they are, leaders need to find ways to observe fundamental work processes in their organizations. When they do, they usually discover that there are gaps between concept and reality in how work gets done. Michael Morales’ experience — in which identifying and addressing such gaps led to his company saving $50,000 in just 60 days — is a case in point.

Mike is the president of Corporación Industrial S.A. (CISA), a company based in Panama City, Panama, that makes corrugated boxes. Conceptually, making corrugated boxes is relatively straightforward. Wood is first turned into pulp, which is then treated, pressed, and dried to form large sheets of paper. Those sheets are then glued together to create flat pieces of corrugated cardboard. Finally, the cardboard is cut to size, folded, and glued to make a finished box.

That’s the process — in theory. In practice, however, it entails moving heavy loads among large, complex machines and executing a series of precision operations. As with most complex industrial processes, the box production process at CISA was designed carefully at the outset. Nonetheless, it was never as efficient as the company’s managers had hoped.

Prior to the project, Mike and his team had concluded that the biggest problem in their manufacturing process was unplanned paper losses — in other words, paper that was damaged during movement between operations or lost due to incorrect cutting. Paper represented over 80% of the company’s production costs and over 60% of its total costs, so any losses could have a significant effect on the bottom line. Prior to 2012, paper losses had been as high as 18% of the total paper put into production. In 2012, the company undertook a significant change initiative focused on reducing paper losses that included spending $3.5 million on new equipment and another $500,000 on training. Despite the effort and expense, paper losses hit a record high of 21.1% in 2012.

Get Updates on Transformative Leadership

Evidence-based resources that can help you lead your team more effectively, delivered to your inbox monthly.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

Privacy Policy

In the summer of 2014, Mike decided to apply structured problem-solving techniques to his plant’s paper loss problem. (Note: The structured problem-solving techniques Mike used are described in detail in our related article, “ The Most Underrated Skill in Management .”)

The first step was to define a clear problem statement.

About the Authors

Nelson P. Repenning is the School of Management Distinguished Professor of System Dynamics and Organization Studies at the MIT Sloan School of Management in Cambridge, Massachusetts, as well as chief social scientist at the consulting firm ShiftGear Work Design LLC. Don Kieffer is a senior lecturer in operations management at the MIT Sloan School and managing partner of ShiftGear Work Design. Michael Morales is president of Corporación Industrial S.A. in Panama City, Panama.

More Like This

Add a comment cancel reply.

You must sign in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account : Comment on articles and get access to many more articles.

Comment (1)

Dan markovitz.

• Operant Innovations Podcast
• The Lift 007 Structured Problem Solving Skills

The Lift 007 | Structured Problem Solving Skills

The podcast.

An ABA Technologies Academy Podcast

Credit:   1.0 BACB, 1 Supervision

Price: $15.00

Instructors: 

Linda A. LeBlanc, PhD, BCBA-D

Tyra P. Sellers, JD, PhD, BCBA-D

This podcast episode describes the importance of teaching supervisees to take a structured problem-solving approach. The roles of negative reinforcement and self-control in problem identification and problem-solving are discussed. The podcast describes a structured 5 step process for problem solving and strategies for maximizing your success at each step.

Learning Objectives:

Attendees will be able to identify at least one possible result of negative reinforcement related to problems Attendees will be able to identify 5 steps involved in problem-solving Attendees will be able to describe one strategy to increase their success in problem-solving.  

Buy CES $15

The book focuses on the importance of strong relationships and teaching higher-order skills throughout any supervisory endeavor. The authors provide a conceptually sound set of supervision practices that will guide the actions of those who aspire to become better supervisors or mentors at any point in their careers.

Learn More       

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (00:08):

Hi, everyone. Welcome back to The Lift, Episode 7. I'm Linda LeBlanc...

Dr. Tyra Sellers (00:14):

...and I'm Tyra Sellers.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (00:16):

Today we're gonna be focusing on chapter 7 of our book, which is about structured problem solving. Problem solving is something that has interested me for the last decade or so. Not only studying problem solving from a developmental perspective with young children, but also examining how adults solve problems. We tend to be very capable problem solvers, as long as we decide we're going to solve a problem. That really speaks to the fact that it runs through the human experience to sometimes not notice problems when we should. In fact, our quote for this chapter, "All problems become smaller when you confront them instead of dodging them", really speaks to that. That notion there is a powerful role of negative reinforcement with respect to how we respond or don't respond to problems. Also, potentially in some of our problem solving strategies. Tyra, how about you? You love a problem or not so much? [Laughing]

Dr. Tyra Sellers (01:42):

[Laughing] I mean, I don't always love a problem, but I definitely love an opportunity to think about problem solving and I love an opportunity to solve a problem, so there's that. My interest in problem solving, similar to yours, started early on in my career. Both with young children and with the individuals with whom I worked with myself. I got pulled into it not necessarily specifically related to problem solving overall, but thinking about a piece of problem solving, which is creativity or behavioral variability, which is something I'm very passionate about and comes at a specific point in problem solving. I agree that we appear to be uniquely positioned to engage in a lot of escape and avoidant behavior around problem solving. I think also if we are not thoughtful about problem solving processes, that we could end up with some false positives where the problem is solved, but not necessarily because of what we did, but because we're great at identifying patterns. We might assume that it was what we did and then we will do that thing again under similar conditions in the future and that's really dangerous. I think talking with you over the last many years about problem solving has solidified how important it is because there are some pretty significant risks around missing opportunities or those false positive situations. I'm excited to talk about problem solving today.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (03:19):

