structured problem solving definition

• 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

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

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.

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

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

• Publications
• Processing Theories
• Alkaline Protective Coatings
• Photosensitive Protective coatings
• Bonding Materials
• Debonding Materials
• Anti-reflective Coatings
• Directed Self-Assembly
• Multilayer Systems
• Flex Sensors
• Moisture Sensors
• Manufacturing
• Executive Advisory Board
• Quality, Environmental and Safety
• Community Giving
• Partnerships
• Press Releases

Posts by Topic

• Brewer Science (22)
• company (22)
• wafer-level packaging (21)
• lithography (15)
• Leadership (14)
• sensors (14)
• Internships (9)
• Technology (9)
• innovation (7)
• printed electronics (7)
• Internet of Things (6)
• Sustainability (6)
• community (6)
• new business developement (6)
• Directed Self-Assembly (5)
• Engineering (5)
• Predictive Maintenance (5)
• Science, (5)
• development (5)
• research (5)
• zero defects (5)
• Integrated Circuits (4)
• coat uniformity (4)
• culture (4)
• spin coat (4)
• technology advancement (4)
• thin wafer handling (4)
• workplace safety (4)
• 3D packaging (3)
• Datastream (3)
• Future Leaders (3)
• GreenCircle Certified (3)
• Manufacturing (3)
• Pillars of Impact (3)
• Problem Solving (3)
• STEM Jobs (3)
• business (3)
• education (3)
• moisture sensors (3)
• nanosensors (3)
• planarization (3)
• processing equipment (3)
• quality (3)
• quality control (3)
• semiconductor manufacturing (3)
• semiconductors (3)
• temporary bonding materials (3)
• wearable electronics (3)
• 3D Stacking (2)
• BrewerBOND (2)
• CS ManTech (2)
• Children (2)
• Convanta (2)
• Corning (2)
• Creativity (2)
• Energy Management (2)
• Fan-Out Wafer Level Packaging (2)
• LED manufacturing (2)
• Nanotechnology (2)
• Polymers (2)
• Potential (2)
• R & D (2)
• SEMICON Japan (2)
• Walter Barnes (2)
• Zero Waste to Landfill (2)
• advanced materials (2)
• advanced packaging (2)
• advanced technology (2)
• advanved lithography (2)
• benchtop equipment (2)
• carbon nanotubes (2)
• disruptive materials (2)
• entrepreneurs (2)
• environment (2)
• environmental monitoring (2)
• etch protection (2)
• human resources (2)
• inflect sensors (2)
• infrastructure management (2)
• integration (2)
• mems and sensors (2)
• moore's law (2)
• multilayer (2)
• nanoscience (2)
• oculus rift (2)
• olympics (2)
• scratch-resistant (2)
• smart manufacturing (2)
• spin process (2)
• spincoat (2)
• supply chain (2)
• thermal slide debonding (2)
• thick-film (2)
• wet etching (2)
• 3-D Stacking (1)
• 3D printing (1)
• Adhesives (1)
• Anniversary (1)
• Artifical Intelligence (1)
• Becky Rich (1)
• Biometric Sensors (1)
• BrewerBOND 220 (1)
• Building and Home Automation (1)
• Compound Semiconductor Manufacturing (1)
• Covanta Energy (1)
• Debonding Process (1)
• Electronics (1)
• Farming (1)
• GaN roughening (1)
• Gartner Hype Scale (1)
• Gartner Inc. (1)
• Geothermal (1)
• Inflect Moisture Sensor (1)
• Lateral Force (1)
• Medical and Health-Care Systems (1)
• National Chemistry Week (1)
• National Guardsman (1)
• National Manufacturing Day (1)
• RDL-first (1)
• Rama Puligadda (1)
• Ray Kurzweil (1)
• SEMICON Taiwan (1)
• SOC Materials (1)
• Scratch-resistant sensors (1)
• Selective Surface Modification (1)
• Semuconductors (1)
• Small Molecule Analysis (1)
• Strategic Materials Conference (1)
• Temporary Bonding (1)
• Testing Services (1)
• Thermal Stability (1)
• Transportation (1)
• Truck Drivers (1)
• Vehicle (1)
• ZoneBOND (1)
• adafruit (1)
• analytical group (1)
• anti-reflective coating (1)
• anti-reflective coatings (1)
• arc materials (1)
• autonomous car (1)
• back-end processes (1)
• batteries (1)
• bureau veritas certifications (1)
• chemical engineering (1)
• chemical stability (1)
• data logging (1)
• debonder (1)
• debonding (1)
• debonding materials (1)
• depth-of-focus (1)
• devices (1)
• digitsole (1)
• eco-friendly (1)
• economics (1)
• embedded wafer-level (1)
• energy-from-waste (1)
• environmental (1)
• environmental standards (1)
• etching (1)
• facial recognition (1)
• flexible electronics (1)
• flexible sensors (1)
• fossil fuel (1)
• grid array (1)
• hardmask (1)
• higher education (1)
• hybrid bonding (1)
• idtechex (1)
• industry 4.0 (1)
• inflect flex sensor (1)
• insoluble (1)
• intellectual property (1)
• inventors day (1)
• landfill (1)
• laser debonding (1)
• laser release (1)
• lithographic (1)
• lithographic composition (1)
• management (1)
• mechanical release (1)
• multi-layer (1)
• nano technologies (1)
• optical simulations (1)
• pebble watch (1)
• personality traits (1)
• photolithography (1)
• pixie scientific (1)
• planarized substrates (1)
• powerlifting (1)
• process engineer (1)
• prolith (1)
• protective coatings (1)
• pure enjoyment (1)
• purification (1)
• recycling (1)
• research and development (1)
• scientific computing (1)
• silicon wafers (1)
• smart technology (1)
• smart watches (1)
• sms audio biosport earbuds (1)
• solar energy (1)
• soluble (1)
• spin bowl (1)
• spin coaters (1)
• spin-on carbon (1)
• square substrate (1)
• substrate size (1)
• surface modification (1)
• temperature sensors (1)
• temporary wafer bonding (1)
• trilayer (1)
• trilayer resist process (1)
• ultrathin wafers (1)
• unilayer processing (1)
• unplugged (1)
• wafer problems (1)
• wearable devices (1)
• wearable solar (1)
• wireless headphones (1)
• zero landfill (1)

Six Steps to Structured Problem Solving

Subscribe to our blog.

What happens when a big problem pops up?  For most of us, our first reaction is, “Quick!  Let’s fix it and make this problem go away.” However, if we rush to fix the problem too quickly, we may end up implementing a “solution” or “quick fix” that doesn’t solve anything because we didn’t take the time to truly identify and understand the root cause of the problem itself.

One way we can keep ourselves from falling into this trap is by having a formal structured problem-solving (SPS) process in place.  Then, when problems do occur, we know exactly what steps to take to help ensure that our solution really will “make it go away.” While there are different variations to an SPS ( 8D , 5Why , DMAIC , etc.), they all follow the same basic steps.

1. Define the Problem

It is important to write a problem statement that is easily understood and is stated purely in terms of measurable or observable symptoms. At this point, there should be no mention of suspected causes or possible solutions. We just need to know what the problem is.  A good problem statement might look something like this: “High (greater than 8 ppb) trace metals in one of our hardmask products are causing unacceptably high defect counts with our most important customer.  We will lose this business if we cannot correct the problem by the end of the year.”

2. Describe the Current Situation

We do this by examining data that is readily available. In our hardmask example, we would collect batch data to identify the specific batches with the elevated defects and then study this data to see what they have in common.  Were they all made in a particular manufacturing location or on the same equipment set? Did they all use the same lots of the raw materials? By identifying where the problem is occurring, and where it is not occurring, we begin to zero in on what is causing our problem.

3. Identify Possible Causes

To identify possible causes, we should gather the team and brainstorm all potential causes that come to mind.  Once we’ve exhausted all possibilities, we can then start systematically ruling items out.  This is the most time-consuming, but one of the most vital steps in the process as we take each potential cause and work to rule it out. We must keep working until we have eliminated everything but the root cause.

4. Verify Root Cause

When we think that we have identified the true root cause, we need verify that it is the root cause by testing out our theory.  For our hardmask example, let’s say that we believe that the root cause is due to a bad batch of one of the raw materials. We can test our theory by making a new batch with everything the same except for a new batch of the suspect ingredient.  If the defect levels are back to normal, that’s a good indication that we have confirmed our root cause. 

5. Implement Solution

After we’ve identified the root cause, we implement a solution to remedy the issue, standardizing our solution and making the change permanent. This could mean updating specifications, writing new training materials, updating training packages or updating the FMEA. In the case of our hardmask example, we would need to create specifications and appropriate testing methods that will alert us that a batch of raw material is bad before we use it.  

6. Monitor for Success

After the solution has been implemented, test data can then be created to find which solutions offer the best improvements. In the case of our hardmask example, we would run test batches to make sure that we have the correct solution in place.  Measurements should also be taken on a scheduled basis to continue to confirm that the solution is still valid, making updates if and when needed.

  To stay up to date on industry hot topics, subscribe to the Brewer Science blog . You can also stay up to date on Brewer Science industry events, topics and news by following us on Twitter , YouTube , LinkedIn , or Facebook .

About Author

Karen Brown, Director of Organizational Development & Relationships, has been employed with Brewer Science for over a decade. Her background in employee development and training has made her an expert for the Brewer Science team in crafting successful, problem-solving employees

Subscribe To Blog

Subscribe to email updates.

At Brewer Science, our customer relationships don’t end when you buy materials and equipment. Because we want to work hand-in-hand to get your processes perfect, we’ve empowered an extensive applications and support team to help with all your processing needs.

[email protected]

Recent Posts

Connect with us.

Continuous Improvement blog Problem Solving: A Structured Approach

"The problems of the world cannot be solved by thinking the same way we thought when we created them." - Albert Einstein

Problem solving is a skill that is essential for success in both personal and professional life. It is the ability to identify and articulate problems, gather information, generate solutions, and implement those solutions effectively.

There are many different approaches to problem solving, but one of the most effective is the 8-step problem-solving process. This process is structured and systematic, which helps to ensure that problems are solved efficiently and effectively.

The 8 steps of the problem-solving process are:

Define the problem

This is the first and most important step in the problem-solving process. If you do not clearly define the problem, you'll have a hard time solving it.

So how do you define a problem? Here are a few tips:

• be specific - do not just say, "the application process lead time is too long."; instead, say something like "the current lead time for the application process is 40 working days”
• use data - if you have data, use it to support your definition of the problem. For example, you could say "the average process lead time has increased by 20% in the past 6 month."
• be objective - do not let your emotions get in the way of defining the problem. For example, don't say "Our lead time is terrible." Instead, say something like "the process lead time is not meeting our customers’ expectations."

Once you've defined the problem, you'll have a much better understanding of what you need to solve. You'll also be able to narrow down the scope of the problem and identify the root cause.

Here is an example of a well-defined problem statement:

The application process lead time has increased by 20% on average to 40 days, in the past 6 months.

This problem statement is specific, uses data, and is objective. It also includes a measure, which is the 20% average increase in lead time. This measure will help to gauge the effectiveness of the final solution. Your problem statement should always include some sort of measure but no suggested solution!

Break down the problem

Once the problem has been defined, you can break it down into smaller, more manageable problems. This will make it easier to identify the root cause of the problem. For example, if the problem is that a process is not producing the desired output, you could break the problem down into the following smaller problems:

• the person in the process is not properly trained.
• the person doing the process is not processing the input correctly.

Set a target

What is the desired outcome of the problem-solving process? What are the specific goals that need to be achieved? It is important to set a clear target so that you know when the problem has been solved. For example, the target for the process problem could be to have the process producing the desired output within 24 hours.

Analyse the root cause

The root cause of the problem is the underlying issue that is causing the problem to occur. It is important to identify the root cause so that it can be addressed effectively. Several techniques can be used to analyse the root cause of a problem, such as the 5 Whys, Fishbone diagrams, and Pareto charts.

Develop Countermeasures

Once the root cause of the problem has been identified, countermeasures can be developed to address it. Countermeasures are specific actions that can be taken to prevent the problem from occurring again. For example, the countermeasures for a process problem could include:

• create Standard Operating Procedures and the “best-known way” of doing the process”
• retraining everyone in the new way of working
• create a control plan to ensure that the input information is being processed correctly 100% of the time

Implement countermeasures

The countermeasures that have been developed need to be implemented. This may involve making changes to processes, procedures, or training. It is important to monitor the implementation of the countermeasures to ensure that they are effective.

Evaluate the results

Once the countermeasures have been implemented, it is important to evaluate the results. Did the countermeasures solve the problem? If not, further action may be needed. For example, if the process problem has not been solved, you may need to identify a new root cause and develop new countermeasures.

Standardise and share lessons learned

Once the problem has been solved, it is important to standardise the solution so that it can be used to prevent the problem from occurring again. The lessons learned from the problem-solving process should also be shared so that others can benefit from them. For example, you could create a standard operating procedure for the new way of working or develop a training program for the staff involved.

By following these steps, you can solve problems more effectively and efficiently.

Here are some additional tips for problem-solving:

• be curious - be willing to investigate problems with an open mind and a desire to learn
• be collaborative - involve others in the problem-solving process to get different perspectives and ideas
• use data and evidence - make decisions about solutions based on data and evidence
• be persistent - do not give up on a problem until you have found a solution that works
• be optimistic - believe that you can solve the problem and do not be afraid to take risks

By following these tips, you can improve your problem-solving skills and become more effective in your personal and professional life.

