Problem Solving - Why so important?

Every single one of us has problems. The interesting thing about “problems” is that everyone thinks that his/her problem is the biggest one. We get entangled into problems on a daily basis and problems increase when we don’t know the reason behind our problem. Most of us don’t get things solved, and even when we feel that we have, the problem only occurs in a slightly different form somewhere else. This can generally be as a result of not consciously being aware of what caused the problem in the first place. 

Albert Einstein once said "If I were given one hour to save the planet, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and one minute resolving it."

Those were wise words, but from what is generally observed, most organizations don’t heed them when considering the problems they need to solve, whether that is in understanding potential improvements in technology or service provision, planning to prevent potential issues they know they will face in the future, or addressing errors that have occurred as a result of their internal controls, activities and products or services.

Actions determined to tackle the problems most organisation face, especially with regard to correcting errors that have occurred, largely fall at the first hurdle, because many organisations simply aren’t sufficiently rigorous in defining the problems they’re attempting to solve and articulating why those issues are important.

Without that rigor, organizations miss opportunities, waste resources, and end up pursuing initiatives that aren’t aligned with the core purpose to any problem solving activity. To ensure the problem never occurs again! How many times have you seen a project go down one path only to realize in hindsight that it should have gone down another? How many times have you seen an action put in place to mitigate an issue identified, only to find it re-occurs somewhere else within the process, or in some other form of the original issue.

All organizations fundamentally need to become better at asking the right questions so that they tackle the right problems. 

What really is a Problem?

A problem is the difference between what is happening or what has happened, and what should be or should have happened. A gap between planned or intended results and actual performance.

This could be seen through measures of :

• Quality
• Delivery
• Cost
• Lead Time
• Safety
• Performance/functionality 

This gap may have just happened, it may be happening right now, or may happen at some point in the future. As a result problem solving needs to be considered in both a reactive and a proactive manner.

At times both are considered together. When problem solving considers both of these in tandem, is when problem solving becomes most effective at ensuring issues never occur again. 

What is the key to successful problem solving?

Finding the root cause of a problem and eliminating it is the primary key to any problem solving activity.

If the root cause is not identified clearly and accurately, then in effect any problem solving activity will only be an attempt at resolving the effect instead.

Although the problem may appear solved, this results in only temporary solutions to the issues raised. The root cause will occur again, and when it does, the potential to determine the root cause becomes more difficult. Why?

Problems, even when they appear for a second or third time, can exhibit largely different symptoms, or occur further down the process. This as a result leads to higher risks of again only addressing the symptoms or effects of the problem.

This cycle of repeatedly resolving effects is commonly known as fire fighting, and is extremely costly, as it costs time, resources and materials that could have been better spent on addressing the real root cause if it was adequately understood.

Addressing the root cause, leads to successful corrective actions.

LETS DEMONSTRATE THIS THROUGH AN EXERCISE:

• Consider the following scenario, and try to determine from the information provided, the reason the problem occurred, and what your potential corrective action would be in the future to prevent it occurring again?

You had an important meeting at 9am with a new customer 3 hours drive from home. You arrived at 9:40. There were many issues however that contributed to your delay. These included, an accident that resulted in 40 minutes added to your journey time, difficulty finding a parking space on the street when you arrived, costing you a further 10 minutes delay. Although you regularly wake up at 5am for work, unfortunately for this morning, you accidentally also slept through your initial alarm at 5am as you know it takes you almost an hour to get ready, waking only at 5:20 when your partners alarm went off.

You know you have to do this journey again the same time next month.

Why don't you write down what you think the root cause is, and what your corrective action would be for your next journey?

Likely, your corrective action focussed on the some of the more immediate concerns or issues identified in the scenario above.

Many may have focusses on the fact that some of the key contributors to being late were identified already and understood; missing your alarm or the difficulties finding parking. Some may have considered improvements to these aspects in terms of ensuring that a second or third alarm was put in place, to ensure oversleeping wasn't possible, or to consider alternative routes, that have reduced risk of accidents and a less used one reducing potential for traffic.

Some may have accepted that accidents do and will occur, thus this particular contributing issue having little scope of being addressed and is a potential prevalent issue regardless of route, journey time or location involved. Their corrective actions being reserved to only those issues described in the previous paragraph and discounting this as an "inevitable" risk.

Little however would have really understood the primary root cause...

The issue with regard to the meeting itself, considering its criticality. Likely the most effective corrective action would, not be :

• re-arranging the meeting to a time more suitable time and location considering rush hour traffic towards 9am and the 3 hour drive required,
• arranging a hotel stay on the night before to ensure the journey time was reduced and the visit was more "local" on the day

But rather;

• to alter the forum and setting of the meeting in its entirety. e.g. Skype, video or conference call for an initial review of requirements. This way ensuring elimination of any potential risks associated with travelling between one location and another.

Is a structured approach really required?

Not all problems need to be resolved using a structured problem solving tool or methodology. It is important however to know when a tool or tools are required or appropriate and when the relevant associated techniques should be employed.

The key decisions of whether to consider a structured approach is if the cause or countermeasure is unknown.

-If the cause and countermeasure are known, generally it is likely the problem is quite a local issue, or simple in the effects noted (eg a scrapped component because a tool has broken). Knowledge is available and evident to determine and apply a solution to the problem (eg adjust speed or feed, purchase higher quality tools)

-If the cause is known but the countermeasure isn’t or not fully understood if able to result in a permanent solution, generally a process specialists or highly skilled personnel are required to determine the countermeasure required. (eg: a higher quality tool required, but inability to determine which tool, and the result expected or means of implementation.

-If the cause is unknown but the countermeasure is, it is likely that the problem hasn’t been completely understood. The action to mitigate the problem therefore may be addressing only the symptoms of the problem and lead to fire fighting or short term fixes. (eg component scrapped, with no clear indication on the tool itself. Operator changed the tool and net component is conforming)

-If both the cause and the countermeasure are unknown, a structured approach is highly effective in order to determine the real root cause, as well as to document and demonstrate effective countermeasures.

Going back to our scenario with the late attendance of our important meeting. A structured approach would not only have enabled us to accurately determine the root cause identified, but would also facilitate the right behaviours when determining an effective corrective action, to prevent recurrence of the problem - missing our meeting. e.g.

• Whether sufficient internet connection is available
• Whether all parties are aware and have capability of supporting the requirements
• Whether the media is suitable to ensure all aspects of the discussion are equivalent to a face to face discussion..

More often that not, the problem we have when attempting to fix our problems, is our problem with problem solving itself.