The biggest impediment to problem-solving is assuming we know what the problem is.
Assumptions allow us to get through life without having to think through every single action, interaction, and reaction. They allow us to grasp the general meaning of things and get on with it. Our assumptions are based on our past experiences, our state of mind, the narrative our brain constructs and maintains, and our mental model of the world. These factors, in combination, are extremely compelling. They favor speedy interpretations, categorizations, and determinations: I got this!
This is a fairly efficient way to proceed. It doesn’t use a lot of conscious attention. It feels right. And the familiarity breeds a sense of certainty; we think we’re on solid ground. I’ve said before that the unconscious part of the brain has an answer for everything. And its answers are correct often enough to lull us into accepting them unconditionally most of the time.
But the fact is that we often believe we have a fuller grasp of the circumstances than we actually do, which is why assumptions can also be the bane of our existence. In order to make its quick assessments, the brain uses shortcuts like cognitive biases.
Left to its own devices, it prefers to keep us treading water in the shallow end of the pool. We can very easily get into the habit of not questioning or even noticing our assumptions, including the assumption that we know what problem to solve.
Problem Finding vs. Problem Solving
in a 2018 podcast, Daniel Pink used the following example to describe the difference between problem finding and problem solving:
It was a very interesting study of artists [by J.W. Getzels and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi], where they put artists in a room and gave them a set of objects on one table and then an empty table and said, “Draw a still life.”
Some of the artists would pick a few items, put it on the table, and draw it. Others of them had a very different process. They’d take a few items, put them on the table, take one off, put it back on the other table, take two more items, put it on the target table, start drawing a sketch, rip it up, take one … One [group] was trying to solve a problem, “How can I make a good drawing?” The other was trying to find a problem, “What good drawing can I make?”
There’s a subtle distinction there, but it’s actually really important, because the people who were in the problem finding category went on to be much more successful artists than the people who were in the problem solving category.
I’ve been using a more prosaic example from Pink in the What Do You Want? course. He posed the problem of needing a new vacuum cleaner and then listed a number of possible actions he could take to determine which vacuum cleaner to purchase. Then he asked, “But what if I’ve gotten my problem wrong?” He said the point wasn’t to acquire a vacuum cleaner but to have clean floors. When looked at from that perspective, the list of possible actions he could take was entirely different.
I have an example of my own. I acquired a new dining table and found that the existing chairs no longer slid comfortably under the table because the fit was too tight. I knew the table had matching chairs, so I immediately got online to order them, only to discover they were no longer available. I spent a fair amount of time looking for a set of chairs that would work, but eventually gave up. When I went back out into the dining area and looked at the table, I burst into laughter. The obvious answer was to raise the legs of the table! I had gotten my problem wrong.
In neither of these examples would there be dire consequences for solving the wrong problem. But the same principle applies to all types of circumstances: business, societal, global, interpersonal, and personal. It’s when the stakes are highest that it’s the most critical we find the right problem to solve.
Desired Outcome
The way to do that is to first identify our desired outcome (clean floors, not acquiring a new vacuum cleaner; chairs fitting under the table, not new chairs). Identifying the desired outcome requires using conscious attention, so it isn’t as “efficient” a process. But efficiency and productivity have their limits. They are more useful in solving mechanical problems. But complex problems—big problems, worthy problems—are best approached from the perspective of the creative process. And that begins with identifying our desired outcome.
NOTE: When you discover you’ve gotten your problem wrong, you have an opportunity to formulate a better problem.