So, what are you waiting for? Start solving some problems today. 

28 July 2023

Graham Ross, Continuous Improvement Manager

More blogs by this author

Our faculties & departments

Engineering.

• Faculty of Engineering
• Architecture
• Biomedical Engineering
• Chemical & Process Engineering
• Civil & Environmental Engineering
• Design, Manufacturing & Engineering Management
• Electronic & Electrical Engineering
• Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering
• Naval Architecture, Ocean & Marine Engineering

Humanities & Social Sciences

• Faculty of Humanities & Social Sciences
• Centre for Lifelong Learning
• Government & Public Policy
• Psychological Sciences & Health
• Social Work & Social Policy
• Faculty of Science
• Computer & Information Sciences
• Mathematics & Statistics
• Pure & Applied Chemistry
• Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy & Biomedical Sciences
• Strathclyde Business School
• Accounting & Finance
• Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship, Strategy & Innovation
• Management Science
• MBA & General Management
• Strathclyde Executive Education & Development
• Work, Employment & Organisation

The Art of Effective Problem Solving: A Step-by-Step Guide

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.

Whether we realise it or not, problem solving skills are an important part of our daily lives. From resolving a minor annoyance at home to tackling complex business challenges at work, our ability to solve problems has a significant impact on our success and happiness. However, not everyone is naturally gifted at problem-solving, and even those who are can always improve their skills. In this blog post, we will go over the art of effective problem-solving step by step.

You will learn how to define a problem, gather information, assess alternatives, and implement a solution, all while honing your critical thinking and creative problem-solving skills. Whether you’re a seasoned problem solver or just getting started, this guide will arm you with the knowledge and tools you need to face any challenge with confidence. So let’s get started!

Problem Solving Methodologies

Individuals and organisations can use a variety of problem-solving methodologies to address complex challenges. 8D and A3 problem solving techniques are two popular methodologies in the Lean Six Sigma framework.

Methodology of 8D (Eight Discipline) Problem Solving:

The 8D problem solving methodology is a systematic, team-based approach to problem solving. It is a method that guides a team through eight distinct steps to solve a problem in a systematic and comprehensive manner.

The 8D process consists of the following steps:

• Form a team: Assemble a group of people who have the necessary expertise to work on the problem.
• Define the issue: Clearly identify and define the problem, including the root cause and the customer impact.
• Create a temporary containment plan: Put in place a plan to lessen the impact of the problem until a permanent solution can be found.
• Identify the root cause: To identify the underlying causes of the problem, use root cause analysis techniques such as Fishbone diagrams and Pareto charts.
• Create and test long-term corrective actions: Create and test a long-term solution to eliminate the root cause of the problem.
• Implement and validate the permanent solution: Implement and validate the permanent solution’s effectiveness.
• Prevent recurrence: Put in place measures to keep the problem from recurring.
• Recognize and reward the team: Recognize and reward the team for its efforts.

Download the 8D Problem Solving Template

A3 Problem Solving Method:

The A3 problem solving technique is a visual, team-based problem-solving approach that is frequently used in Lean Six Sigma projects. The A3 report is a one-page document that clearly and concisely outlines the problem, root cause analysis, and proposed solution.

The A3 problem-solving procedure consists of the following steps:

• Determine the issue: Define the issue clearly, including its impact on the customer.
• Perform root cause analysis: Identify the underlying causes of the problem using root cause analysis techniques.
• Create and implement a solution: Create and implement a solution that addresses the problem’s root cause.
• Monitor and improve the solution: Keep an eye on the solution’s effectiveness and make any necessary changes.

Subsequently, in the Lean Six Sigma framework, the 8D and A3 problem solving methodologies are two popular approaches to problem solving. Both methodologies provide a structured, team-based problem-solving approach that guides individuals through a comprehensive and systematic process of identifying, analysing, and resolving problems in an effective and efficient manner.

Step 1 – Define the Problem

The definition of the problem is the first step in effective problem solving. This may appear to be a simple task, but it is actually quite difficult. This is because problems are frequently complex and multi-layered, making it easy to confuse symptoms with the underlying cause. To avoid this pitfall, it is critical to thoroughly understand the problem.

To begin, ask yourself some clarifying questions:

• What exactly is the issue?
• What are the problem’s symptoms or consequences?
• Who or what is impacted by the issue?
• When and where does the issue arise?

Answering these questions will assist you in determining the scope of the problem. However, simply describing the problem is not always sufficient; you must also identify the root cause. The root cause is the underlying cause of the problem and is usually the key to resolving it permanently.

Try asking “why” questions to find the root cause:

• What causes the problem?
• Why does it continue?
• Why does it have the effects that it does?

By repeatedly asking “ why ,” you’ll eventually get to the bottom of the problem. This is an important step in the problem-solving process because it ensures that you’re dealing with the root cause rather than just the symptoms.

Once you have a firm grasp on the issue, it is time to divide it into smaller, more manageable chunks. This makes tackling the problem easier and reduces the risk of becoming overwhelmed. For example, if you’re attempting to solve a complex business problem, you might divide it into smaller components like market research, product development, and sales strategies.

To summarise step 1, defining the problem is an important first step in effective problem-solving. You will be able to identify the root cause and break it down into manageable parts if you take the time to thoroughly understand the problem. This will prepare you for the next step in the problem-solving process, which is gathering information and brainstorming ideas.

Step 2 – Gather Information and Brainstorm Ideas

Gathering information and brainstorming ideas is the next step in effective problem solving. This entails researching the problem and relevant information, collaborating with others, and coming up with a variety of potential solutions. This increases your chances of finding the best solution to the problem.

Begin by researching the problem and relevant information. This could include reading articles, conducting surveys, or consulting with experts. The goal is to collect as much information as possible in order to better understand the problem and possible solutions.

Next, work with others to gather a variety of perspectives. Brainstorming with others can be an excellent way to come up with new and creative ideas. Encourage everyone to share their thoughts and ideas when working in a group, and make an effort to actively listen to what others have to say. Be open to new and unconventional ideas and resist the urge to dismiss them too quickly.

Finally, use brainstorming to generate a wide range of potential solutions. This is the place where you can let your imagination run wild. At this stage, don’t worry about the feasibility or practicality of the solutions; instead, focus on generating as many ideas as possible. Write down everything that comes to mind, no matter how ridiculous or unusual it may appear. This can be done individually or in groups.

Once you’ve compiled a list of potential solutions, it’s time to assess them and select the best one. This is the next step in the problem-solving process, which we’ll go over in greater detail in the following section.

Step 3 – Evaluate Options and Choose the Best Solution

Once you’ve compiled a list of potential solutions, it’s time to assess them and select the best one. This is the third step in effective problem solving, and it entails weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each solution, considering their feasibility and practicability, and selecting the solution that is most likely to solve the problem effectively.

To begin, weigh the advantages and disadvantages of each solution. This will assist you in determining the potential outcomes of each solution and deciding which is the best option. For example, a quick and easy solution may not be the most effective in the long run, whereas a more complex and time-consuming solution may be more effective in solving the problem in the long run.

Consider each solution’s feasibility and practicability. Consider the following:

• Can the solution be implemented within the available resources, time, and budget?
• What are the possible barriers to implementing the solution?
• Is the solution feasible in today’s political, economic, and social environment?

You’ll be able to tell which solutions are likely to succeed and which aren’t by assessing their feasibility and practicability.

Finally, choose the solution that is most likely to effectively solve the problem. This solution should be based on the criteria you’ve established, such as the advantages and disadvantages of each solution, their feasibility and practicability, and your overall goals.

It is critical to remember that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to problems. What is effective for one person or situation may not be effective for another. This is why it is critical to consider a wide range of solutions and evaluate each one based on its ability to effectively solve the problem.

Step 4 – Implement and Monitor the Solution

When you’ve decided on the best solution, it’s time to put it into action. The fourth and final step in effective problem solving is to put the solution into action, monitor its progress, and make any necessary adjustments.

To begin, implement the solution. This may entail delegating tasks, developing a strategy, and allocating resources. Ascertain that everyone involved understands their role and responsibilities in the solution’s implementation.

Next, keep an eye on the solution’s progress. This may entail scheduling regular check-ins, tracking metrics, and soliciting feedback from others. You will be able to identify any potential roadblocks and make any necessary adjustments in a timely manner if you monitor the progress of the solution.

Finally, make any necessary modifications to the solution. This could entail changing the solution, altering the plan of action, or delegating different tasks. Be willing to make changes if they will improve the solution or help it solve the problem more effectively.

It’s important to remember that problem solving is an iterative process, and there may be times when you need to start from scratch. This is especially true if the initial solution does not effectively solve the problem. In these situations, it’s critical to be adaptable and flexible and to keep trying new solutions until you find the one that works best.

To summarise, effective problem solving is a critical skill that can assist individuals and organisations in overcoming challenges and achieving their objectives. Effective problem solving consists of four key steps: defining the problem, generating potential solutions, evaluating alternatives and selecting the best solution, and implementing the solution.

You can increase your chances of success in problem solving by following these steps and considering factors such as the pros and cons of each solution, their feasibility and practicability, and making any necessary adjustments. Furthermore, keep in mind that problem solving is an iterative process, and there may be times when you need to go back to the beginning and restart. Maintain your adaptability and try new solutions until you find the one that works best for you.

• Novick, L.R. and Bassok, M., 2005.  Problem Solving . Cambridge University Press.

Was this helpful?

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.

The Triple Threat to Productivity: Muda, Muri, and Mura Explained

Andon Systems: Tips for Successful Implementation and Maintenance

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.

Understanding Process Performance: Pp and Ppk

Understand Process Performance (Pp) and Process Performance Index (Ppk) to assess and improve manufacturing processes.…

LIFO or FIFO for Stock Management?

Choosing between LIFO and FIFO for stock management depends on factors like product nature, market…

Are There Any Official Standards for Six Sigma?

Are there any official standards for Six Sigma? While Six Sigma is a well-defined methodology…

5S Floor Marking Best Practices

In lean manufacturing, the 5S System is a foundational tool, involving the steps: Sort, Set…

How to Measure the ROI of Continuous Improvement Initiatives

When it comes to business, knowing the value you’re getting for your money is crucial,…

8D Problem-Solving: Common Mistakes to Avoid

In today’s competitive business landscape, effective problem-solving is the cornerstone of organizational success. The 8D…

(925) 289-9001

• Sep 4, 2022

STRUCTURED PROBLEM SOLVING TOOLS

Updated: Feb 28, 2023

Structured vs Unstructured Problem Solving

Using a structured approach to solve problems can help to ensure the correct problem is being solved, with the right solution. When an unstructured approach to problem solving is used, which is generally the case, the problem is not well understood and the solution addresses a symptom, rather than the root cause. Another major disadvantage of an unstructured approach is that it is easy to hit a roadblock and convince yourself that the problem cannot be solved or that the solution cannot be implemented for a variety reasons.

Each of the five problem solving tools described below approach problem solving in a different way. They can help you to find solutions that that might not be immediately obvious and compare possible solutions before choosing the best one.

Problem Solving Definition

A problem is the distance between how things currently are and the way they should be. Problem solving forms the ‘bridge’ between these two elements. In order to close the gap, you need to understand the way things are (problem) and the way they ought to be (solution).

The Difference Between Problem Solving and Decision Making

Although there is a clear distinction between problem solving and decision making, the two are often confused. Problem solving differs fundamentally from decision making. A problem occurs when something is not behaving as it should, something is deviating from the norm or something goes wrong. Decision making is a case of choosing between different alternatives. Decision making is required in response to the question: “Which computer shall I buy?” Problem solving is needed in response to the statement: “My computer won’t work”.

Most problem solving methods follow a common pattern, beginning with a definition of the problem, moving on to the consideration of potential solutions, and culminating with the selection, testing and implementation of a chosen course of action. Divergent thinking techniques can be helpful in generating creative ideas, while convergent thinking can assist in structuring and evaluating potential solutions.

Problems can be classified into one of two categories: the ‘fix-it’ or the ‘do-it’ scenario:

Fix-it – solving an existing problem, (e.g. a current product range is falling short of its sales targets). An immediate short-term solution could be to increase marketing activity, for example.

Do-it – moving you in the right direction for what you want to achieve, (e.g. a new product range needs to be introduced to compete with market rivals). This type of problem will require longer term planning in order to achieve its objectives.

Irrespective of the severity or complexity of the problem, the process should:

be systematic and thorough

provide evidence to show how the problem was solved

avoid a rush to a solution without first understanding the cause of the problem

enable possible causes to be assessed

1. Six-Step Problem Solving Model

Problem solving models are used extensively in the workplace and the Six Step method is a simple and reliable way to solve problems. This technique uses an analytical and reliable approach to problem solving. Its process keeps the group assigned to solve a problem on track while they carry out their investigation and search for a solution.

2. The Drill Down Technique

In complex organizations problems are inevitable. Successful organizations take the time to identify these complicated problems and plan a practical resolution as soon as possible. The Drill Down Technique is a popular approach to problem solving in complex organizations. As its name suggests you break down a problem into its various components into small practical pieces that enable you to identify a resolution.

3. The Four Frame Model

The Four Frame Model is one of the most popular and in-depth tools that management use to maximize an organization’s potential. The model divides up an organization into ‘four frames’ – Structural, Human Resource, Political and Symbolic – with the objective of better understanding the organization. Each frame must be looked at in a meaningful way; if one or more is discarded the findings will be incomplete.

