Falling team morale, lost market share and stalled innovation can involve several connected causes and competing views of success. Some are wicked problems: their definition changes as you learn. Treating every challenge as a simple fault can lead to repeated fixes that miss the wider system. Start by asking what is known, what is uncertain and who is affected.
I. Diagnosis: What Kind of Problem Is It?
Before acting, define the challenge and the evidence you have. Can expert analysis explain the cause and effect, or do you need small experiments to learn how the system behaves? A business problem can include both kinds of work.
Complicated Problems
- Definition:Can be clarified with evidence and expertise.
- Solution:Several workable answers may exist.
- Approach:Analyse, compare options and use expert judgement.
Complex and Wicked Problems
- Definition:May be disputed or change as you learn.
- Solution:Outcomes depend on context and adaptation.
- Approach:Explore connections, test small changes and learn.
II. Your Problem-Solving Habits
Use these five questions to reflect on your approach. This is an informal discussion exercise, not a validated personality test or a diagnosis of cognitive bias. Results describe your choices here, not a fixed trait; ties use the first profile in the list.
1/5. When facing a new challenge, your first instinct is to:
Reviewing your answers...
Your Result: 🚀 Action-Oriented
Your answers favour quick decisions. This can help you act, but check for optimism bias: look for evidence that challenges your first expectation.
Your Result: 🕵️ Evidence-Seeking
Your answers favour gathering facts. Check for confirmation bias: try to disprove your hypothesis as well as support it.
Your Result: 🎧 Collaborative
Your answers favour talking decisions through. Check for affinity bias: give unfamiliar or dissenting voices a fair hearing.
Your Result: 🤔 Analytical
Your answers favour careful comparison. Watch for analysis paralysis: set a decision point when further analysis adds little value.
Your Result: 💡 Idea-Driven
Your answers favour new approaches. Check for salience bias: compare the most striking idea with less eye-catching options.
Five Discussion Profiles
🚀 Action-Oriented
Favours quick action. Useful when time matters; test optimistic assumptions.
🕵️ Evidence-Seeking
Favours facts. Seek evidence against your explanation, not only for it.
🎧 Collaborative
Favours shared views. Include dissent and people outside your usual circle.
🤔 Analytical
Favours detailed comparison. Agree when there is enough evidence to decide.
💡 Idea-Driven
Favours new ideas. Compare their usefulness rather than their novelty alone.
III. Root Cause and Quality Tools
Choose a tool for the question you need to answer. These tools can help structure evidence and possible causes, but a diagram or repeated question does not prove a root cause.
Pareto
Use: Prioritise. Rank causes by frequency or impact using your own data; do not assume an 80/20 split.
5 Whys
Use: Investigate. Ask beyond the symptom, then test each proposed cause with evidence.
Ishikawa
Use: Explore. Group possible causes in a fishbone diagram, then investigate them.
8D
Use: Contain and correct. A structured team process for quality problems, corrective actions and follow-up.
FMEA
Use: Prevent. Assess possible failure modes and prioritise ways to reduce risk.
Kepner-Tregoe
Use: Compare. Structure the investigation of a deviation using what is different, where and when.
IV. Working with Complexity
The Cynefin framework helps you choose a response that fits the context. It is a sense-making aid, not a score or a rigid classification. Revisit your view as evidence changes, and do not replace safety procedures or specialist advice with a diagram.
Probe - Sense - Respond. Test small changes within clear limits.
Act - Sense - Respond. Stabilise first, then assess the situation.
Sense - Analyse - Respond. Use expert analysis and compare workable answers.
Sense - Categorise - Respond. Use established practice when cause and effect are understood.
Three Ways to Rethink a System
Donella Meadows placed system goals, paradigms and the ability to question paradigms near the top of her list of intervention points. This is a prompt for systems thinking, not a guarantee that a particular change will work.
- System goal: ask what the system is trying to achieve.
- Paradigm: question the beliefs behind its rules and decisions.
- Questioning paradigms: stay open to other models and explanations.
Sources: Cynefin · Donella Meadows