Woohoo! Problem solving! [Laughing] One of the things that I think can happen is that negative reinforcement can operate in that you don't even acknowledge that there is a problem.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (03:38):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (03:38):

If you were to name it, so to speak, and give it power, then you'd have to do something about it and we just have this really powerful ability to not see the dysfunction that could be right in front of us. I think that can occur not only in some of the work we do with clients, but it can absolutely occur in the supervision management process where you just stay on autopilot. If they were to peek in and observe and say, "Wait a minute. Did you notice this is happening?"

Dr. Tyra Sellers (04:26):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (04:26):

We'd say, "Well, yeah. Maybe so..." [Laughing] but we won't come to that point on our own.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (04:35):

Yeah, I agree. I think that we also are very busy and multitasking and taking on more and more responsibilities, which can result in us not having systems to continually look for emerging problems. Purposely looking for problems, not just to check in that everything is going okay. Really a system to check in different areas like programming with your clients or your trainees and your supervisees, or your caregivers for the specific purpose of temperature check any emerging problems happening. I think we just don't do that. It's something that folks probably need to build into their repertoires so that they even have an opportunity to ignore the problem. If you're not even looking for it, that's problematic in first place. Then I think there's this other piece that comes into it where we might catch a glimpse that there's an issue, but it's not that big of a deal, right? Maybe it's smaller in scope or it doesn't have as big of a risk of harm as we would think if we really dug into it. You catch a whiff of it, but you don't really attend to it, right? [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (05:46):

Absolutely and I think especially when you are supervising people that are very new to practice. I think I see that a lot where they can tell something is wrong, but not really see the entire scope of it. For example, they may come to you for guidance and it's about a program that's not going well. They're not seeing really good acquisition and as you begin to dig in, you start to realize that some faulty stimulus control pattern has emerged and that there are probably multiple programs that are being affected by this. They just haven't yet made contact with the scope of it through the data.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (06:43):

Yeah, absolutely. I think another example is if you're someone that supervises people that supervise people, you might have someone come in to you say, "Ah, you know. Things are funky with this person" or "I'm not enjoying working with them," but they're not quite able to put their finger on the issue or "I'm just not enjoying supervision"' and not understanding the scope. I think what I would love for people to hear is, and this is not behavior analytic, but if you... well, I'll try to make it behavior analytic.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (07:24):

[Laughing] Okay, because we are offering a CE for this. [Laughing]

Dr. Tyra Sellers (07:28):

Yes and you can help shape this, because you're really good at doing those in the moment translations. Here's what I tell my folks and what I try to remind myself: If I am engaging in covert or overt verbal behavior or having physiological responses that are described as discomfort or aversive. I'm having not awesome thoughts about someone or my stomach feels queasy. Those are pieces of data. I think what is uncomfortable for us is that we don't want to necessarily say those are indicating something. You don't know what they're indicating yet, but my guess is if you dig in and do the work, you will be able to discriminate what is causing or at least what is related to the kind of covert or overt verbal behavior or your funny feeling. If you have those indicators stop and try to engage in systematic problem identification where you can discriminate exactly what the issue is. Don't discount that, but don't buy into, "Oh, Linda is just difficult." No. What is it that I'm attending to when I say those things? You have to dig a little deeper, but I think that happens a lot when folks smell the smoke maybe on the horizon, but you can't quite figure out how to change your lens of focus to find the actual fire. That's often where a mentor or a colleague comes in where you can talk about those things.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (09:02):

I think that's right and I think a lot of times, as you're talking to that person, they may help you be able to recognize that you have a role...

Dr. Tyra Sellers (09:12):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (09:12):

...in the evolving problem.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (09:14):

Common denominator.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (09:15):

[Laughing] And that there is something that you're responding to in that other person's behavior, but you're also responding to your own behavior.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (09:29):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (09:30):

That is because you haven't acknowledged, "I feel uncomfortable when I am supervising this person", you are behaving in a very contingency shaped way with no power of your rules to say, "My job is to be their supervisor, so I need to put that aside or I need to behave differently and I'm not doing it".