4. Eight Disciplines of Problem Solving

This problem-solving tool requires that a practical plan is created at the start of this eight step process. It requires a clear definition of the problem, individuals involved in the solution and the resources. Each of the eight disciplines in this process, are designed to move you a step closer to a successful resolution.

5. The Cynefin Framework

The core of the Cynefin framework is the way that it breaks down problems into one of five contexts. You place your problem into one of these specific contexts and it will then help you decide how best to approach it. This problem-solving tool is a level ‘above’ others because it requires you to figure out how you should be thinking about a problem in the first place. The framework is often used in conjunction with other problem-solving tools in finding a solution.

6. The 5-Whys Technique

The 5 Why’s Technique is an easy-to-use method for uncovering the root of an issue. All you need is asking ‘Why?’ five times. Start with an issue and ask why it happened. Make sure your answer is based on unbiased facts. Continue the process of asking ‘Why?’ four more times. Eventually, you reach the root of the issue. Now you can try to find a solution.

Start Using Structured Problem Solving Techniques

Hopefully you find these different techniques useful and they get your imagination rolling with ideas on how to solve different problems. There are other techniques you can use, but when it comes to solving problems from simple to complex, these techniques will work well. And keep in mind that you can combine these techniques as well.

Here are 5 takeaways to use the next time a problem gets you and your team tangled up:

Don’t start by trying to solve the problem (or the symptom). First, aim to understand the root cause of the problem.

Use questions to generate ideas for solving the problem.

Look to previous problems to find the answers to new ones.

Clear your preconceived ideas and past experiences before attempting to tackle the problem.

When you are looking for people to add to your team – look for people that highlight their ability to solve problems!

Recent Posts

Introducing Our Newest OKR Training Course: Certified OKR Champion

Anticipating Issues with Data-Driven Insights for Improved Performance

What is a Blue Ocean vs. Red Ocean Strategy?

Resources >

Mckinsey approach to problem solving, a guide to the 7-step mckinsey problem solving process.

McKinsey and Company is recognized for its rigorous approach to problem solving. They train their consultants on their seven-step process that anyone can learn.

This resource guides you through that process, largely informed by the McKinsey Staff Paper 66. It also includes a PowerPoint Toolkit with slide templates of each step of the process that you can download and customize for your own use.

In this guide you'll learn:

Overview of the mckinsey approach to problem solving, problem solving process, problem definition.

• Problem Statement

Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet

Structure the problem, hypothesis trees, issue trees, analyses and workplan, synthesize findings, craft recommendations, communicate, distinctiveness practices, harness the power of collaboration, sources and additional reading, request the mckinsey approach to problem solving.

Problem solving — finding the optimal solution to a given business opportunity or challenge — is the very heart of how consultants create client impact, and considered the most important skill for success at McKinsey.

The characteristic “McKinsey method” of problem solving is a structured, inductive approach that can be used to solve any problem. Using this standardized process saves us from reinventing the problem-solving wheel, and allows for greater focus on distinctiveness in the solution. Every new McKinsey associate must learn this method on his or her first day with the firm.

There are four fundamental disciplines of the McKinsey method:

1. Problem definition

A thorough understanding and crisp definition of the problem.

2. The problem-solving process

Structuring the problem, prioritizing the issues, planning analyses, conducting analyses, synthesizing findings, and developing recommendations.

3. Distinctiveness practices

Constructing alternative perspectives; identifying relationships; distilling the essence of an issue, analysis, or recommendation; and staying ahead of others in the problem-solving process.

4. Collaboratio n

Actively seeking out client, customer, and supplier perspectives, as well as internal and external expert insight and knowledge.

Once the problem has been defined, the problem-solving process proceeds with a series of steps:

• Structure the problem
• Prioritize the issues
• Plan analyses
• Conduct analyses
• Synthesize findings
• Develop recommendations

Not all problems require strict adherence to the process. Some steps may be truncated, such as when specific knowledge or analogies from other industries make it possible to construct hypotheses and associated workplans earlier than their formal place in the process. Nonetheless, it remains important to be capable of executing every step in the basic process.

When confronted with a new and complex problem, this process establishes a path to defining and disaggregating the problem in a way that will allow the team to move to a solution. The process also ensures nothing is missed and concentrates efforts on the highest-impact areas. Adhering to the process gives the client clear steps to follow, building confidence, credibility, and long-term capability.

The most important step in your entire project is to first carefully define the problem. The problem definition will serve the guide all of the team’s work, so it is critical to ensure that all key stakeholders agree that it is the right problem to be solving.

The problem definition will serve the guide all of the team’s work, so it is critical to ensure that all key stakeholders agree that it is the right problem to be solving.

There are often dozens of issues that a team could focus on, and it is often not obvious how to define the problem.

In any real-life situation, there are many possible problem statements. Your choice of problem statement will serve to constrain the range of possible solutions.

Constraints can be a good thing (e.g., limit solutions to actions within the available budget.) And constraints can be a bad thing (e.g., eliminating the possibility of creative ideas.) So choose wisely.

The problem statement may ignore many issues to focus on the priority that should be addressed. The problem statement should be phrased as a question, such that the answer will be the solution.

Example scenario – A family on Friday evening :

A mother, a father, and their two teenage children have all arrived home on a Friday at 6 p.m. The family has not prepared dinner for Friday evening. The daughter has lacrosse practice on Saturday and an essay to write for English class due on Monday. The son has theatre rehearsal on both Saturday and Sunday and will need one parent to drive him to the high school both days, though he can get a ride home with a friend.

The family dog, a poodle, must be taken to the groomer on Saturday morning. The mother will need to spend time this weekend working on assignments for her finance class she is taking as part of her Executive MBA. The father plans to go on a 100-mile bike ride, which he can do either Saturday or Sunday. The family has two cars, but one is at the body shop. They are trying to save money to pay for an addition to their house.

Potential problem definitions – A family on Friday evening :

The problem definition should not be vague, without clear measures of success. Rather, it should be a SMART definition:

• Action-oriented

Given one set of facts, it is possible to come up with many possible problem statements. The choice of problem statement constrains the range of possible solutions.

Before starting to solve the problem, the family first needs to agree on what problem they want to solve.

• What should the family do for dinner on Friday night?
• How can the family schedule their activities this weekend to accomplish everything planned given that they only have one vehicle available?
• How can the family increase income or reduce expenses to allow them to save $75K over the next 12 months to pay for the planned addition to their house?

Problem Statement Worksheet

This is a helpful tool to use to clearly define the problem. There are often dozens of issues that a team could focus on, and it is often not obvious how to define the problem. In any real-life situation, there are many possible problem statements. Your choice of problem statement will serve to constrain the range of possible solutions.

• Use a question . The problem statement should be phrased as a question, such that the answer will be the solution. Make the question SMART: specific, measurable, action-oriented, relevant, and time-bound. Example: “How can XYZ Bank close the $100 million profitability gap in two years?”
• Context . What are the internal and external situations and complications facing the client, such as industry trends, relative position within the industry, capability gaps, financial flexibility, and so on?
• Success criteria . Understand how the client and the team define success and failure. In addition to any quantitative measures identified in the basic question, identify other important quantitative or qualitative measures of success, including timing of impact, visibility of improvement, client capability building required, necessary mindset shifts, and so on.
• Scope and constraints . Scope most commonly covers the markets or segments of interest, whereas constraints govern restrictions on the nature of solutions within those markets or segments.
• Stakeholders . Explore who really makes the decisions — who decides, who can help, and who can block.
• Key sources of insight . What best-practice expertise, knowledge, and engagement approaches already exist? What knowledge from the client, suppliers, and customers needs to be accessed? Be as specific as possible: who, what, when, how, and why.

In completing the Problem Statement Worksheet, you are prompted to define the key stakeholders.

As you become involved in the problem-solving process, you should expand the question of key stakeholders to include what the team wants from them and what they want from the team, their values and motivations (helpful and unhelpful), and the communications mechanisms that will be most effective for each of them.

Using the Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet allows you to comprehensively identify:

• Stakeholders
• What you need from them
• Where they are
• What they need from you

The two most helpful techniques for rigorously structuring any problem are hypothesis trees and issue trees. Each of these techniques disaggregates the primary question into a cascade of issues or hypotheses that, when addressed, will together answer the primary question.

A hypothesis tree might break down the same question into two or more hypotheses. 

The aim at this stage is to structure the problem into discrete, mutually exclusive pieces that are small enough to yield to analysis and that, taken together, are collectively exhaustive.

Articulating the problem as hypotheses, rather than issues, is the preferred approach because it leads to a more focused analysis of the problem. Questions to ask include:

• Is it testable – can you prove or disprove it?
• It is open to debate? If it cannot be wrong, it is simply a statement of fact and unlikely to produce keen insight.
• If you reversed your hypothesis – literally, hypothesized that the exact opposite were true – would you care about the difference it would make to your overall logic?
• If you shared your hypothesis with the CEO, would it sound naive or obvious?
• Does it point directly to an action or actions that the client might take?

Quickly developing a powerful hypothesis tree enables us to develop solutions more rapidly that will have real impact. This can sometimes seem premature to clients, who might find the “solution” reached too quickly and want to see the analysis behind it.

Take care to explain the approach (most important, that a hypothesis is not an answer) and its benefits (that a good hypothesis is the basis of a proven means of successful problem solving and avoids “boiling the ocean”).

Example: Alpha Manufacturing, Inc.

Problem Statement: How can Alpha increase EBITDA by $13M (to $50M) by 2025?

The hypotheses might be:

• Alpha can add $125M revenues by expanding to new customers, adding $8M of EBITDA
• Alpha can reduce costs to improve EBITDA by $5M

These hypotheses will be further disaggregated into subsidiary hypotheses at the next level of the tree.

Often, the team has insufficient knowledge to build a complete hypothesis tree at the start of an engagement. In these cases, it is best to begin by structuring the problem using an issue tree.

An issue tree is best set out as a series of open questions in sentence form. For example, “How can the client minimize its tax burden?” is more useful than “Tax.” Open questions – those that begin with what, how, or why– produce deeper insights than closed ones. In some cases, an issue tree can be sharpened by toggling between issue and hypothesis – working forward from an issue to identify the hypothesis, and back from the hypothesis to sharpen the relevant open question.

Once the problem has been structured, the next step is to prioritize the issues or hypotheses on which the team will focus its work. When prioritizing, it is common to use a two-by-two matrix – e.g., a matrix featuring “impact” and “ease of impact” as the two axes.

Applying some of these prioritization criteria will knock out portions of the issue tree altogether. Consider testing the issues against them all, albeit quickly, to help drive the prioritization process.

Once the criteria are defined, prioritizing should be straightforward: Simply map the issues to the framework and focus on those that score highest against the criteria.

As the team conducts analysis and learns more about the problem and the potential solution, make sure to revisit the prioritization matrix so as to remain focused on the highest-priority issues.

The issues might be:

• How can Alpha increase revenue?
• How can Alpha reduce cost?

Each of these issues is then further broken down into deeper insights to solutions.

If the prioritization has been carried out effectively, the team will have clarified the key issues or hypotheses that must be subjected to analysis. The aim of these analyses is to prove the hypotheses true or false, or to develop useful perspectives on each key issue. Now the task is to design an effective and efficient workplan for conducting the analyses.

Transforming the prioritized problem structure into a workplan involves two main tasks:

• Define the blocks of work that need to be undertaken. Articulate as clearly as possible the desired end products and the analysis necessary to produce them, and estimate the resources and time required.
• Sequence the work blocks in a way that matches the available resources to the need to deliver against key engagement milestones (e.g., important meetings, progress reviews), as well as to the overall pacing of the engagement (i.e., weekly or twice-weekly meetings, and so on).

A good workplan will detail the following for each issue or hypothesis: analyses, end products, sources, and timing and responsibility. Developing the workplan takes time; doing it well requires working through the definition of each element of the workplan in a rigorous and methodical fashion.

It’s useful to match the workplan to three horizons:

• What is expected at the end of the engagement
• What is expected at key progress reviews
• What is due at daily and/or weekly team meetings

The detail in the workplan will typically be greater for the near term (the next week) than for the long term (the study horizon), especially early in a new engagement when considerable ambiguity about the end state remains.

Here are three different templates for a workplan:

This is the most difficult element of the problem-solving process. After a period of being immersed in the details, it is crucial to step back and distinguish the important from the merely interesting. Distinctive problem solvers seek the essence of the story that will underpin a crisp recommendation for action.

Although synthesis appears, formally speaking, as the penultimate step in the process, it should happen throughout. Ideally, after you have made almost any analytical progress, you should attempt to articulate the “Day 1” or “Week 1” answer. Continue to synthesize as you go along. This will remind the team of the question you are trying to answer, assist prioritization, highlight the logical links of the emerging solution, and ensure that you have a story ready to articulate at all times during the study.

McKinsey’s primary tool for synthesizing is the pyramid principle. Essentially, this principle asserts that every synthesis should explain a single concept, per the “governing thought.” The supporting ideas in the synthesis form a thought hierarchy proceeding in a logical structure from the most detailed facts to the governing thought, ruthlessly excluding the interesting but irrelevant.

While this hierarchy can be laid out as a tree (like with issue and hypothesis trees), the best problem solvers capture it by creating dot-dash storylines — the Pyramid Structure for Grouping Arguments.

