Safeguarding Problem Definition: Firewall and Time Test

Two safeguards can help us define a problem before rushing to solve it: separate the two stages, and ask whether the proposed solution will last.

SAFEGUARD: Build a problem-solution firewall

Separate the problem-defining phase of the decision-making process from the problem-solving phase.

A mentor of mine once taught me that the best way to avoid finding the perfect solution to the wrong problem at work, when time allows, is to hold two separate meetings: one to define the problem, and one to come up with the solution.

The most precious resources in any organization are time and the brainpower of your best employees. Asking for two separate meetings to come up with a solution to a problem that seemed obvious to everyone is not an easy sell. But it’s worth it. I’ve used this safeguard for many years, and I’ve seen it used over and over by people who consistently make good decisions. As soon as they start implementing it, they learn that having a single meeting for both tasks only makes them vulnerable to the social default—either their action-oriented teams will likely spend only a moment or two defining the problem and the rest of the meeting trying to solve it, or everyone will start suggesting solutions to their version of the problem. Either way the meeting won’t be as useful as it should be.

When you spend time trying to understand the problem, you realize that you have a room full of people who have insight that you don’t have. One way to keep meetings short and avoid the signaling that comes from repeating information that everyone knows is simply asking everyone, “What do you know about this problem that other people in the room don’t know?”

That question makes people think. They stop filling the air with ideas everyone already knows and start explaining how they think about the problem.

Hearing those different perspectives helps the group develop a shared understanding of the problem. At the second meeting, people can assess solutions against that understanding and consider how changes in their own part of the organization would affect everyone else. An apocryphal quote often attributed to the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein sums up this idea: “To understand is to know what to do.”

People go fast in operational environments. If you insert too much process into decisions, you miss the expiring windows of opportunity. But fast-paced environments are a feast for defaults. You need to slow down—but not too much—and use a combination of judgment, principles, and safeguards to make sure you’re getting to the best answer possible and thinking clearly. Probing and asking deeper questions slows down the process just enough to dramatically improve your chances of solving the right problem.

Creating space between the definition of a problem and the solution to it works at a personal level too. Give yourself time to get clear on what the problem is before you jump into solving it. More often than not, you’ll discover that your first attempt to define the underlying issue is rarely the most accurate.

Write down what you think the problem is, and look at it again the next day. Replace vague or unexplained jargon with a concrete description. If you cannot explain what is happening, spend more time understanding it before choosing a solution.

SAFEGUARD: Use the test of time

Ask whether the proposed solution addresses what keeps producing the problem. How long should the fix last, and under what conditions would the problem return? A recurring problem may mean that you have treated a symptom while leaving its cause in place.

Suppose, for example, that Downtown Dog Rescue in Los Angeles had tried to solve its problem with overcrowding by hosting a spring dog-adoption campaign, rather than addressing one of the root causes: pet owners’ inability to continue caring for their dogs. The campaign might have succeeded in reducing the number of dogs the rescue housed at the time, but only temporarily. A few months later, the facility would have once again been overcrowded.

A quick fix can relieve an immediate problem and buy time to address its cause. The danger is mistaking that relief for a lasting solution. Repeated temporary fixes consume time and can leave people exhausted by the same problem. If immediate action is necessary, decide who will investigate the cause and when the longer-term work will happen.