Dr. Tyra Sellers (09:57):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (09:58):

Very often, when we don't really name something as a problem and look at what are all the contributors to this problem, we miss that our behavior is part of it. We are the environment to someone else's person just like they're the environment to us. I think when we miss that contributory variable, we also miss our opportunity to solve the problem.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (10:29):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (10:30):

Acknowledging that you are affecting a situation is the great first step to recognizing that if you behave differently, you might affect that situation differently.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (10:44):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (10:44):

That's what gets you into more meaningful problem solving.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (10:50):

Yeah and I think that trickles into this other idea that many of us, and I'm guilty of this for sure, catch that whiff of smoke, might even be able to lightly identify it. Maybe not quite the scope of the problem, but then we think, "It'll probably get better", or "I need to give this person some more time", and engage in some avoidant behavior. I would argue that in most situations likely ignoring or just thinking that something is going to improve over time, probably is ineffective. If it does improve over time, something probably changed and you just can't detect it, so don't do that. [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (11:39):

Yeah. Problems aren't smart. They don't solve themselves.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (11:42):

No. [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (11:43):

Just like the stinky trash isn't gonna take itself out. Just waiting and hoping that's gonna get better with time is just almost never really effective.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (11:55):

That whole "train and hope". For example, generalization is something that is abhorent to us. We would never do that, so it makes sense that we should not do that when it comes to problems, particularly those within the supervisory relationship.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (12:15):

Yeah. I do think the supervisor certainly has their own behavior in solving problems that they should examine and in many ways may already be very good at, in certain realms, but the value of actively teaching your supervisees and trainees to use a structured problem solving approach. I think that is a great gift that you can give because there will be a time when you're not around and you want to build their independence and their success and capability to solve those problems when you're not there to solve it with them anymore.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (13:05):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (13:06):

That's a hard focus to keep, because when supervisees and trainees come to you with a problem, there's a really good chance you have seen that, done that, solved that before, and you have a solution that's at strength and there can be a stunting of the growth of the supervisee if you just give out those solutions like candy instead of pausing and going through that problem solving process with them to teach them how to do it.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (13:54):

Right. You're going to give them the fish or you are going to teach them how to fish. [Laughing]. Absolutely. That said, there are instances probably where the risk of harm is too great that you do just have to take action and that's okay. If there's an instance where as a supervisor, I just have to solve this problem right now because there's a risk of harm, but then I can take that as an opportunity to debrief, talk about why I made that choice and then walk them through my problem solving and problem evaluation processes. I think most issues, whether or not your supervising or trainee is identifying it or you are identifying it, can probably be solved in a more instructive manner. That said, you should teach problem solving outside of the presence of an actual problem, right? Let's teach a structured problem solving method in a more didactic manner and then apply it when those real problems come up with them.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (15:00):

Throughout my whole life, in all kinds of situations, I tend to be a little speedy in my behavior. Lots of thoughts, lots of actions, lots of talking, lots of everything and I really have to view it as my job and my purpose. I have to arrange my environment to keep myself mindful of the fact that it's not my job to solve their problems. It's my job to teach them to problem solve, but that really takes self-control.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (15:38):

Yes. Slow down, Linda.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (15:41):

[Laughing] Slow down, Skippy! [Laughing] There is this quick reinforcer and low effort to just give the solution because you've already rapidly done all the steps of problem solving and gotten there, plus they're going to be grateful and happy and you're a giver of the good things.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (16:05):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (16:06):

That's an ultimate quick, immediate, low effort reinforcer. The other is this more effortful, "Let's go through the steps. Let me not say what I already know and ask questions."

Dr. Tyra Sellers (16:23):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (16:24):

To help you think about what you're going to figure out and it's delayed. It's a bigger reinforcer when you do that, but the reinforcer is their later independent, generative problem solving, and you might not see that for months.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (16:42):

Yeah. Well, do you have strategies to increase the latency between, "Linda's hearing about a problem" and "Linda's solving the problem, so she makes space for someone else to solve the problem with her support"? What do you do? What are your strategies?

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (16:59):

One of them, and I don't wanna tell you all of them, because if I ever have a supervisor they're going to know, and then like, "Uh huh. That's Linda's little strategy now", but I talk with my hands. When I'm listening, I cross my fingers really tightly together and keep them in my lap.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (17:18):

Everybody listening, you all can't see this, but she's literally modeling this for me now. [Laughing] Interlacing her fingers and holding them up to the camera so I can confirm she does that. [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (17:30):

That's right and it helps me pause and I also insert a few responses that pauses and probably one of the ones I've been called out on before is...

Dr. Tyra Sellers (17:48):

Wait, can I tell you? Can I say it?

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (17:50):

Dr. Tyra Sellers (17:50):

Is it this one?

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (17:51):

Dr. Tyra Sellers (17:53):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (17:53):

[Laughing] That's right.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (17:55):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (17:56):

That "Well..." will typically be followed by a question or an observing statement rather than the more direct response. I recognize that my impulsivity and giving the answers actually was a problem and I had to generate some alternative things that I could do because once you do something that starts to get the person who's brought the problem on that problem solving train, that's very reinforcing. When they start talking about, "Oh, I see what you mean. Maybe this other thing is also related". That's really reinforcing for me. I just have to get myself to that point.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (18:52):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (18:52):

Early on, I even would write myself little sticky notes [Laughing] that would be visible to me, but not them right at the bottom of my desk that says, "Teach, teach, teach". [Laughing]

Dr. Tyra Sellers (19:08):

I love those little covert visual prompts that we have.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (19:12):

[Laughing] How about you?