Pyramid Structure for Grouping Arguments

• Focus on action. Articulate the thoughts at each level of the pyramid as declarative sentences, not as topics. For example, “expansion” is a topic; “We need to expand into the European market” is a declarative sentence.
• Use storylines. PowerPoint is poor at highlighting logical connections, therefore is not a good tool for synthesis. A storyline will clarify elements that may be ambiguous in the PowerPoint presentation.
• Keep the emerging storyline visible. Many teams find that posting the storyline or story- board on the team-room wall helps keep the thinking focused. It also helps in bringing the client along.
• Use the situation-complication-resolution structure. The situation is the reason there is action to be taken. The com- plication is why the situation needs thinking through – typically an industry or client challenge. The resolution is the answer.
• Down the pyramid: does each governing thought pose a single question that is answered completely by the group of boxes below it?
• Across: is each level within the pyramid MECE?
• Up: does each group of boxes, taken together, provide one answer – one “so what?” – that is essentially the governing thought above it?
• Test the solution. What would it mean if your hypotheses all came true?

It is at this point that we address the client’s questions: “What do I do, and how do I do it?” This means not offering actionable recommendations, along with a plan and client commitment for implementation.

The essence of this step is to translate the overall solution into the actions required to deliver sustained impact. A pragmatic action plan should include:

• Relevant initiatives, along with a clear sequence, timing, and mapping of activities required
• Clear owners for each initiative
• Key success factors and the challenges involved in delivering on the initiatives

Crucial questions to ask as you build recommendations for organizational change are:

• Does each person who needs to change (from the CEO to the front line) understand what he or she needs to change and why, and is he or she committed to it?
• Are key leaders and role models throughout the organization personally committed to behaving differently?
• Has the client set in place the necessary formal mechanisms to reinforce the desired change?
• Does the client have the skills and confidence to behave in the desired new way?

Once the recommendations have been crafted in the problem-solving process, it’s vital to effectively communicate those findings and recommendations.

An executive summary is a great slide to use for this. See more on executive summary slides, including 30 templates, at our Ultimate Guide to Executive Summary Slides .

Great problem solvers identify unique disruptions and discontinuities, novel insights, and step-out opportunities that lead to truly distinctive impact. This is done by applying a number of practices throughout the problem-solving process to help develop these insights.

Expand: Construct multiple perspectives

Identifying alternative ways of looking at the problem expands the range of possibilities, opens you up to innovative ideas, and allows you to formulate more powerful hypotheses. Questions that help here include:

• What changes if I think from the perspective of a customer, or a supplier, or a frontline employee, or a competitor?
• How have other industries viewed and addressed this same problem?
• What would it mean if the client sought to run the company like a low-cost airline or a cosmetics manufacturer?

Link: Identify relationships

Strong problem solvers discern connections and recognize patterns in two different ways:

• They seek out the ways in which different problem elements – issues, hypotheses, analyses, work elements, findings, answers, and recommendations – relate to one another.
• They use these relationships throughout the basic problem-solving process to identify efficient problem-solving approaches, novel solutions, and more powerful syntheses.

Distill: Find the essence

Cutting through complexity to identify the heart of the problem and its solution is a critical skill.

• Identify the critical problem elements. Are there some issues, approaches, or options that can be eliminated completely because they won’t make a significant difference to the solution?
• Consider how complex the different elements are and how long it will take to complete them. Wherever possible, quickly advance simpler parts of the problem that can inform more complex or time-consuming elements.

Lead: Stay ahead/step back

Without getting ahead of the client, you cannot be distinctive. Paradoxically, to get ahead – and stay ahead – it is often necessary to step back from the problem to validate or revalidate the approach and the solution.

• Spend time thinking one or more steps ahead of the client and team.
• Constantly check and challenge the rigor of the underlying data and analysis.
• Stress-test the whole emerging recommendation
• Challenge the solution against a set of hurdles. Does it satisfy the criteria for success as set out on the Problem Statement Worksheet?

No matter how skilled, knowledgeable, or experienced you are, you will never create the most distinctive solution on your own. The best problem solvers know how to leverage the power of their team, clients, the Firm, and outside parties. Seeking the right expertise at the right time, and leveraging it in the right way, are ultimately how we bring distinctiveness to our work, how we maximize efficiency, and how we learn.

When solving a problem, it is important to ask, “Have I accessed all the sources of insight that are available?” Here are the sources you should consider:

• Your core team
• The client’s suppliers and customers
• Internal experts and knowledge
• External sources of knowledge
• Communications specialists

The key here is to think open, not closed. Opening up to varied sources of data and perspectives furthers our mission to develop truly innovative and distinctive solutions for our clients.

• McKinsey Staff Paper 66 — not published by McKinsey but possibly found through an internet search
• The McKinsey Way , 1999, by Ethan M. Rasiel

For consultants

© Copyright 2024 by Umbrex

Designed by our friends at Filez

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

• What's different about BSM?
• What vice presidents say about BSM
• Sample Clients
• Lean in Labs
• What We Find In Labs
• Key Lean Labs Concepts
• Lean in R&D
• Lean in Regulatory Affairs
• Lean Manufacturing
• Global Lean Programs
• Digital Visual Management
• Articles and Reports
• Case Studies
• Lean R&D
• Lean Programs
• Real Lean Blogs

Structured Problem Solving – The key to Lean?

We are all familiar with the “House of Lean”; with how the twin pillars of Just in Time (JIT) and Jidoka (built-in Quality) fundamentally drive profitability by increasing cashflow and reducing cost. That is why most Lean implementations focus on these two aspects.

Companies that have successfully implemented Lean understand that the “Stability” or foundation the House of Lean is built upon is Structured Problem Solving. The iterative improvement loop offered by Structured Problem Solving allows for the correct Lean tools to be used at the correct time and in the correct way.

Despite this, Structured Problem Solving is underutilized and laboratories are especially slow to embrace it.

So, what is Structured Problem Solving? Toyota defines the following 8-steps:

• Clarify the Problem
• Breakdown the Problem
• Set the Target
• Analyze the Root Cause
• Develop Countermeasures
• Implement Countermeasures
• Monitor Results and Process
• Standardize and Share Success

The irony is that most laboratories will be using a similar set of steps (or a sub-set) everyday as part of their deviation process. So why the resistance to applying Structured Problem Solving to their business processes?

I would argue that the underutilization of the 8-step process is analogous to why Lean implementations all too often fail. A focus and reliance on the tools with a lack of understanding of the core foundations that guide their use. The power and efficacy of 8-step problem solving lies not in the use of root cause analysis tools – the Ishikawa diagrams or the 5-whys – to develop and implement counter measures. Rather, it lies in the first three steps – to develop a shared, concise understanding of the problem and more importantly, alignment on what would be considered solving it.

Unfortunately, these first, critical steps are often rushed or neglected entirely. Whether due to the flawed assumption that everyone’s understanding of the problem is the same (it very rarely is), a lack of time or resources available to collect the necessary data, or an enthusiastic team who want to launch directly into the root cause analysis, the end result is often the same; ineffective, box ticking CAPAs that fail to address the underlying issue.

BSM’s methodology inherently supports good Structured Problem Solving. The visual management systems developed as part of our Lean Lab implementations allow the perfect framework to facilitate the 8-steps. The use of Short Interval Control and properly developed KPI’s ensure that first three steps are easy to complete as the data and targets are readily available, while also serving as triggers themselves. As such a complete Lean Lab solution will make it easy to identify when failures are occurring and will provide the information to support Structured Problem Solving. Also, as Lean Lab solutions are developed and owned by lab members the process can help embolden the lab to tackle and solve the problems they face.

Our consultants can provide further information on the above and discuss any aspect of Real Lean Transformation, simply set-up a call today.

40 problem-solving techniques and processes

All teams and organizations encounter challenges. Approaching those challenges without a structured problem solving process can end up making things worse.

Proven problem solving techniques such as those outlined below can guide your group through a process of identifying problems and challenges , ideating on possible solutions , and then evaluating and implementing the most suitable .

In this post, you'll find problem-solving tools you can use to develop effective solutions. You'll also find some tips for facilitating the problem solving process and solving complex problems.

Design your next session with SessionLab

Join the 150,000+ facilitators 
using SessionLab.

Recommended Articles

A step-by-step guide to planning a workshop, 54 great online tools for workshops and meetings, how to create an unforgettable training session in 8 simple steps.

• 18 Free Facilitation Resources We Think You’ll Love

What is problem solving?

Problem solving is a process of finding and implementing a solution to a challenge or obstacle. In most contexts, this means going through a problem solving process that begins with identifying the issue, exploring its root causes, ideating and refining possible solutions before implementing and measuring the impact of that solution.

For simple or small problems, it can be tempting to skip straight to implementing what you believe is the right solution. The danger with this approach is that without exploring the true causes of the issue, it might just occur again or your chosen solution may cause other issues.

Particularly in the world of work, good problem solving means using data to back up each step of the process, bringing in new perspectives and effectively measuring the impact of your solution.

Effective problem solving can help ensure that your team or organization is well positioned to overcome challenges, be resilient to change and create innovation. In my experience, problem solving is a combination of skillset, mindset and process, and it’s especially vital for leaders to cultivate this skill.

What is the seven step problem solving process?

A problem solving process is a step-by-step framework from going from discovering a problem all the way through to implementing a solution.

With practice, this framework can become intuitive, and innovative companies tend to have a consistent and ongoing ability to discover and tackle challenges when they come up.

You might see everything from a four step problem solving process through to seven steps. While all these processes cover roughly the same ground, I’ve found a seven step problem solving process is helpful for making all key steps legible.

We’ll outline that process here and then follow with techniques you can use to explore and work on that step of the problem solving process with a group.

The seven-step problem solving process is:

1. Problem identification 

The first stage of any problem solving process is to identify the problem(s) you need to solve. This often looks like using group discussions and activities to help a group surface and effectively articulate the challenges they’re facing and wish to resolve.

Be sure to align with your team on the exact definition and nature of the problem you’re solving. An effective process is one where everyone is pulling in the same direction – ensure clarity and alignment now to help avoid misunderstandings later.

2. Problem analysis and refinement

The process of problem analysis means ensuring that the problem you are seeking to solve is  the   right problem . Choosing the right problem to solve means you are on the right path to creating the right solution.

At this stage, you may look deeper at the problem you identified to try and discover the root cause at the level of people or process. You may also spend some time sourcing data, consulting relevant parties and creating and refining a problem statement.

Problem refinement means adjusting scope or focus of the problem you will be aiming to solve based on what comes up during your analysis. As you analyze data sources, you might discover that the root cause means you need to adjust your problem statement. Alternatively, you might find that your original problem statement is too big to be meaningful approached within your current project.

Remember that the goal of any problem refinement is to help set the stage for effective solution development and deployment. Set the right focus and get buy-in from your team here and you’ll be well positioned to move forward with confidence.

3. Solution generation

Once your group has nailed down the particulars of the problem you wish to solve, you want to encourage a free flow of ideas connecting to solving that problem. This can take the form of problem solving games that encourage creative thinking or techniquess designed to produce working prototypes of possible solutions. 

The key to ensuring the success of this stage of the problem solving process is to encourage quick, creative thinking and create an open space where all ideas are considered. The best solutions can often come from unlikely places and by using problem solving techniques that celebrate invention, you might come up with solution gold. 

4. Solution development

No solution is perfect right out of the gate. It’s important to discuss and develop the solutions your group has come up with over the course of following the previous problem solving steps in order to arrive at the best possible solution. Problem solving games used in this stage involve lots of critical thinking, measuring potential effort and impact, and looking at possible solutions analytically. 

During this stage, you will often ask your team to iterate and improve upon your front-running solutions and develop them further. Remember that problem solving strategies always benefit from a multitude of voices and opinions, and not to let ego get involved when it comes to choosing which solutions to develop and take further.

Finding the best solution is the goal of all problem solving workshops and here is the place to ensure that your solution is well thought out, sufficiently robust and fit for purpose. 

5. Decision making and planning

Nearly there! Once you’ve got a set of possible, you’ll need to make a decision on which to implement. This can be a consensus-based group decision or it might be for a leader or major stakeholder to decide. You’ll find a set of effective decision making methods below.

Once your group has reached consensus and selected a solution, there are some additional actions that also need to be decided upon. You’ll want to work on allocating ownership of the project, figure out who will do what, how the success of the solution will be measured and decide the next course of action.

Set clear accountabilities, actions, timeframes, and follow-ups for your chosen solution. Make these decisions and set clear next-steps in the problem solving workshop so that everyone is aligned and you can move forward effectively as a group. 

Ensuring that you plan for the roll-out of a solution is one of the most important problem solving steps. Without adequate planning or oversight, it can prove impossible to measure success or iterate further if the problem was not solved. 

6. Solution implementation 

This is what we were waiting for! All problem solving processes have the end goal of implementing an effective and impactful solution that your group has confidence in.

Project management and communication skills are key here – your solution may need to adjust when out in the wild or you might discover new challenges along the way. For some solutions, you might also implement a test with a small group and monitor results before rolling it out to an entire company.

You should have a clear owner for your solution who will oversee the plans you made together and help ensure they’re put into place. This person will often coordinate the implementation team and set-up processes to measure the efficacy of your solution too.

7. Solution evaluation 

So you and your team developed a great solution to a problem and have a gut feeling it’s been solved. Work done, right? Wrong. All problem solving strategies benefit from evaluation, consideration, and feedback.

You might find that the solution does not work for everyone, might create new problems, or is potentially so successful that you will want to roll it out to larger teams or as part of other initiatives. 

