PROBLEMS & SOLUTIONS

Problems & Solutions

One of the most frequently used words in the office is ‘Problem’. However, modern organizations avoid using the word problem and prefer ‘Challenge’ as a substitute. The logic offered is that when you say ‘problem’ it creates an atmosphere of impossibility, where as when you use the word challenge it give a sense of possibility of overcoming the challenge. What ever way you think it is certain that you would face a problem or challenge and unless you do something smart, you would be in perennial trouble.

Problem is a word which is used by who work and those who do not. Problem may be a temporary, short spanned or it may appear permanent. The life of the problem depends on its origin and solutions are based on introspection, behaviorism, simulation, computer modeling and experiments.  Yet there is a huge difference in their usage. Those who like to work take problem as a temporary hurdle in their path for achieving the pre-decided goal. They work a little harder, some how enjoy the challenge while it lasts and, in the end, emerge as victors. On the other hand, the ones who avoid to work blame the problems for their failures. We all have our share of problems and “people” as problems and fortunately we also have people tackling both of them.

 Let us try to understand this in a simple way.

Any organization or any process where humans are involved would have problems, challenges, issues, tribulations, hurdles, misunderstandings, doubts and even jealousy, which add spice to our life. Without above, our lives would be monotonous and bland. The problems can be a matter of opportunities to those who want to find solutions. They can be also the reasons for failures for those who just waste their time, energy and efforts. The approach to the problems can be the first significant reason for the success or failures. To accept that there is in fact a problem is the first step towards solving the problem. Denial would always result in multiplying the difficulty level. ‘All is well’ can be very motivating but can rarely produce results. There are physical problems and they certainly need physical solutions. The ostrich approach can rarely get a solution. Very few times a problem can be willed away. There is always the other side, its interests, compulsions and impacts on the problem. Take a classic case of Kashmir. It is a problem for the last 70 years. Every body is trying to wish away the problem to what effect we all know. All borders have potential of developing into a serious problem and what are we doing about them? Do we wait for the developed problem or we take some preventive measures?

Problem solving has developed in to a full-fledged training and teaching module. Almost all professional schools have used the technique in the curriculum and the students who seriously attempt to be solution oriented find the working life that much easy.

The problems which attract most attention, are usually ‘person-centric’ or ‘process centric’. Both varieties are immensely capable of creating nuisance; can act as a major hurdle for the smooth working of an organization. It is usually accepted that problems without human involvement are somewhat easier to solve and also the solutions can be used many times, once you take care of variables.  It takes lot of guts to tackle the person- centric problem, especially when the person is at the top wrung of the organization. Simple and obvious solution can be finding a replacement, but in practice it may not work. Each man has his aura, followers and some degrees of past successes. To find the right person, then induct him usually takes time and in dynamic situations the organization rarely has sufficient time. So ideally the person to be replaced is allowed to be in the set up but without any appreciable power. The redundancy is a costly affair but it at least keeps the system going.

The problems which are process centric can be slightly trickier. Simply, because it also includes persons as components whose performance varies.  Any process has many phases and many different persons are supposedly handling them for being more productive. Each step in the process has to be segregated and evaluated separately. Unless, all other factors except for the specific factor under study, are fixed or steady or non-variable, it is practically impossible to check the system, for faults. The connection between the factor and the persons who handle them needs a detailed study subsequent to which the system can be ready for some solutions.

In any problem-solving method the correct estimation of the objective and the subjective individual inputs, expertise, interpersonal relations which are responsible for collective efforts needs a special skill. This can be one of the simplest justifications for the presence of experts and their experience in any dynamic environment. The older the person handling the problems generally means more chances of success of finding a viable solution. The older and experienced person has a load of specific intelligence of the working of the process. He is also aware of the acceptable tolerance limit. He also has a number of precedents similar to the situation in question. He also has required influence some times necessary to circumvent a nasty situation.

The classical model of problem solving has following steps:

• Identification and understanding the problem
• Devise a plan A or B or even C or D
• Implementation of the plan
• Review of the plan
• Repeat, if needed.

It appears easy but it rarely turns out easy. The steps have many sub steps and each needs a specific skill. For example, to identify the problem one needs some expertise in data and its sufficiency. Setting up an action plan one needs to understand the correct estimates of the optimal time required to complete each act. Implementation of the actual plan with available resources needs a dynamic leader who can do whatever is needed and better than the team members. For a review, one needs a person who must be able to align all the relevant details with the objective and discard the redundant and irrelevant details. He needs a clear focus coupled with astute cleverness to find out where the leakage is and how to plug the same. The repeat of the developed, tested and successful model also needs same enthusiasm and a firm belief about its workability. All these things are very details oriented and hence time consuming as well as energy sapping.

There is also an approach called as GROW model which is an acronym for Goal, Reality, Obstacles/ Options, Way forward. Other approaches are analogy, generalizations, induction, lateral thinking, mind mapping, brain storming and many others. What is to be remembered is what ever approach you use would ideally lead to some possible solution, but unless correctly implemented no prospective solution by itself resolve the problem.

It is said that if any problem is to be solved, one has to remember that he is most likely the principal component of the problem. Extension of this statement may result in the concept of ‘out of box’ thinking. It is generally accepted that the solution of the problem is within the problem itself. The farther you run away from the problem may increase the distance from the solution. Meet the problem head on and tackle it smartly to resolve it.

(1237)