Dr. Tyra Sellers (19:14):

I think that probably your delay or mediating response of "Well..." has made it into my repertoire. I think also I often am not good at recognizing it before the words start leaving my mouth. I do a lot of converting. I might start saying, "Oh, you know, I can see that..." And then I'll pause. Then I'll say, "Well, you know what? Actually, I want to know what you think. What do you see?" Or, "What are your thoughts?" I don't usually catch myself ahead of time like you do. I'm at least usually able convert it. When I know that there's a problem solving opportunity coming up, I have steps that I go through before I start talking about it with the person or if I know I've identified a problem, but I want to pull it out of them. Before I meet with them, or as they're presenting the problem, I go through this checklist in my head: Did someone get hurt or is someone going to get hurt in the next 24 hours? If that's the case, I might need to just jump ahead and go ahead and solve it. If not, then my internal dialogue is like, "Cool. Calm down. This is a teaching moment. This is not your moment to shine. This is your moment to help someone else shine". I just go through that narrative in my head to remind myself that my goal and values related to supervision are to strengthen someone else. Not to make me look good, not to brighten my light. I don't need to do that. We need to make the whole world's light brighter and that usually helps me. It's like a pre-check. Pre-flight check.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (21:05):

That's right. Got the checklist ready to go. Ready to take off.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (21:09):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (21:09):

One of the things that can happen as someone starts to get better at the problem solving process, and we'll talk in a minute about the process that we lay out, is they recognize direct client behavior and issues as a problem to be focused on. Maybe something's not going well with this program or problem behavior is developing, but they don't recognize other kinds of things. Let's say an issue in the relationship with the family or even a staff performance issue the same way.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (21:57):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (21:57):

Basically, that new situation doesn't evoke their problem solving repertoire. Instead, it evokes that lifelong history we have with blaming, "They're broken. This is an issue with them."

Dr. Tyra Sellers (22:19):

Yeah. Don't look at that. [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (22:21):

That's right. A part of, I think, being a good supervisor is broadening that stimulus class of situations that will evoke the problem solving repertoire that you are trying to establish. As you said, you don't have to have a problem causing you pain right now to go through the problem solving process.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (22:51):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (22:52):

You could examine a situation that's already happened. You could present a new situation that person's never encountered. It's really about, I think enough at bats with this problem solving process to really expand the definition.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (23:11):

I agree. I think that there's one other component in there when you were talking about that there need to be sort of stimuli to evoke a problem identification and problem solving. I think that one of the reasons that we are better at it with our clients is that we're consuming a truckload of data related to our clients. You should be all the time, right? Often we're not structured in taking data with our trainees or taking data with our staff satisfaction or our stakeholder satisfaction or our ability to double check that we're not engaging in micro-aggressions or you name it. We're not collecting purposeful data on those things. We don't come in contact with stimuli that we could be like, "Hey, guess what? There's a problem over here". My other suggestion would be spend time figuring out some systems for checking on those things. We know how to take data on if our trainees are consistently late, or if they're making less eye contact in meetings or they're smiling. Put some momentary time sampling up in that piece and catch some data on what's going on, so you can catch those instances and exercise your problem solving muscles with those more complicated or complex, or maybe just less familiar problems.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (24:35):

Yeah and we lay out a five step process and we have primarily been talking about step one, which is detect the problem and overcome that avoidance, get a little data, recognize the smoke. We talk in the book about teaching people to bring smoke or recognize smoke rather than waiting for a fire. Also, notice the subtle things. Notice what's missing that someone used to do because not everything is super in your face, right? Particularly, with interpersonal interactions often when a problem develops, there is a little bit more withdrawal, less contact, less comfortable, fluid interactions. That can be more subtle to notice, but once you've detected the problem, which for many people is scary, if they don't know that having a problem does not mean you need to immediately have a solution. It just means you need to start problem solving. You already know what to do. Don't be scared to say you have a problem. Just start problem solving and that leads into those next steps of defining the problem behaviorally and taking a functional assessment approach.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (26:05):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (26:06):

Generating solutions and then doing a careful Pro/Con analysis of those solutions to pick one and then quit your dawdling. Implement and evaluate. Even if it wasn't the right solution, you are going to be able to course correct. We've talked a lot about step one and we should know a lot about step two: Defining the problem and finding the true scope and taking that functional assessment approach. You've done some research in OBM on applying a functional assessment approach to staff performance problems. Talk to us a little bit about how. It's not all an experimental functional analysis of client destructive behavior. There's so many other ways to do that bigger meaning of the word functional analysis.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (27:09):