None of that is possible without taking the time to evaluate the success of the solution you developed in your problem solving model and adjust if necessary.

Remember that the problem solving process is often iterative and it can be common to not solve complex issues on the first try. Even when this is the case, you and your team will have generated learning that will be important for future problem solving workshops or in other parts of the organization. 

It’s also worth underlining how important record keeping is throughout the problem solving process. If a solution didn’t work, you need to have the data and records to see why that was the case. If you go back to the drawing board, notes from the previous workshop can help save time.

What does an effective problem solving process look like?

Every effective problem solving process begins with an agenda . In our experience, a well-structured problem solving workshop is one of the best methods for successfully guiding a group from exploring a problem to implementing a solution.

The format of a workshop ensures that you can get buy-in from your group, encourage free-thinking and solution exploration before making a decision on what to implement following the session.

This Design Sprint 2.0 template is an effective problem solving process from top agency AJ&Smart. It’s a great format for the entire problem solving process, with four-days of workshops designed to surface issues, explore solutions and even test a solution.

Check it for an example of how you might structure and run a problem solving process and feel free to copy and adjust it your needs!

For a shorter process you can run in a single afternoon, this remote problem solving agenda will guide you effectively in just a couple of hours.

Whatever the length of your workshop, by using SessionLab, it’s easy to go from an idea to a complete agenda . Start by dragging and dropping your core problem solving activities into place . Add timings, breaks and necessary materials before sharing your agenda with your colleagues.

The resulting agenda will be your guide to an effective and productive problem solving session that will also help you stay organized on the day!

Complete problem-solving methods

In this section, we’ll look at in-depth problem-solving methods that provide a complete end-to-end process for developing effective solutions. These will help guide your team from the discovery and definition of a problem through to delivering the right solution.

If you’re looking for an all-encompassing method or problem-solving model, these processes are a great place to start. They’ll ask your team to challenge preconceived ideas and adopt a mindset for solving problems more effectively.

Six Thinking Hats

Individual approaches to solving a problem can be very different based on what team or role an individual holds. It can be easy for existing biases or perspectives to find their way into the mix, or for internal politics to direct a conversation.

Six Thinking Hats is a classic method for identifying the problems that need to be solved and enables your team to consider them from different angles, whether that is by focusing on facts and data, creative solutions, or by considering why a particular solution might not work.

Like all problem-solving frameworks, Six Thinking Hats is effective at helping teams remove roadblocks from a conversation or discussion and come to terms with all the aspects necessary to solve complex problems.

The Six Thinking Hats   #creative thinking   #meeting facilitation   #problem solving   #issue resolution   #idea generation   #conflict resolution   The Six Thinking Hats are used by individuals and groups to separate out conflicting styles of thinking. They enable and encourage a group of people to think constructively together in exploring and implementing change, rather than using argument to fight over who is right and who is wrong.

Lightning Decision Jam

Featured courtesy of Jonathan Courtney of AJ&Smart Berlin, Lightning Decision Jam is one of those strategies that should be in every facilitation toolbox. Exploring problems and finding solutions is often creative in nature, though as with any creative process, there is the potential to lose focus and get lost.

Unstructured discussions might get you there in the end, but it’s much more effective to use a method that creates a clear process and team focus.

In Lightning Decision Jam, participants are invited to begin by writing challenges, concerns, or mistakes on post-its without discussing them before then being invited by the moderator to present them to the group.

From there, the team vote on which problems to solve and are guided through steps that will allow them to reframe those problems, create solutions and then decide what to execute on. 

By deciding the problems that need to be solved as a team before moving on, this group process is great for ensuring the whole team is aligned and can take ownership over the next stages. 

Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ)   #action   #decision making   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #innovation   #design   #remote-friendly   It doesn’t matter where you work and what your job role is, if you work with other people together as a team, you will always encounter the same challenges: Unclear goals and miscommunication that cause busy work and overtime Unstructured meetings that leave attendants tired, confused and without clear outcomes. Frustration builds up because internal challenges to productivity are not addressed Sudden changes in priorities lead to a loss of focus and momentum Muddled compromise takes the place of clear decision- making, leaving everybody to come up with their own interpretation. In short, a lack of structure leads to a waste of time and effort, projects that drag on for too long and frustrated, burnt out teams. AJ&Smart has worked with some of the most innovative, productive companies in the world. What sets their teams apart from others is not better tools, bigger talent or more beautiful offices. The secret sauce to becoming a more productive, more creative and happier team is simple: Replace all open discussion or brainstorming with a structured process that leads to more ideas, clearer decisions and better outcomes. When a good process provides guardrails and a clear path to follow, it becomes easier to come up with ideas, make decisions and solve problems. This is why AJ&Smart created Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ). It’s a simple and short, but powerful group exercise that can be run either in-person, in the same room, or remotely with distributed teams.

Problem Definition Process

While problems can be complex, the problem-solving methods you use to identify and solve those problems can often be simple in design. 

By taking the time to truly identify and define a problem before asking the group to reframe the challenge as an opportunity, this method is a great way to enable change.

Begin by identifying a focus question and exploring the ways in which it manifests before splitting into five teams who will each consider the problem using a different method: escape, reversal, exaggeration, distortion or wishful. Teams develop a problem objective and create ideas in line with their method before then feeding them back to the group.

This method is great for enabling in-depth discussions while also creating space for finding creative solutions too!

Problem Definition   #problem solving   #idea generation   #creativity   #online   #remote-friendly   A problem solving technique to define a problem, challenge or opportunity and to generate ideas.

The 5 Whys 

Sometimes, a group needs to go further with their strategies and analyze the root cause at the heart of organizational issues. An RCA or root cause analysis is the process of identifying what is at the heart of business problems or recurring challenges. 

The 5 Whys is a simple and effective method of helping a group go find the root cause of any problem or challenge and conduct analysis that will deliver results. 

By beginning with the creation of a problem statement and going through five stages to refine it, The 5 Whys provides everything you need to truly discover the cause of an issue.

The 5 Whys   #hyperisland   #innovation   This simple and powerful method is useful for getting to the core of a problem or challenge. As the title suggests, the group defines a problems, then asks the question “why” five times, often using the resulting explanation as a starting point for creative problem solving.

World Cafe is a simple but powerful facilitation technique to help bigger groups to focus their energy and attention on solving complex problems.

World Cafe enables this approach by creating a relaxed atmosphere where participants are able to self-organize and explore topics relevant and important to them which are themed around a central problem-solving purpose. Create the right atmosphere by modeling your space after a cafe and after guiding the group through the method, let them take the lead!

Making problem-solving a part of your organization’s culture in the long term can be a difficult undertaking. More approachable formats like World Cafe can be especially effective in bringing people unfamiliar with workshops into the fold. 

World Cafe   #hyperisland   #innovation   #issue analysis   World Café is a simple yet powerful method, originated by Juanita Brown, for enabling meaningful conversations driven completely by participants and the topics that are relevant and important to them. Facilitators create a cafe-style space and provide simple guidelines. Participants then self-organize and explore a set of relevant topics or questions for conversation.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)

One of the best approaches is to create a safe space for a group to share and discover practices and behaviors that can help them find their own solutions.

With DAD, you can help a group choose which problems they wish to solve and which approaches they will take to do so. It’s great at helping remove resistance to change and can help get buy-in at every level too!

This process of enabling frontline ownership is great in ensuring follow-through and is one of the methods you will want in your toolbox as a facilitator.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)   #idea generation   #liberating structures   #action   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   DADs make it easy for a group or community to discover practices and behaviors that enable some individuals (without access to special resources and facing the same constraints) to find better solutions than their peers to common problems. These are called positive deviant (PD) behaviors and practices. DADs make it possible for people in the group, unit, or community to discover by themselves these PD practices. DADs also create favorable conditions for stimulating participants’ creativity in spaces where they can feel safe to invent new and more effective practices. Resistance to change evaporates as participants are unleashed to choose freely which practices they will adopt or try and which problems they will tackle. DADs make it possible to achieve frontline ownership of solutions.

Design Sprint 2.0

Want to see how a team can solve big problems and move forward with prototyping and testing solutions in a few days? The Design Sprint 2.0 template from Jake Knapp, author of Sprint, is a complete agenda for a with proven results.

Developing the right agenda can involve difficult but necessary planning. Ensuring all the correct steps are followed can also be stressful or time-consuming depending on your level of experience.

Use this complete 4-day workshop template if you are finding there is no obvious solution to your challenge and want to focus your team around a specific problem that might require a shortcut to launching a minimum viable product or waiting for the organization-wide implementation of a solution.

Open space technology

Open space technology- developed by Harrison Owen – creates a space where large groups are invited to take ownership of their problem solving and lead individual sessions. Open space technology is a great format when you have a great deal of expertise and insight in the room and want to allow for different takes and approaches on a particular theme or problem you need to be solved.

Start by bringing your participants together to align around a central theme and focus their efforts. Explain the ground rules to help guide the problem-solving process and then invite members to identify any issue connecting to the central theme that they are interested in and are prepared to take responsibility for.

Once participants have decided on their approach to the core theme, they write their issue on a piece of paper, announce it to the group, pick a session time and place, and post the paper on the wall. As the wall fills up with sessions, the group is then invited to join the sessions that interest them the most and which they can contribute to, then you’re ready to begin!

Everyone joins the problem-solving group they’ve signed up to, record the discussion and if appropriate, findings can then be shared with the rest of the group afterward.

Open Space Technology   #action plan   #idea generation   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #large group   #online   #remote-friendly   Open Space is a methodology for large groups to create their agenda discerning important topics for discussion, suitable for conferences, community gatherings and whole system facilitation

Techniques to identify and analyze problems

Using a problem-solving method to help a team identify and analyze a problem can be a quick and effective addition to any workshop or meeting.

While further actions are always necessary, you can generate momentum and alignment easily, and these activities are a great place to get started.

We’ve put together this list of techniques to help you and your team with problem identification, analysis, and discussion that sets the foundation for developing effective solutions.

Let’s take a look!

Fishbone Analysis

Organizational or team challenges are rarely simple, and it’s important to remember that one problem can be an indication of something that goes deeper and may require further consideration to be solved.

Fishbone Analysis helps groups to dig deeper and understand the origins of a problem. It’s a great example of a root cause analysis method that is simple for everyone on a team to get their head around. 

Participants in this activity are asked to annotate a diagram of a fish, first adding the problem or issue to be worked on at the head of a fish before then brainstorming the root causes of the problem and adding them as bones on the fish. 

Using abstractions such as a diagram of a fish can really help a team break out of their regular thinking and develop a creative approach.

Fishbone Analysis   #problem solving   ##root cause analysis   #decision making   #online facilitation   A process to help identify and understand the origins of problems, issues or observations.

Problem Tree 

Encouraging visual thinking can be an essential part of many strategies. By simply reframing and clarifying problems, a group can move towards developing a problem solving model that works for them. 

In Problem Tree, groups are asked to first brainstorm a list of problems – these can be design problems, team problems or larger business problems – and then organize them into a hierarchy. The hierarchy could be from most important to least important or abstract to practical, though the key thing with problem solving games that involve this aspect is that your group has some way of managing and sorting all the issues that are raised.

Once you have a list of problems that need to be solved and have organized them accordingly, you’re then well-positioned for the next problem solving steps.

Problem tree   #define intentions   #create   #design   #issue analysis   A problem tree is a tool to clarify the hierarchy of problems addressed by the team within a design project; it represents high level problems or related sublevel problems.

SWOT Analysis

Chances are you’ve heard of the SWOT Analysis before. This problem-solving method focuses on identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is a tried and tested method for both individuals and teams.

Start by creating a desired end state or outcome and bare this in mind – any process solving model is made more effective by knowing what you are moving towards. Create a quadrant made up of the four categories of a SWOT analysis and ask participants to generate ideas based on each of those quadrants.

Once you have those ideas assembled in their quadrants, cluster them together based on their affinity with other ideas. These clusters are then used to facilitate group conversations and move things forward. 

SWOT analysis   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   #meeting facilitation   The SWOT Analysis is a long-standing technique of looking at what we have, with respect to the desired end state, as well as what we could improve on. It gives us an opportunity to gauge approaching opportunities and dangers, and assess the seriousness of the conditions that affect our future. When we understand those conditions, we can influence what comes next.

Agreement-Certainty Matrix

Not every problem-solving approach is right for every challenge, and deciding on the right method for the challenge at hand is a key part of being an effective team.

The Agreement Certainty matrix helps teams align on the nature of the challenges facing them. By sorting problems from simple to chaotic, your team can understand what methods are suitable for each problem and what they can do to ensure effective results. 

If you are already using Liberating Structures techniques as part of your problem-solving strategy, the Agreement-Certainty Matrix can be an invaluable addition to your process. We’ve found it particularly if you are having issues with recurring problems in your organization and want to go deeper in understanding the root cause. 

Agreement-Certainty Matrix   #issue analysis   #liberating structures   #problem solving   You can help individuals or groups avoid the frequent mistake of trying to solve a problem with methods that are not adapted to the nature of their challenge. The combination of two questions makes it possible to easily sort challenges into four categories: simple, complicated, complex , and chaotic .  A problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy to duplicate.  It is complicated when experts are required to devise a sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably.  A problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but outcomes are not predictable in detail.  Chaotic is when the context is too turbulent to identify a path forward.  A loose analogy may be used to describe these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.”  The Liberating Structures Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.

