Not solving the wrong problem really well!

A lot of people understand what we mean by that immediately. Others take a little longer. 

It's probably a fact that no-one deliberately sets out with the express intention of disregarding the big picture. People don't deliberately aim to fix something brilliantly, that is pointless or not broken. Sadly though they do.

We've seen many cases now where teams have been sent off to solve a small part of a 'system.' We all hope it's not intentional but we know it's darned expensive frustrating and - well - wrong. Well meaning folk go off and do stuff with little or no relationship to the other moving parts only to find that the other moving parts fail as a direct result.

The reasons are quite clear but the antidote is a little more subtle. 

We solve the wrong problems because the enterprise lacks the big picture. People say its too complex. Not my problem – not my remit. The context is set very narrowly. That is often deliberate too. And/or we bring in experts with knowledge in a set field. Because, by design these fields are siloed. 

The solution requires a completely different approach to thinking. It requires imagination, passion for the bigger picture. This sometimes means bigger/different teams, exploring the wider implications, being prepared for the tougher challenges. It means (initially anyway) potentially more complex programs – bringing with it the concern of larger cost. We don't like that idea so the real work gets derailed before it has a chance to happen.

But it doesn't have to be that way. 

By looking at the bigger picture sooner there is often a more creative way. This actually saves massive cost and time later. More creative thinking, earlier can find the more ingenious solutions. Additionally the team are often more inspired to work towards solving the bigger challenge. It's all suddenly more meaningful.

Solving the wrong problem is always way more expensive. In the short as well as the long run. Frustration with a fast new fix that is wrong - is immediate as the whole system breaks down. The resulting re-engineering required to undo and then solve the initial issues properly is clearly an un-budgeted item and the double whammy requires the business to fix the real problem. 

We might call this learning. But perhaps we should avoid some of this 'learning' in the first place. We could call that prevention. I call that smart.

The 8 hard earned lessons that created our principles. The 21st Century demands a philosophy that embraces 'systems and integrative thinking' across the entire enterprise.

1. Framework thinking ensures that a structure emerges that contains and aligns all of the moving parts.
2. 'Framing' and agreeing the real question – the one that is driving change or transformation - is crucial to a successful outcome.
3. Answering the whole of the question properly requires that the right people are fully involved throughout the development of the 'frameworks'.
4. Decision Quality criteria must be defined at every step and used to parse every single decision – consistently for the correct decisions to be made.
5. Aligned (possibly new) and shared meaning of all the key terms is vital. Language has to be agreed. Communication can only then be coherent to drive change through everyone.
6. Visualisation is critical to create agreement over the intangible concepts such as vision, mission and operation.
7. Impartiality of thinking, especially in the early stages of innovative/creative re-thinking is vital.
8. Co-creation and collaboration is the only way to create ownership, understanding and sustainability.
9. Behavioural change is only possible with deeply felt inspiration and motivation at both individual and enterprise level. 

Posted via email from Just Thinking!