Yes. I think that's a really good point and I love that you're that you're making that. Identifying functional relations is just about, "Can you consistently say under these conditions, this thing happens, changes increases, decreases?" We do that with our acquisition programming. We should be doing it with acquisition programming for staff, which is called training. You should know over time when I train in this way, using these examples, folks master it pretty quickly, don't engage in a lot of errors, maintain it over time. I think we sometimes forget to apply that to adult learners that we're working with. Parents, other teachers, our trainees, our staff. We have a number of really fantastic free tools that people way smarter than me [Laughing] have created in our profession. They are all variations on the performance diagnostic checklist and the one that is probably most used in the applied setting for service provision is the performance diagnostic checklist for human services. It's fantastic because again, it increases that latency to solving the problem, forces you to focus on environmental variables. It's better matched for discreet type problems, like someone's not showing up on time or not accurately filling out their supervision paperwork. I do think that you can use it to help you connect with how to take a functional approach to things like interpersonal communication problems and things like that. I'll tell you, just in my opinion, with trying to create, trying to assess and create a plan for problem behavior with the client. When I say problem behavior, I mean, behavior somehow that is dangerous or impeding their ability to be independent and is identified by all parties as important to try to work on. I think the most critical piece, and that people fail at a lot, is the operational definition. I think it's hard to teach. I think it's hard to get it right. I think it's hard for us to give up all of the subjective terminology that is at strength for us. I think same thing when it comes to issues with ourselves or with our staff, our trainees, that we really don't do a great job of defining. I think this is a spot where you need to sit for a while. I think it's best when you're trying to figure out what the problem is. Talk with a colleague, a mentor, a supervisor or peer, because likely, especially if you are involved in the problem at all, there's gonna be quite a bit of subjectivity in there. Really trying to describe this in objective terms, in measurable observable terms, the same way we would, any other thing that we're trying to get our hands around. That's true even of skill acquisition definitions, right? Something I want you to do more of. I should have an operational definition of it. I think that defining the problem, as you said, is critical. You've identified it. Now, really stay here. Don't put your running shoes on and try to run this. It's not a sprint. Figure it out. I think we've got tools that can help us and our technology, obviously, can do wonders here.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (30:48):

I agree. What I find is if someone comes to a supervision or consultation session and they are basically telling stories and can't yet say exactly what they're working on, they haven't yet really formulated that good operational definition, which means they certainly aren't going to have identified the function, which should then lead to the solutions that you generate, which is step three. It's so critical when you're doing this process to don't jump ahead.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (31:35):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (31:35):

Make sure after you've detected the problem that you really do know what the true scope, be able to describe it and know what some of the functional determinants are. When you pull solutions out of thin air, that aren't related to those functional determinants, just like anything else, they are more likely to have to be powerful and aversive rather than directly related in a meaningful way to what was causing the little problem tornado in the first place.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (32:10):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (32:10):

Our power to operate more directly using reinforcement, using a variety of other strategies. That's related to how well we identify the function with all kinds of problems. When you get to step three, that's probably Tyra's favorite step.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (32:34):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (32:34):

Where it's time to generate solutions and what I find is a lot of people want to jump to this, "Oh problem! Okay. Solutions!" They wanna skip step two.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (32:46):

I certainly have.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (32:48):

[Laughing] Don't do it! I've been guilty of it. Again, remember, I'm more on the impulsive train where I just go like, "Ooh, Ooh! I got a good idea. That worked before". Really holding yourself accountable to generating solutions and generating variable solutions can prevent you from doing what Tyra mentioned earlier. That is being a one trick pony where, "I got my one strategy that I used, no matter what that problem and looks like". Hey, I bet you're a nail, because I got a hammer. That notion of you hold yourself accountable to generating. There's a universe of possibilities. Some of them are going to be terrible. [Laughing]

Dr. Tyra Sellers (33:36):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (33:36):

But more than one of them will be reasonable and actually hold yourself accountable to generating those. Tyra, what do we do to help if we get stuck on this of like, "I just want to go with my old buddy: functional communication training", or what have you? It's not that that's a bad idea, but how do you get some other things in the mix?

Dr. Tyra Sellers (34:00):

Great question. I think one of the first things is keep in mind the potential function that you've identified because that's gonna help you in generating solutions that are better matched, right? Again, just saying, "Oh, that person isn't performing well. We're gonna throw more training at them". That might not be the right thing to do. Think about different variables that you've identified. Some of the things that I do, just Tyra's head about creativity. I try to engage in problem solving activities or brainstorming. Generating the solutions under stimulus conditions, different than the ones I'm in right now. For example, if you present to me with a problem right now, Linda and said, "We gotta brainstorm some solutions", I might push my chair back and stand up. Better yet, I would leave this physical environment and I would go to a different environment. The reason is, whether or not we're aware, the stimuli that we contact regularly, are more likely to generate responses that we have engaged in, in the presence of those stimuli. It's very easy to just say, "Okay, we're gonna problem solve, trainee. Let's leave the office and go for a walk around the building", or something like that as we're talking. Let's go in the meeting room, let's go down to a cafe. Provided you can maintain confidentiality, but change the stimuli. I frequently will write down the first solution that comes to mind and then put it away, or put it on the whiteboard and then put a line through it. Something that will kind of evoke, "Not that". Now, I might go back to it after I generate more. It's not gone, but I don't want it to be most present because I'm more likely to keep coming back to it. I also will often set goals for myself or other people. We have to come up with at least 10 different possibilities. Now, I can't quote the research on this, but I've been in a few workshops where other people that do work on this will say, "You're not actually getting degenerative, new, truly novel responses until you're like in the forties", which many of our problems don't need that much creativity. That's like in the business world, but if you don't set a goal, you're likely to stop and land on one before you've considered all possibilities. Sometimes we'll set a goal and then often if I've identified a couple of different environmental variables that I think are impacting, I might try to generate solutions under those different categories. I'm thinking some of it may be related, but they don't have enough reminders to get this task done in a certain way. Okay, cool. What are all the solutions there? Maybe some of it is related to, "This is not very fun to do". What are some of the solutions there? Then I can combo plate it, but those are my strategies. How about you, Linda?