Organizing and charting a team’s progress can be important in ensuring its success. SQUID (Sequential Question and Insight Diagram) is a great model that allows a team to effectively switch between giving questions and answers and develop the skills they need to stay on track throughout the process. 

Begin with two different colored sticky notes – one for questions and one for answers – and with your central topic (the head of the squid) on the board. Ask the group to first come up with a series of questions connected to their best guess of how to approach the topic. Ask the group to come up with answers to those questions, fix them to the board and connect them with a line. After some discussion, go back to question mode by responding to the generated answers or other points on the board.

It’s rewarding to see a diagram grow throughout the exercise, and a completed SQUID can provide a visual resource for future effort and as an example for other teams.

SQUID   #gamestorming   #project planning   #issue analysis   #problem solving   When exploring an information space, it’s important for a group to know where they are at any given time. By using SQUID, a group charts out the territory as they go and can navigate accordingly. SQUID stands for Sequential Question and Insight Diagram.

To continue with our nautical theme, Speed Boat is a short and sweet activity that can help a team quickly identify what employees, clients or service users might have a problem with and analyze what might be standing in the way of achieving a solution.

Methods that allow for a group to make observations, have insights and obtain those eureka moments quickly are invaluable when trying to solve complex problems.

In Speed Boat, the approach is to first consider what anchors and challenges might be holding an organization (or boat) back. Bonus points if you are able to identify any sharks in the water and develop ideas that can also deal with competitors!   

Speed Boat   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Speedboat is a short and sweet way to identify what your employees or clients don’t like about your product/service or what’s standing in the way of a desired goal.

The Journalistic Six

Some of the most effective ways of solving problems is by encouraging teams to be more inclusive and diverse in their thinking.

Based on the six key questions journalism students are taught to answer in articles and news stories, The Journalistic Six helps create teams to see the whole picture. By using who, what, when, where, why, and how to facilitate the conversation and encourage creative thinking, your team can make sure that the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the are covered exhaustively and thoughtfully. Reporter’s notebook and dictaphone optional.

The Journalistic Six – Who What When Where Why How   #idea generation   #issue analysis   #problem solving   #online   #creative thinking   #remote-friendly   A questioning method for generating, explaining, investigating ideas.

Individual and group perspectives are incredibly important, but what happens if people are set in their minds and need a change of perspective in order to approach a problem more effectively?

Flip It is a method we love because it is both simple to understand and run, and allows groups to understand how their perspectives and biases are formed. 

Participants in Flip It are first invited to consider concerns, issues, or problems from a perspective of fear and write them on a flip chart. Then, the group is asked to consider those same issues from a perspective of hope and flip their understanding.  

No problem and solution is free from existing bias and by changing perspectives with Flip It, you can then develop a problem solving model quickly and effectively.

Flip It!   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Often, a change in a problem or situation comes simply from a change in our perspectives. Flip It! is a quick game designed to show players that perspectives are made, not born.

LEGO Challenge

Now for an activity that is a little out of the (toy) box. LEGO Serious Play is a facilitation methodology that can be used to improve creative thinking and problem-solving skills. 

The LEGO Challenge includes giving each member of the team an assignment that is hidden from the rest of the group while they create a structure without speaking.

What the LEGO challenge brings to the table is a fun working example of working with stakeholders who might not be on the same page to solve problems. Also, it’s LEGO! Who doesn’t love LEGO! 

LEGO Challenge   #hyperisland   #team   A team-building activity in which groups must work together to build a structure out of LEGO, but each individual has a secret “assignment” which makes the collaborative process more challenging. It emphasizes group communication, leadership dynamics, conflict, cooperation, patience and problem solving strategy.

What, So What, Now What?

If not carefully managed, the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the problem-solving process can actually create more problems and misunderstandings.

The What, So What, Now What? problem-solving activity is designed to help collect insights and move forward while also eliminating the possibility of disagreement when it comes to identifying, clarifying, and analyzing organizational or work problems. 

Facilitation is all about bringing groups together so that might work on a shared goal and the best problem-solving strategies ensure that teams are aligned in purpose, if not initially in opinion or insight.

Throughout the three steps of this game, you give everyone on a team to reflect on a problem by asking what happened, why it is important, and what actions should then be taken. 

This can be a great activity for bringing our individual perceptions about a problem or challenge and contextualizing it in a larger group setting. This is one of the most important problem-solving skills you can bring to your organization.

W³ – What, So What, Now What?   #issue analysis   #innovation   #liberating structures   You can help groups reflect on a shared experience in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction. Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what actions logically follow with Now What . The shared progression eliminates most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what to do. Voila!

Journalists  

Problem analysis can be one of the most important and decisive stages of all problem-solving tools. Sometimes, a team can become bogged down in the details and are unable to move forward.

Journalists is an activity that can avoid a group from getting stuck in the problem identification or problem analysis stages of the process.

In Journalists, the group is invited to draft the front page of a fictional newspaper and figure out what stories deserve to be on the cover and what headlines those stories will have. By reframing how your problems and challenges are approached, you can help a team move productively through the process and be better prepared for the steps to follow.

Journalists   #vision   #big picture   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   This is an exercise to use when the group gets stuck in details and struggles to see the big picture. Also good for defining a vision.

Problem-solving techniques for brainstorming solutions

Now you have the context and background of the problem you are trying to solving, now comes the time to start ideating and thinking about how you’ll solve the issue.

Here, you’ll want to encourage creative, free thinking and speed. Get as many ideas out as possible and explore different perspectives so you have the raw material for the next step.

Looking at a problem from a new angle can be one of the most effective ways of creating an effective solution. TRIZ is a problem-solving tool that asks the group to consider what they must not do in order to solve a challenge.

By reversing the discussion, new topics and taboo subjects often emerge, allowing the group to think more deeply and create ideas that confront the status quo in a safe and meaningful way. If you’re working on a problem that you’ve tried to solve before, TRIZ is a great problem-solving method to help your team get unblocked.

Making Space with TRIZ   #issue analysis   #liberating structures   #issue resolution   You can clear space for innovation by helping a group let go of what it knows (but rarely admits) limits its success and by inviting creative destruction. TRIZ makes it possible to challenge sacred cows safely and encourages heretical thinking. The question “What must we stop doing to make progress on our deepest purpose?” induces seriously fun yet very courageous conversations. Since laughter often erupts, issues that are otherwise taboo get a chance to be aired and confronted. With creative destruction come opportunities for renewal as local action and innovation rush in to fill the vacuum. Whoosh!

Mindspin  

Brainstorming is part of the bread and butter of the problem-solving process and all problem-solving strategies benefit from getting ideas out and challenging a team to generate solutions quickly. 

With Mindspin, participants are encouraged not only to generate ideas but to do so under time constraints and by slamming down cards and passing them on. By doing multiple rounds, your team can begin with a free generation of possible solutions before moving on to developing those solutions and encouraging further ideation. 

This is one of our favorite problem-solving activities and can be great for keeping the energy up throughout the workshop. Remember the importance of helping people become engaged in the process – energizing problem-solving techniques like Mindspin can help ensure your team stays engaged and happy, even when the problems they’re coming together to solve are complex. 

MindSpin   #teampedia   #idea generation   #problem solving   #action   A fast and loud method to enhance brainstorming within a team. Since this activity has more than round ideas that are repetitive can be ruled out leaving more creative and innovative answers to the challenge.

The Creativity Dice

One of the most useful problem solving skills you can teach your team is of approaching challenges with creativity, flexibility, and openness. Games like The Creativity Dice allow teams to overcome the potential hurdle of too much linear thinking and approach the process with a sense of fun and speed. 

In The Creativity Dice, participants are organized around a topic and roll a dice to determine what they will work on for a period of 3 minutes at a time. They might roll a 3 and work on investigating factual information on the chosen topic. They might roll a 1 and work on identifying the specific goals, standards, or criteria for the session.

Encouraging rapid work and iteration while asking participants to be flexible are great skills to cultivate. Having a stage for idea incubation in this game is also important. Moments of pause can help ensure the ideas that are put forward are the most suitable. 

The Creativity Dice   #creativity   #problem solving   #thiagi   #issue analysis   Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.

Idea and Concept Development

Brainstorming without structure can quickly become chaotic or frustrating. In a problem-solving context, having an ideation framework to follow can help ensure your team is both creative and disciplined.

In this method, you’ll find an idea generation process that encourages your group to brainstorm effectively before developing their ideas and begin clustering them together. By using concepts such as Yes and…, more is more and postponing judgement, you can create the ideal conditions for brainstorming with ease.

Idea & Concept Development   #hyperisland   #innovation   #idea generation   Ideation and Concept Development is a process for groups to work creatively and collaboratively to generate creative ideas. It’s a general approach that can be adapted and customized to suit many different scenarios. It includes basic principles for idea generation and several steps for groups to work with. It also includes steps for idea selection and development.

Problem-solving techniques for developing and refining solutions 

The success of any problem-solving process can be measured by the solutions it produces. After you’ve defined the issue, explored existing ideas, and ideated, it’s time to develop and refine your ideas in order to bring them closer to a solution that actually solves the problem.

Use these problem-solving techniques when you want to help your team think through their ideas and refine them as part of your problem solving process.

Improved Solutions

After a team has successfully identified a problem and come up with a few solutions, it can be tempting to call the work of the problem-solving process complete. That said, the first solution is not necessarily the best, and by including a further review and reflection activity into your problem-solving model, you can ensure your group reaches the best possible result. 

One of a number of problem-solving games from Thiagi Group, Improved Solutions helps you go the extra mile and develop suggested solutions with close consideration and peer review. By supporting the discussion of several problems at once and by shifting team roles throughout, this problem-solving technique is a dynamic way of finding the best solution. 

Improved Solutions   #creativity   #thiagi   #problem solving   #action   #team   You can improve any solution by objectively reviewing its strengths and weaknesses and making suitable adjustments. In this creativity framegame, you improve the solutions to several problems. To maintain objective detachment, you deal with a different problem during each of six rounds and assume different roles (problem owner, consultant, basher, booster, enhancer, and evaluator) during each round. At the conclusion of the activity, each player ends up with two solutions to her problem.

Four Step Sketch

Creative thinking and visual ideation does not need to be confined to the opening stages of your problem-solving strategies. Exercises that include sketching and prototyping on paper can be effective at the solution finding and development stage of the process, and can be great for keeping a team engaged. 

By going from simple notes to a crazy 8s round that involves rapidly sketching 8 variations on their ideas before then producing a final solution sketch, the group is able to iterate quickly and visually. Problem-solving techniques like Four-Step Sketch are great if you have a group of different thinkers and want to change things up from a more textual or discussion-based approach.

Four-Step Sketch   #design sprint   #innovation   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   The four-step sketch is an exercise that helps people to create well-formed concepts through a structured process that includes: Review key information Start design work on paper,  Consider multiple variations , Create a detailed solution . This exercise is preceded by a set of other activities allowing the group to clarify the challenge they want to solve. See how the Four Step Sketch exercise fits into a Design Sprint

Ensuring that everyone in a group is able to contribute to a discussion is vital during any problem solving process. Not only does this ensure all bases are covered, but its then easier to get buy-in and accountability when people have been able to contribute to the process.

1-2-4-All is a tried and tested facilitation technique where participants are asked to first brainstorm on a topic on their own. Next, they discuss and share ideas in a pair before moving into a small group. Those groups are then asked to present the best idea from their discussion to the rest of the team.

This method can be used in many different contexts effectively, though I find it particularly shines in the idea development stage of the process. Giving each participant time to concretize their ideas and develop them in progressively larger groups can create a great space for both innovation and psychological safety.

1-2-4-All   #idea generation   #liberating structures   #issue analysis   With this facilitation technique you can immediately include everyone regardless of how large the group is. You can generate better ideas and more of them faster than ever before. You can tap the know-how and imagination that is distributed widely in places not known in advance. Open, generative conversation unfolds. Ideas and solutions are sifted in rapid fashion. Most importantly, participants own the ideas, so follow-up and implementation is simplified. No buy-in strategies needed! Simple and elegant!

15% Solutions

Some problems are simpler than others and with the right problem-solving activities, you can empower people to take immediate actions that can help create organizational change. 

Part of the liberating structures toolkit, 15% solutions is a problem-solving technique that focuses on finding and implementing solutions quickly. A process of iterating and making small changes quickly can help generate momentum and an appetite for solving complex problems.

Problem-solving strategies can live and die on whether people are onboard. Getting some quick wins is a great way of getting people behind the process.   

It can be extremely empowering for a team to realize that problem-solving techniques can be deployed quickly and easily and delineate between things they can positively impact and those things they cannot change. 

15% Solutions   #action   #liberating structures   #remote-friendly   You can reveal the actions, however small, that everyone can do immediately. At a minimum, these will create momentum, and that may make a BIG difference.  15% Solutions show that there is no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their discretion instead of what they cannot change.  With a very simple question, you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance. Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole landscape.

Problem-solving techniques for making decisions and planning

After your group is happy with the possible solutions you’ve developed, now comes the time to choose which to implement. There’s more than one way to make a decision and the best option is often dependant on the needs and set-up of your group.

Sometimes, it’s the case that you’ll want to vote as a group on what is likely to be the most impactful solution. Other times, it might be down to a decision maker or major stakeholder to make the final decision. Whatever your process, here’s some techniques you can use to help you make a decision during your problem solving process.

