In a world where processes and systems are prized, we set out to get an overview of the types of approaches that are used for identifying and solving problems in the workplace.
We kept the premise general, although we did ask what industry each participant was currently involved in. The sample size of sixty two was relatively small, but they were generous with their time, and provided plenty of context alongside their answers that was very valuable.
Interestingly, we encouraged people to vent if they so wished (as the survey was anonymous) there was very little negativity involved. Bar one very irate respondent, who wanted everyone they worked with exiled to Mars. The questions and answers can be viewed in full here, and below we have some of the main insights that emerged.
Rigid problem solving systems lead to limited solutions.
Logic based approaches were popular for process based challenges. Yet, not every problems (especially people-based issues) can be effectively solved by following a prescribed step-by-step formula.
Frustration is evident in the responses around this. Respondents said that restrictions meant that more creative approaches were viewed as risky, meaning that anything that might be more effective is rarely considered.
Are we solving the right issues?
When solving anything, all the answers in the world will be unhelpful if the initial question is incorrect. Only a third of respondents were confident that they were working on the right issues.
Long term, ongoing problems were also highlighted, which indicates that undiagnosed issues are compounding into larger problems instead of being discretely addressed.
Executing solutions is a gray area.
Although the first order of business is finding solutions, the second order is agreeing a way to enact them. Making decisions, allocating resources and assigning roles is high on the list of bug bears for participants.
The lack of this critical ingredient leads to more meetings and a sub-optimal approach that creates endless loops and barriers.
Over zealous personalities dominate proceedings
Loud, confident voices have an outsized influence on decision-making that leads to a certain amount of disillusionment amongst respondents. Quite a few regard these people as well meaning, which leads us to suspect that they are unaware of their actions.
A skilled facilitator and a method to sidestep this issue can allow more voices to contribute. More perspectives means more options present themselves.
Raising issues can lead to unwelcome workloads.
The well-meaning messenger is invariably shot. By bringing a problem to light, respondents revealed they are expected to deal with it.
Even when it falls outside of their skillset, position and responsibilities.
Unless a system is in place to avoid this, it may be easier to actively avoid issues.
When decision-making doesn’t align with culture it hinders progress.
Without a well defined set of organisational values, people struggle to align around a North Star for agreeing on ways forward.
A shared understanding of cultural norms provides certainty and assurance, and leads to more confidence and stability when people are working together to solves issues.