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (37:22):

I love all of those strategies and that notion of write everything down because in my spitballing of ideas, some silly stuff is gonna come out too. I don't start evaluating while you're still generating.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (37:46):

New Speaker (37:46):

That evaluative piece really suppresses the generativity. Just write it all down. If a unicorn shows up a unicorn gets on the whiteboard.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (37:55):

I love unicorns.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (37:58):

[Laughing] That's right. Write it all down. I love that idea of knowing, "I wanna try to come up with at least this many ideas." In the problem solving activity that we provide in the chapter, we have four or five lines and they're there for a reason. We want to prompt you to come up with at least that many. Then, when you go to the next step for the Pro/Con analysis, there are five spots for you to put a potential solution and then evaluate those pros and cons.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (38:43):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (38:43):

There are these antecedent things that you can to get yourself to come up with some new ideas. I really like doing this step of the brainstorming of potential solutions with another person. Very often, their idea then sparks a couple in response and I never would've had any of those ideas if I didn't have that other person in my environment.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (39:16):

Yeah. That brings up another point that is a recommendation in this arena. Tack some rules, especially if you're doing it with someone else at the outset. Get at what you were saying, "No idea is off the table". A lot of people will start generating ideas from what resources do I have available? Don't do that. That comes later in your Pro/Con analysis. Start with that sort of question. If resources were not an issue, what are all of the possible solutions? Some of them might not be doable, but the ones that aren't doable could generate an algorithm or a variation of an analog or a variation of them that would be doable or that you could test out. Even if some of the solutions seem farfetched, or as you mentioned a unicorn, that's okay. Put them on there and give everybody permission. Nobody should say, "We already tried that", or "We don't have the money for that, Linda". That doesn't matter. As you said, this isn't the evaluative process, this is just the generative process.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (40:27):

Once you've done that generative process, you're obviously not going to put unicorn or wave my magic wand.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (40:36):

I'm putting unicorn as a solution from now on, every time. [Laughing]

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (40:39):

Every time. That's right. You're going to pick maybe some combo plates, as you mentioned. You're going to pick the ones that seem to have the most utility, just even at first blush, eliminate the ones that are probably not really gonna be viable yet, but pick 3, 4, 5 of those and then do that careful Pro/Con analysis. What are the advantages? What are the disadvantages? We encourage people to think about not only advantages and disadvantages, but the short term ones as well as the long term ones.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (41:22):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (41:23):

Fill all the boxes, because if you haven't thought of a disadvantage of a solution yet, you probably haven't thought things through carefully enough.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (41:36):

Yeah. I think you're absolutely right. I think about: Is it doable? Resources, that kind of stuff. Is it gonna be socially acceptable? Is it gonna feel good? One maybe doable with less resources, but not make people feel so great. Another might be a little more effortful, but make people feel better about it. I'm gonna pick that one. Am I gonna get a short term benefit? Am I gonna get a long term benefit? Is it sustainable, right? Like in the long term. So, absolutely.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (42:09):

That's right. I think the reason to think about the long and short term pros and cons is because sometimes the short term is real hard, but the long term is so much better. For example, let's say things aren't going well with that supervisee and you maybe even recognize that you've contributed to that. One of the solutions you can evaluate is an apology, a crucial conversation and that is hard. The short term cons are, "I don't want to, I don't want to, I don't want to."

Dr. Tyra Sellers (42:49):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (42:49):

Five times, please.[Laughing] The long term benefits are so worth it. There are things that you can do to try to cushion and eliminate the short term discomfort cons effort, but you can really make those longer term ones more present for yourself of, "It's the right thing to do. It's consistent with my values. I'm gonna be showing this person that a supervisor does this." That's an important part of your role and that it is okay to be wrong and it's even more okay to apologize. When you start writing all that stuff down, you start seeing like, "Oh my gosh, there are a jillion pros."

Dr. Tyra Sellers (43:41):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (43:42):

In the long term, I just gotta get through this really hard immediate con.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (43:49):

Yep. I think that's a fantastic point. I would just summarize that if you have a solution that ticks most of the boxes, but you're still hesitant, because it's gonna be hard or it's gonna make you feel bad or make someone else feel bad, a great way to move past that is to reconnect with your values. For example, in my work, what we often do when we have a solution or two things we're choosing between is we pair them with each of our identified values. If one of them is aligned with more or all of our values, that's what we're gonna go with. If we're hesitant about something and we can connect with our values, then often that is a way to slightly alleviate some of that discomfort. I know it's yucky, but this means I'm living my values of X, Y, Z. I really love that you brought that up.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (44:44):

If you are a little bit more on the impulsive side and you're jumping right to the, "Oh, found a problem. I'm gonna go with my go to solution," you're a little bit more on the impulsive side, but there's also the dawdler side. There are people who will go through each of those first four steps and then step five is: Gotta pick one. You gotta do it and you have to evaluate it. I think that we can have these histories where being wrong is quite aversive to us and it can lead us to avoid actually making the choice and going with it. That's where you get the like, "Well, I just need to think about it. Let me sleep on it. Well, let me just get a little more data. Let me just think about it." When that occurs, you've gotta really hold yourself accountable to, "If I need more data, what data is it?" Is it data about the function of the problem? Is it data about a potential pro or con of one of the solutions? If you can't describe what it is, you're probably just dawdling. [Laughing]