How-Now-Wow Matrix

The problem-solving process is often creative, as complex problems usually require a change of thinking and creative response in order to find the best solutions. While it’s common for the first stages to encourage creative thinking, groups can often gravitate to familiar solutions when it comes to the end of the process. 

When selecting solutions, you don’t want to lose your creative energy! The How-Now-Wow Matrix from Gamestorming is a great problem-solving activity that enables a group to stay creative and think out of the box when it comes to selecting the right solution for a given problem.

Problem-solving techniques that encourage creative thinking and the ideation and selection of new solutions can be the most effective in organisational change. Give the How-Now-Wow Matrix a go, and not just for how pleasant it is to say out loud. 

How-Now-Wow Matrix   #gamestorming   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   When people want to develop new ideas, they most often think out of the box in the brainstorming or divergent phase. However, when it comes to convergence, people often end up picking ideas that are most familiar to them. This is called a ‘creative paradox’ or a ‘creadox’. The How-Now-Wow matrix is an idea selection tool that breaks the creadox by forcing people to weigh each idea on 2 parameters.

Impact and Effort Matrix

All problem-solving techniques hope to not only find solutions to a given problem or challenge but to find the best solution. When it comes to finding a solution, groups are invited to put on their decision-making hats and really think about how a proposed idea would work in practice. 

The Impact and Effort Matrix is one of the problem-solving techniques that fall into this camp, empowering participants to first generate ideas and then categorize them into a 2×2 matrix based on impact and effort.

Activities that invite critical thinking while remaining simple are invaluable. Use the Impact and Effort Matrix to move from ideation and towards evaluating potential solutions before then committing to them. 

Impact and Effort Matrix   #gamestorming   #decision making   #action   #remote-friendly   In this decision-making exercise, possible actions are mapped based on two factors: effort required to implement and potential impact. Categorizing ideas along these lines is a useful technique in decision making, as it obliges contributors to balance and evaluate suggested actions before committing to them.

If you’ve followed each of the problem-solving steps with your group successfully, you should move towards the end of your process with heaps of possible solutions developed with a specific problem in mind. But how do you help a group go from ideation to putting a solution into action? 

Dotmocracy – or Dot Voting -is a tried and tested method of helping a team in the problem-solving process make decisions and put actions in place with a degree of oversight and consensus. 

One of the problem-solving techniques that should be in every facilitator’s toolbox, Dot Voting is fast and effective and can help identify the most popular and best solutions and help bring a group to a decision effectively. 

Dotmocracy   #action   #decision making   #group prioritization   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Dotmocracy is a simple method for group prioritization or decision-making. It is not an activity on its own, but a method to use in processes where prioritization or decision-making is the aim. The method supports a group to quickly see which options are most popular or relevant. The options or ideas are written on post-its and stuck up on a wall for the whole group to see. Each person votes for the options they think are the strongest, and that information is used to inform a decision.

Straddling the gap between decision making and planning, MoSCoW is a simple and effective method that allows a group team to easily prioritize a set of possible options.

Use this method in a problem solving process by collecting and summarizing all your possible solutions and then categorize them into 4 sections: “Must have”, “Should have”, “Could have”, or “Would like but won‘t get”.

This method is particularly useful when its less about choosing one possible solution and more about prioritorizing which to do first and which may not fit in the scope of your project. In my experience, complex challenges often require multiple small fixes, and this method can be a great way to move from a pile of things you’d all like to do to a structured plan.

MoSCoW   #define intentions   #create   #design   #action   #remote-friendly   MoSCoW is a method that allows the team to prioritize the different features that they will work on. Features are then categorized into “Must have”, “Should have”, “Could have”, or “Would like but won‘t get”. To be used at the beginning of a timeslot (for example during Sprint planning) and when planning is needed.

When it comes to managing the rollout of a solution, clarity and accountability are key factors in ensuring the success of the project. The RAACI chart is a simple but effective model for setting roles and responsibilities as part of a planning session.

Start by listing each person involved in the project and put them into the following groups in order to make it clear who is responsible for what during the rollout of your solution.

• Responsibility  (Which person and/or team will be taking action?)
• Authority  (At what “point” must the responsible person check in before going further?)
• Accountability  (Who must the responsible person check in with?)
• Consultation  (Who must be consulted by the responsible person before decisions are made?)
• Information  (Who must be informed of decisions, once made?)

Ensure this information is easily accessible and use it to inform who does what and who is looped into discussions and kept up to date.

RAACI   #roles and responsibility   #teamwork   #project management   Clarifying roles and responsibilities, levels of autonomy/latitude in decision making, and levels of engagement among diverse stakeholders.

Problem-solving warm-up activities

All facilitators know that warm-ups and icebreakers are useful for any workshop or group process. Problem-solving workshops are no different.

Use these problem-solving techniques to warm up a group and prepare them for the rest of the process. Activating your group by tapping into some of the top problem-solving skills can be one of the best ways to see great outcomes from your session.

Check-in / Check-out

Solid processes are planned from beginning to end, and the best facilitators know that setting the tone and establishing a safe, open environment can be integral to a successful problem-solving process. Check-in / Check-out is a great way to begin and/or bookend a problem-solving workshop. Checking in to a session emphasizes that everyone will be seen, heard, and expected to contribute. 

If you are running a series of meetings, setting a consistent pattern of checking in and checking out can really help your team get into a groove. We recommend this opening-closing activity for small to medium-sized groups though it can work with large groups if they’re disciplined!

Check-in / Check-out   #team   #opening   #closing   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Either checking-in or checking-out is a simple way for a team to open or close a process, symbolically and in a collaborative way. Checking-in/out invites each member in a group to be present, seen and heard, and to express a reflection or a feeling. Checking-in emphasizes presence, focus and group commitment; checking-out emphasizes reflection and symbolic closure.

Doodling Together  

Thinking creatively and not being afraid to make suggestions are important problem-solving skills for any group or team, and warming up by encouraging these behaviors is a great way to start. 

Doodling Together is one of our favorite creative ice breaker games – it’s quick, effective, and fun and can make all following problem-solving steps easier by encouraging a group to collaborate visually. By passing cards and adding additional items as they go, the workshop group gets into a groove of co-creation and idea development that is crucial to finding solutions to problems. 

Doodling Together   #collaboration   #creativity   #teamwork   #fun   #team   #visual methods   #energiser   #icebreaker   #remote-friendly   Create wild, weird and often funny postcards together & establish a group’s creative confidence.

Show and Tell

You might remember some version of Show and Tell from being a kid in school and it’s a great problem-solving activity to kick off a session.

Asking participants to prepare a little something before a workshop by bringing an object for show and tell can help them warm up before the session has even begun! Games that include a physical object can also help encourage early engagement before moving onto more big-picture thinking.

By asking your participants to tell stories about why they chose to bring a particular item to the group, you can help teams see things from new perspectives and see both differences and similarities in the way they approach a topic. Great groundwork for approaching a problem-solving process as a team! 

Show and Tell   #gamestorming   #action   #opening   #meeting facilitation   Show and Tell taps into the power of metaphors to reveal players’ underlying assumptions and associations around a topic The aim of the game is to get a deeper understanding of stakeholders’ perspectives on anything—a new project, an organizational restructuring, a shift in the company’s vision or team dynamic.

Constellations

Who doesn’t love stars? Constellations is a great warm-up activity for any workshop as it gets people up off their feet, energized, and ready to engage in new ways with established topics. It’s also great for showing existing beliefs, biases, and patterns that can come into play as part of your session.

Using warm-up games that help build trust and connection while also allowing for non-verbal responses can be great for easing people into the problem-solving process and encouraging engagement from everyone in the group. Constellations is great in large spaces that allow for movement and is definitely a practical exercise to allow the group to see patterns that are otherwise invisible. 

Constellations   #trust   #connection   #opening   #coaching   #patterns   #system   Individuals express their response to a statement or idea by standing closer or further from a central object. Used with teams to reveal system, hidden patterns, perspectives.

Draw a Tree

Problem-solving games that help raise group awareness through a central, unifying metaphor can be effective ways to warm-up a group in any problem-solving model.

Draw a Tree is a simple warm-up activity you can use in any group and which can provide a quick jolt of energy. Start by asking your participants to draw a tree in just 45 seconds – they can choose whether it will be abstract or realistic. 

Once the timer is up, ask the group how many people included the roots of the tree and use this as a means to discuss how we can ignore important parts of any system simply because they are not visible.

All problem-solving strategies are made more effective by thinking of problems critically and by exposing things that may not normally come to light. Warm-up games like Draw a Tree are great in that they quickly demonstrate some key problem-solving skills in an accessible and effective way.

Draw a Tree   #thiagi   #opening   #perspectives   #remote-friendly   With this game you can raise awarness about being more mindful, and aware of the environment we live in.

Closing activities for a problem-solving process

Each step of the problem-solving workshop benefits from an intelligent deployment of activities, games, and techniques. Bringing your session to an effective close helps ensure that solutions are followed through on and that you also celebrate what has been achieved.

Here are some problem-solving activities you can use to effectively close a workshop or meeting and ensure the great work you’ve done can continue afterward.

One Breath Feedback

Maintaining attention and focus during the closing stages of a problem-solving workshop can be tricky and so being concise when giving feedback can be important. It’s easy to incur “death by feedback” should some team members go on for too long sharing their perspectives in a quick feedback round. 

One Breath Feedback is a great closing activity for workshops. You give everyone an opportunity to provide feedback on what they’ve done but only in the space of a single breath. This keeps feedback short and to the point and means that everyone is encouraged to provide the most important piece of feedback to them. 

One breath feedback   #closing   #feedback   #action   This is a feedback round in just one breath that excels in maintaining attention: each participants is able to speak during just one breath … for most people that’s around 20 to 25 seconds … unless of course you’ve been a deep sea diver in which case you’ll be able to do it for longer.

Who What When Matrix 

Matrices feature as part of many effective problem-solving strategies and with good reason. They are easily recognizable, simple to use, and generate results.

The Who What When Matrix is a great tool to use when closing your problem-solving session by attributing a who, what and when to the actions and solutions you have decided upon. The resulting matrix is a simple, easy-to-follow way of ensuring your team can move forward. 

Great solutions can’t be enacted without action and ownership. Your problem-solving process should include a stage for allocating tasks to individuals or teams and creating a realistic timeframe for those solutions to be implemented or checked out. Use this method to keep the solution implementation process clear and simple for all involved. 

Who/What/When Matrix   #gamestorming   #action   #project planning   With Who/What/When matrix, you can connect people with clear actions they have defined and have committed to.

Response cards

Group discussion can comprise the bulk of most problem-solving activities and by the end of the process, you might find that your team is talked out! 

Providing a means for your team to give feedback with short written notes can ensure everyone is head and can contribute without the need to stand up and talk. Depending on the needs of the group, giving an alternative can help ensure everyone can contribute to your problem-solving model in the way that makes the most sense for them.

Response Cards is a great way to close a workshop if you are looking for a gentle warm-down and want to get some swift discussion around some of the feedback that is raised. 

Response Cards   #debriefing   #closing   #structured sharing   #questions and answers   #thiagi   #action   It can be hard to involve everyone during a closing of a session. Some might stay in the background or get unheard because of louder participants. However, with the use of Response Cards, everyone will be involved in providing feedback or clarify questions at the end of a session.

Tips for effective problem solving

Problem-solving activities are only one part of the puzzle. While a great method can help unlock your team’s ability to solve problems, without a thoughtful approach and strong facilitation the solutions may not be fit for purpose.

Let’s take a look at some problem-solving tips you can apply to any process to help it be a success!

Clearly define the problem

Jumping straight to solutions can be tempting, though without first clearly articulating a problem, the solution might not be the right one. Many of the problem-solving activities below include sections where the problem is explored and clearly defined before moving on.

This is a vital part of the problem-solving process and taking the time to fully define an issue can save time and effort later. A clear definition helps identify irrelevant information and it also ensures that your team sets off on the right track.

Don’t jump to conclusions

It’s easy for groups to exhibit cognitive bias or have preconceived ideas about both problems and potential solutions. Be sure to back up any problem statements or potential solutions with facts, research, and adequate forethought.

The best techniques ask participants to be methodical and challenge preconceived notions. Make sure you give the group enough time and space to collect relevant information and consider the problem in a new way. By approaching the process with a clear, rational mindset, you’ll often find that better solutions are more forthcoming.  

Try different approaches  

Problems come in all shapes and sizes and so too should the methods you use to solve them. If you find that one approach isn’t yielding results and your team isn’t finding different solutions, try mixing it up. You’ll be surprised at how using a new creative activity can unblock your team and generate great solutions.

Don’t take it personally 

Depending on the nature of your team or organizational problems, it’s easy for conversations to get heated. While it’s good for participants to be engaged in the discussions, ensure that emotions don’t run too high and that blame isn’t thrown around while finding solutions.

You’re all in it together, and even if your team or area is seeing problems, that isn’t necessarily a disparagement of you personally. Using facilitation skills to manage group dynamics is one effective method of helping conversations be more constructive.

Get the right people in the room

Your problem-solving method is often only as effective as the group using it. Getting the right people on the job and managing the number of people present is important too!

If the group is too small, you may not get enough different perspectives to effectively solve a problem. If the group is too large, you can go round and round during the ideation stages.

Creating the right group makeup is also important in ensuring you have the necessary expertise and skillset to both identify and follow up on potential solutions. Carefully consider who to include at each stage to help ensure your problem-solving method is followed and positioned for success.

