There is an interesting book which I stumbled on: “Are your lights on” by Donald C. Gause and Gerald Weinberg. I shall attempt to note down the key points contained therein, along with my own ideas and/or disagreements where relevant.

They start off by saying that many people have many different perceptions of a particular problem. They warn that, without truly understanding a problem, then you will most likely be solving the wrong one; or likely, you will be solving the problem of a particular person (i.e. the person who speaks the loudest, or has the largest bank account), as opposed to the problems of your client.

Step 1: Ask the right questions

The tenants problem might be to spend less time waiting. The landlord’s problem might be to stop complaints (or at least, to avoid hearing them). The landlord’s wife then speaks sharply to the landlord, and only then, does it become a problem (for the landlord). Whereas the mailboy might want to do their rounds with the minimum time, effort and aggravation. When this fails, the mailboys resort to using rumours re: Labor Laws and unions. This precipitates management to act.

In other words, there may be many parties, who claim the same problem, but who actually face different real problems.

Heuristics

• Who has a problem?
• What is the essence of your (or their) problem?

What’s your problem?

A problem is a difference between things as desired and things as perceived.

(You can change desires, or you can change perceptions).

Phantom problems are real problems.

You might feel cold. But then when you see the thermostat - you find that it is actually quite warm. All of a sudden, your “problem” disappears. This is a phantom problem. If you propose upon a solution which is not true, things could be going down the wrong path. e.g. one might say “I’m cold because I am sick” - and then one might go to bed early, and take some unneeded medication.

Find many solutions

Don’t take other people’s solution method to be a problem definition; don’t leap to an immediate conclusion regarding the problem.

There are some critical assumptions which are relied upon when solving a problem (either known or unknown). You cannot always have all the facts - there will be unknowns which you might not be aware of.

You can never be sure you have a correct definition, even after the problem is solved; but don’t stop trying to get to one.

In this instance, Billy was given a problem: that of winning a property by tender in an auction. What he was not aware of was that all other bidders also had that same information. There was unknown information that would have rendered his particular solution, useless.

My Suggested Heuristics

The key lessons that I take out of this:

• get as much information as you can (useful information!? (then again, what constitutes useful information?))
• devise many solutions.
• be aware that facts may change, in unanticipated ways.

What is the problem, really?

Another lesson to be learned: make sure the person who wants to solve the problem, actually wants to solve the problem.

And another: be wary of being pushed to hurry into things. A hurried decision late in a project makes for mistakes. A hurry at the beginning, makes for catastrophies.

WE NEVER HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO DO IT RIGHT, BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO DO IT OVER.

WE NEVER HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO CONSIDER WHETHER WE WANT IT, BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO REGRET IT.

And be aware, that the solution to every problem will cause side effects. It is hopeful, that these side effects, cause less harm than the original problem itself.

Lastly, the authors ask the readers to make a moral decision about the problems they are trying to solve.

Each solution is the source of the next problem.

Sometimes you can displace problems - i.e. you transfer your problem so that it becomes someone else’s problem. This might be good: it allows others to get creative in solving their own problems, especially if they are in a better position to solve them. When a designer solves a “problem” that causes externalities (that is, other problems to others) - that is a misfit.

Heuristics

If you can’t think of at least three things wrong with your problem, then you don’t understand the problem. You may also think of ways in which your problem negative affects others.

• Start by thinking of WHO could be affected, then ask:
• How can they be negatively affected?
• Call in random and external people and speak to them. They will offer a fresh point of view - and you don’t need to call in external and expensive “expert consultants”. Their understanding of the problem, and their solutions, may help; and in explaining things to them, you perceive new misfits.
• Test your definition of a problem on a foreigner, someone blind, or a child; or otherwise make yourself one.

If you direct your mind to problems with existing things, you’ll start to see them. Can you think of some problems with an existing solution: e.g. paper or hard back books?

Here are some problems with books that I just came up with: (i) they naturally don’t come with bookmarks. (ii) It is not particularly convenient to hold or read one, particular if it is weighty. (iii) The spline tends to break. (iv) The literature within it tends to be long winded, needlessly verbose and painful to read. (v) you might cut yourself when turning a page. (vi) it presumes that you have great eye sight. (vii) You cannot ask the book any questions.

(Even the way you present or word a problem will affect the solutions proffered)

Landing on the level - semantics

People interpret problems differently - in the semantic level most familiar to them. An example is given of a diagram, with a question - each question being different - and then different responses are elicited. Problem definitions are definitely interpreted by readers, of a problem, and are more than likely, interpreted when defined.

Heuristics

• You state a different problem worded differently, and ask different questions, then you get different solutions.

Mind your meaning

There is considerable ambiguity in the English language alone, even if a problem statement is correctly identified, so as to miscommunicate a desired objective.

e.g. for each of the following, the word “had” can be construed differently.

• Mary had a little lamb. With pepper and garlic source.
• Mary had a little lamb. It is now nowhere to be seen.
• Mary had a little lamb. The lamb was short-changed, but not lost.

Consider very carefully that your problem statements cannot be misconstrued as far as possible.

The important of succinct and clear communication is especially important in War dispatches. Subordinates of General Grant had often commented that his communications often had not the slightest tinge of ambiguity.

Let us see how we can play with words, and the resulting different meaning which may result from the following orders:

Consider the following:

• You may attack above Vicksburg or below it at Grand Gulf.

• You must attack above Vicksburg, either or, below it at Grand Gulf.

• You can either attack at Vicksburg, or well below it.

• You can attack at Vicksburg, either or well below it.

• You can attack at Vicksburg, and well below it.

• You may attack at Vicksburg, or well below it.

• You must attack at Vicksburg, or well below it.

• You must attack at Vicksburg, and well below it.

• You may attack at Vicksburg and well below it.

• You may attack at Vicksburg, and well below it.

• (Vicksburg

  Grand Gulf).attack

• We may attack at Vicksburg and well below it.

• Both Parties may attack at Vicksburg, and well below it.

Who’s problem is it?

The most important lessons in all of civil service is contained below:

Don’t solve other people’s problems when they can solve them perfectly well themselves.

Or I would say it thus: let the person best able to solve the problem, solve the problem. Anyone else will make a determination, where they do not feel the benefits or the pain of their decisions.

And secondly:

If it’s their problem, make it their problem.

And another aphorism:

If a person is in a position to do something about a problem, but doesn’t have the problem, the do something so he does.

Heuristics

• Ask: where does the problem come from? (i.e. from a bureaucrat’s incompetent? )

• And a warning: problems often come from within. i.e. your own interpretation of things.