Dr. Tyra Sellers (46:04):

Yes. Ultimately, you have to pick a solution. You have to design how you're gonna implement it and have a plan and you need to pull the trigger and do it and trust that if it wasn't the best thing, in hindsight, after you get some of those data, you will have had a structured approach that you can go back to and you can tweak. Same thing with implementing a skill acquisition, or a behavior reductive program with our clients. We don't just write it and let it go. We're constantly checking in because we engage in philosophic doubt. There's always a possibility we missed something or there's a better way to do something. I think folks need to just sometimes jump and probably you're not gonna have the right solution every time or early on, and you're gonna have to go back and tweak and that's okay because no one is better positioned than a behavior analyst to do that.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (47:05):

Yeah. There's some exciting stuff happening in the literature right now and at least for JABA. I read every one of those papers so I know about it. That notion of we choose prompting strategies, error correction strategies, treatments for problem behavior. There are more and more studies coming out, particularly on the prompting and error correction, where you have an assessment that gives you data about several possible strategies and really helps you work through some of the pros and cons with data to support that, rather than just, "I'm gonna do everything least to most," or "I'm gonna do everything no-no."

Dr. Tyra Sellers (47:56):

Put your cookie cutters away. We don't do cookie cutter.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (47:59):

[Laughing] That notion of, "Here are your options, here's the data that you have," but then whichever one you pick the others don't disappear.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (48:11):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (48:12):

You're gonna get that data and you have to remember, it's just data. The data are what they are. If they're saying this isn't working, great. It's a good thing you got that data. Now you can choose something else. If they're saying this does work, great. It's a good thing you've got that data. There are times when you're gonna have to lather, rinse, repeat.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (48:40):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (48:41):

I picked the solution, I tried it. The data say, it's not going that well. Let's go back to the beginning.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (48:48):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (48:48):

Maybe even problem solve on your implementation. Well, are my data not good?

Dr. Tyra Sellers (48:55):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (48:55):

Is my procedural integrity not good? Is there another function that I might have missed? If so, what are my solutions? Maybe I had the right function and I just need to go back to my solutions, generate a few more or pick my second option or combo my second option with my first option.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (49:18):

Yeah. I think there are some data even relative to supervisory type practices and training practices that are telling us something similar. Just your go-to isn't the right way. There's an article by Bacotti and colleagues. I hope I'm saying that right. It's recent. This year, 2021, that really start showing that for many adult learners, at some point in the skill acquisition when you're training them, yes, immediate feedback following the response is great, but at some point individuals not only showed a preference, but also did better when the feedback shifted to beforehand, which makes sense, right? Like, "Okay, Linda. Tell me what I'm doing right and wrong as I'm doing it." Now that I'm getting better, I've got some acquisition, I'm more fluent, you coming and talking in my ear might be a disrupter. It might produce disfluencies. It's mucking up my flow. Like, "Get off my mojo. Tell me about it before." Remember. Blah, blah, blah, right? I love that idea that we need to throw away that cookie cutter, "one size fits all," or "I'm doing it this way, because I've always done it this way", and continue to be responsive to the improvements in our profession that our science is giving us.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (50:37):

And continue to take data on our own implementation.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (50:41):

Yes. Be a scientist in the moment, right? That's what we do. It's all practitioner science models.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (50:49):

I love it. Wouldn't Murray Sidman be proud? That notion, "Bring some science to everything you do in your practice, every day". To wrap it up on problem solving, I would say this: We've gotta recognize we have long histories where problems are terrible things and we hope we don't have them and we've gotta change that mindset to, "Oh, you've got one, but the best one you have is the one you know about." Don't hope there aren't any problems. There are gonna be problems.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (51:25):

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (51:25):

Recognize it and realize it, and develop that repertoire of what to do when you have a problem.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (51:33):

And teach it, expressly.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (51:36):

And teach it to others and give them that gift.

Speaker 2 (51:39):

Really quickly, Linda. I know we're wrapping up, but also just to call out a resource in the book in chapter 7. There's that appendix that helps you identify for yourself or work with a trainee, to identify maybe some deficits or excesses in your own or their problem solving repertoires as you're going through or teaching a structured approach. I really love that, because likely if you're someone who's more than three or four years old, you've got some funky stuff that has just been shaped over time in your problem solving. We've got that theme of self-reflection, spend some time thinking about where you maybe need to improve or teach your trainees and supervisees how to take a structured approach to do that self-reflection around their problem solving repertoires, so they can take a more active and meaningful approach to shaping things up.

Dr. Linda LeBlanc (52:34):

Yep. For this chapter on problem solving, which is the first of a set where we provide these appendices about assess your own potential problems with this repertoire and then work on those. We'll be talking about the same approach of self-reflection, self-assessment in our next couple of episodes and we really are going to bring this problem solving mindset back when we get to solving problems in the supervisory repertoires or relationship in a later chapter. All right. If you have been listening, please don't go anywhere because it's getting real and we have more guests joining us in our next episode. Join us again for another episode of The Lift.