Create psychologically safe spaces for discussion

Identifying a problem accurately also requires that all members of a group are able to contribute their views in an open and safe manner.

It can be tough for people to stand up and contribute if the problems or challenges are emotive or personal in nature. Try and create a psychologically safe space for these kinds of discussions and where possible, create regular opportunities for challenges to be brought up organically.

Document everything

The best solutions can take refinement, iteration, and reflection to come out. Get into a habit of documenting your process in order to keep all the learnings from the session and to allow ideas to mature and develop. Many of the methods below involve the creation of documents or shared resources. Be sure to keep and share these so everyone can benefit from the work done!

Bring a facilitator 

Facilitation is all about making group processes easier. With a subject as potentially emotive and important as problem-solving, having an impartial third party in the form of a facilitator can make all the difference in finding great solutions and keeping the process moving. Consider bringing a facilitator to your problem-solving session to get better results and generate meaningful solutions!

Develop your problem-solving skills

It takes time and practice to be an effective problem solver. While some roles or participants might more naturally gravitate towards problem-solving, it can take development and planning to help everyone create better solutions.

You might develop a training program, run a problem-solving workshop or simply ask your team to practice using the techniques below. Check out our post on problem-solving skills to see how you and your group can develop the right mental process and be more resilient to issues too!

Design a great agenda

Workshops are a great format for solving problems. With the right approach, you can focus a group and help them find the solutions to their own problems. But designing a process can be time-consuming and finding the right activities can be difficult.

Check out our workshop planning guide to level-up your agenda design and start running more effective workshops. Need inspiration? Check out templates designed by expert facilitators to help you kickstart your process!

Save time and effort creating an effective problem solving process

A structured problem solving process is a surefire way of solving tough problems, discovering creative solutions and driving organizational change. But how can you design for successful outcomes?

With SessionLab, it’s easy to design engaging workshops that deliver results. Drag, drop and reorder blocks  to build your agenda. When you make changes or update your agenda, your session  timing   adjusts automatically , saving you time on manual adjustments.

Collaborating with stakeholders or clients? Share your agenda with a single click and collaborate in real-time. No more sending documents back and forth over email.

Explore  how to use SessionLab  to design effective problem solving workshops or  watch this five minute video  to see the planner in action!

Over to you

The problem-solving process can often be as complicated and multifaceted as the problems they are set-up to solve. With the right problem-solving techniques and a mix of exercises designed to guide discussion and generate purposeful ideas, we hope we’ve given you the tools to find the best solutions as simply and easily as possible.

Is there a problem-solving technique that you are missing here? Do you have a favorite activity or method you use when facilitating? Let us know in the comments below, we’d love to hear from you! 

James Smart is Head of Content at SessionLab. He’s also a creative facilitator who has run workshops and designed courses for establishments like the National Centre for Writing, UK. He especially enjoys working with young people and empowering others in their creative practice.

thank you very much for these excellent techniques

Certainly wonderful article, very detailed. Shared!

Your list of techniques for problem solving can be helpfully extended by adding TRIZ to the list of techniques. TRIZ has 40 problem solving techniques derived from methods inventros and patent holders used to get new patents. About 10-12 are general approaches. many organization sponsor classes in TRIZ that are used to solve business problems or general organiztational problems. You can take a look at TRIZ and dwonload a free internet booklet to see if you feel it shound be included per your selection process.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

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

Going from a mere idea to a workshop that delivers results for your clients can feel like a daunting task. In this piece, we will shine a light on all the work behind the scenes and help you learn how to plan a workshop from start to finish. On a good day, facilitation can feel like effortless magic, but that is mostly the result of backstage work, foresight, and a lot of careful planning. Read on to learn a step-by-step approach to breaking the process of planning a workshop into small, manageable chunks.  The flow starts with the first meeting with a client to define the purposes of a workshop.…

Effective online tools are a necessity for smooth and engaging virtual workshops and meetings. But how do you choose the right ones? Do you sometimes feel that the good old pen and paper or MS Office toolkit and email leaves you struggling to stay on top of managing and delivering your workshop? Fortunately, there are plenty of great workshop tools to make your life easier when you need to facilitate a meeting and lead workshops. In this post, we’ll share our favorite online tools you can use to make your life easier and run better workshops and meetings. In fact, there are plenty of free online workshop tools and meeting…

How does learning work? A clever 9-year-old once told me: “I know I am learning something new when I am surprised.” The science of adult learning tells us that, in order to learn new skills (which, unsurprisingly, is harder for adults to do than kids) grown-ups need to first get into a specific headspace.  In a business, this approach is often employed in a training session where employees learn new skills or work on professional development. But how do you ensure your training is effective? In this guide, we'll explore how to create an effective training session plan and run engaging training sessions. As team leader, project manager, or consultant,…

Design your next workshop with SessionLab

Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab

Sign up for free

Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes

• Development
• Published: March 1997
• Volume 45 , pages 65–94, ( 1997 )

Cite this article

• David H. Jonassen 1  

10k Accesses

798 Citations

10 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Although problem solving is regarded by most educators as among the most important learning outcomes, few instructional design prescriptions are available for designing problem-solving instruction and engaging learners. This paper distinguishes between well-structured problems and ill-structured problems. Well-structured problems are constrained problems with convergent solutions that engage the application of a limited number of rules and principles within well-defined parameters. Ill-structured problems possess multiple solutions, solution paths, fewer parameters which are less manipulable, and contain uncertainty about which concepts, rules, and principles are necessary for the solution or how they are organized and which solution is best. For both types of problems, this paper presents models for how learners solve them and models for designing instruction to support problem-solving skill development. The model for solving well-structured problems is based on information processing theories of learning, while the model for solving ill-structured problems relies on an emerging theory of ill-structured problem solving and on constructivist and situated cognition approaches to learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Developing real life problem-solving skills through situational design: a pilot study

Designing Problem-Solving for Meaningful Learning: A Discussion of Asia-Pacific Research

An Instructional Design Model for Information Science

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Anderson, J.R., Farrell, R. & Sauers, R. (1984). Learning to program in LISP. Cognitive Science, 8 , 87–129.

Article   Google Scholar  

Arlin, P.K. (1989). The problem of the problem. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 229–237). New York: Praeger.

Google Scholar  

Bloom, B.S., Englehart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook 1; The cognitive domain . New York: Longman.

Bodker, S. (1991). Activity theory as a challenge to systems design. In H.E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, & R. Hirschheim (Eds.), Information systems research: Contemporary approaches and emergent traditions . Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Bransford, J. (1994). Who ya gonna call? Thoughts about teaching problem solving. In P. Hallinger, K. Lithwood, & J. Murphy (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on educational leadership . New York: Teacher's College Press.

Bransford, J., & Stein, B.S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity . New York : W.H. Freeman .

Charney, D., Reder, L., & Kusbit, G.W. (1990). Goal setting and procedure selection in acquiring computer skills: A comparison of tutorials, problem solving, and learner exploration. Cognition & Instruction, 7 (4) 323–342.

Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5 , 121–152.

Chi, M.T.H. & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach . New York: W.H. Freeman.

Chi, M.T.H. & Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 7–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Churchman, C.W. (1971). The design of inquiring systems: Basic concepts of systems and organizations . New York: Basic Books.

Cognition Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 77–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cooper, G., & Sweller, J. (1987). The effects of schema acquisition and rule automation of mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79 , 347–362.

Covington, M.C., Crutchfield, R.S., Daves, L.B., & Olton, R.M. (1974). The productive thinking program: A course in learning to think . Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill.

de Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M.G.M. (1986). Cognitive structures of good an poor novice problem solvers in physics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78 , 279–288.

deBono, E. (1974). CoRT thinking materials . London: Direct Educational Services.

Dunkle, M.E., Schraw, G., & Bendixen, L.D. (1995, April). Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Ernst, G.W., & Newell, A. (1969). GPS: A case study in generality and problem solving . New York: Academic Press.

Gagné, R.M. (1966). The conditions of learning (1st ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gagné, R.M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gagné, R.M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Gagné, R.M., Briggs, L.J., & Wager, W.W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Jovanovich.

Gick, M.L. (1986). Problem-solving strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21 , 99–120.

Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12 , 306–355.

Gordon, S.E., & Gill, R.T.. (1989). The formation and use of knowledge structures in problem solving domains. Tech. Report AFOSR-88-0063. Washington, DC: Bolling AFB.

Greeno, J. (1978). Natures of problem-solving abilities. In W. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (pp. 239–270). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hayes, J.R. (1981) The compleat problem solver . Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press.

Jacobson, M.J. (1990). Knowledge acquisition, cognitive flexibility, and the instructional applications of hypertext: A comparison of contrasting designs for computer-enhanced learning environments . (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois).

Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Scaffolding diagnostic reasoning in case-based learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education .

Jonassen, D.H., Ambruso, D.R., & Olesen, J. (1992). Designing a hypertext on transfusion medicine using cognitive flexibility theory. Journal of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, 1 (3), 309–322.

Jonassen, D.H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M.A. (1993). Structural knowledge . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Jonassen, D.H., Doricott, D., & Engels, R. (1995). Comparing the effectiveness of worked examples and trial-and-error learning methods in an engineering microworld . American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Jonassen, D.H., Mann, E., & Ambruso, D.J. (1996). Causal modeling for structuring case-based learning environments. Intelligent Tutoring Media, 6 (3/4), 103–112.

Jonassen, D.H., & Tessmer, M. (1996). An outcomes-based taxonomy for the design, evaluation, and research of instructional systems. Training Research Journal .

Kosonen, P., & Winne, P.H. (1995). Effects of teaching statistical laws on reasoning about everyday problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87 , 33–46.

Kitchner, K.S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26 , 222–232.

Kitchner, K.S., & King, P.M. (1981). Reflective judgment: Concepts of justification and their relationship to age and education. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2 , 89–116.

Kluwe, R.H., & Friedrichsen, G. (1985), Mechanisms of control and regulation and problem solving. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action control (pp. 203–217). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B.A Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

LeBlanc, S.E., & Fogler, H.S. (1995). Strategies for creative problem solving . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Leont'ev, A.N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Mayer, R.E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59 (1), 43–64.

McCombs, B.L. (1986). The instructional systems development model: A review of those factors critical to its implementation. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 34 , 67–81.

Meacham, J.A., & Emont, N.C. (1989). The interpersonal basis of everyday problem solving. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 7–23). New York: Praeger.

Merrill, M.D. (1983). Component display theory. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Nardi, B.A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Newell, A. (1980). Reasoning, problem solving and decision processes: The problem space as a fundamental category. In R.S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Attention and Performance, VIII . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Newell, A. & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Polson. P., & Jeffries, R. (1985). Instruction in problem solving skills: An analysis of four approaches. In J.W. Segal, S. F. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills (Vol. 1, pp. 417–455). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Polya, M. (1957). How to solve it (2nd Ed.). New York: Doubleday.

Reed, S. K. (1992). Cognition: Theory and applications . Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Reitman, W. (1965). Cognition and thought . New York: Wiley.

Robertson, W.C. (1990). Detection of cognitive structure with protocol data: Predicting performance on physics transfer problems. Cognitive Science, 14 , 253–280.

Rubinstein, M. (1975). Patterns of problem solving . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Scandura, J.M. (1964). An analysis of exposition and discovery modes of problem solving instruction. Journal of Experimental Education, 33 (2), 149–159.

Schank, R., & Cleary, C. (1995). Engines for education . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schön, D.A. (1990). The design process. In V.A. Howard (Ed.), Varieties of thinking: Essays from Harvard's philosophy of education center (pp. 110–141). New York: Routledge.

Simon, H.A. (1976). Identifying basic abilities underlying intelligent performance on complex tasks. In L.B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Simon, D.P. (1978). Information processing theory of human problem solving. In D. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive process . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Simon, D.P., & Simon, H.A. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. Siegler (Ed.), Children's thinking: What develops . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Sinnott, J.D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 72–99). New York: Praeger.

Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1993). Instructional design . Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Spiro, R.J., Vispoel, W., Schmitz, J., Samarapungavan, A., & Boerger, A. (1987). Knowledge acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains. In B.C. Britton (Ed.), Executive control processes . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Spiro, R.J., Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J., & Anderson, D.K. (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains . Tech Report No. 441. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12 , 257–285.

Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. (1985) The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2 , 59–89.

Tarmizi, R., & Sweller, J. (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80 , 424–436.

Voss, J.F. (1988). Learning and transfer in subject-matter learning: A problem solving model. International Journal of Educational Research, 11 , 607–622.

Voss, J.F., & Post, T.A. (1989). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M.J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Voss, J.F., Wolfe, C.R., Lawrence, J.A., & Engle, R.A. (1991). From representation to decision: An analysis of problem solving in international relations. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Complex problem solving . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ward, M., & Sweller, J. (1990). Structuring effective worked examples. Cognition and Instruction, 7 (1), 1–39.

Wickelgren, W.A., (1973). How to solve problems: Elements of a theory of problems and problem solving . San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.

Wood, P.K. (1983). Inquiring systems and problem structures: Implications for cognitive development. Human Development, 26 , 249–265.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

the Pennsylvania State University, USA

David H. Jonassen ( Professor and head of the Instructional Systems program )

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Additional information

His publications include the recently completed Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology , reviewed in this issue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Jonassen, D.H. Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. ETR&D 45 , 65–94 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613

Download citation

Issue Date : March 1997

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Educational Technology
• Learning Outcome
• Instructional Design
• Processing Theory
• Solution Path
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research