Dr. Tyra Sellers (53:34):

Yeah. Go find yourself a problem and get it solved. Bye, everyone.

Recommended for you

Leave a reply

Designed to sharpen your critical thinking skills.

Your online learning journey

Frame your problem, think critically and engage with your stakeholders.

As a manager or aspiring leader, you know that to rise through the ranks requires strong and creative problem-solving skills. To get to the top, business leaders need to act and react to the priorities set for the organization.

They must exercise their critical thinking capabilities and decide which issues to focus on and when. So, what are the essential elements of effective problem-solving that you can apply to your particular scenario?

The program is structured into five units, covering the following topics:

• Learn to recognize when a problem requires a systematic approach.
• Articulate how the process works and how each part contributes.
• Understand why engaging stakeholders is critical throughout the process.
• Learn how to develop your Frame sequence and how to frame your problem.
• Apply the Holding Hands, Dolly the Sheep and Watson rules to the Frame sequence to make it robust.
• Learn how to map out all the possible problem causes using a WHY map.
• Identify which causes are at the root of the problem.
• Update the Frame sequence to integrate new information.
• Learn how to apply MECE thinking.
• Identify and organize all the potential solutions using a HOW map and determine which are feasible.
• Identify a set of criteria that represents your stakeholders’ views.
• Create a decision matrix to rank the attractiveness of the options.
• Make aligned decisions that support the solution.
• Craft a storyline to defend the line of thinking (bullet proof) which is being empathetic to stakeholders.
• See the big picture and plan your next actions.

Themes you will explore

Problem framing

Thinking creatively

Thinking critically

Question mapping

Hypotheses testing

Decision making

Engaging stakeholders

You will have a dedicated learning coach, making sure you receive a highly individualized learning experience.

Your professional learning coach accompanies you through your 5-week learning journey on this Complex Problem Solving online course. They provide support and feedback as you apply your learning directly into your workplace, where it has an immediate impact.

Their input helps you translate your learning to your particular context. By spreading this feedback regularly throughout the program, you’ll be sure to embed your ongoing learning directly in your daily work.

Your professional learning coach interacts with you via video, in writing, and over the phone. You have calls, spread across the 5-weeks, at intervals that consolidate your learning.

Business Process Improvement Training Courses

Private training

Become adept in the business process improvement methodologies and tools

Whether in-person or virtual, our live sessions use accelerated learning techniques, securing your thorough comprehension through interactive workshops and lectures. Discover our on-demand e-learnings and free webinars for flexible learning options.

All of our instructors are drawn from industry and have hands-on experience in the application of their specialist subjects. Our approach is to work closely with our clients during business process improvement initiatives.

Whether you are wanting to simply create awareness of the need for continuous process improvement or implement a full global corporate initiative, enrolling in our training will help you.

Benefit from becoming a better individual and organization

Find out how continuous process improvement training can create success for you and your organization. Embedding the concept will enable you to compete better and create more customer satisfaction.

Focus on the area that you most need or take on all the various approaches, methodologies, and tools to cover all aspects of your business. Even earn certifications, like our BSI auditor qualification.

Popular business process improvement training courses

Our most popular courses are listed below with brief descriptions and links to our BSI Learning Marketplace for more details and to enroll.

Develop the necessary skills when auditing process improvement and learn various process improvement tools, the TIM WOODS eight process wastes, value stream mapping (VSM), and reactive and proactive problem solving. Learn to distinguish different stages of process improvement maturity and how to identify a continuous process improvement culture.

See more details and enroll.

Learn the principles of general communication techniques, interpersonal skills, non-verbal communication, listening skills, techniques for building rapport, methods for dealing with difficult interactions, and effective briefing techniques. The focus is for auditors to communicate with those being audited, including making initial contact, preparing the audit plan, interaction while conducting the audit, briefing and preparing the audit findings, and recommendations.

Get the skills and techniques to write an accurate audit report that provides the right facts and communicates all findings in a clear, succinct way.

Develop an understanding of the document information systems and the practical methodologies to implement management controls regardless of media type.

Understand the concept, definition, and process of RCA using SURF (symptoms, underlying factors, root causes, fixes) methodology. Uncover the real root causes of problems faced in your daily operations and enable fact-based decision-making.

Learn the purpose of process mapping, the various approaches for daily operation and process improvement, and how to apply process mapping effectively in your organization.

Understand that problem solving is a universal competency that applies to every industry and organization. Be equipped with the required skills to construct, utilize, and interpret data from the 7QC tools to effectively improve the quality of your products and services.

Gain an overall understanding of the eight disciplines (8D) methodology and how to use the 8D process to identify root causes, followed by short and long-term solutions for issues encountered. Learn how to identify corrective actions to be taken and assess the effectiveness of the corrective actions to prevent recurrence.

Our training programs can help you and your organization inspire growth.

Do you have questions about our courses or enterprise programs? Contact our team at 1-800-217-1390 or submit an inquiry.