What is THE problem? LO26856

From: Leo Minnigh (l.d.minnigh@library.tudelft.nl)
Date: 06/22/01


Replying to LO26794 --

Dear LO'ers,

> Greetings to all you fellow learners,
>
> My reply to Leo Minnigh's <l.d.minnigh@library.tudelft.nl>
> 7 Steps Problem Solving Skill LO26744
> may be somewhat frank (in the sense of taste), although I intended it to
> be frank (in the sense of ingenuity).

Apologies for this delayed reply. Ten days with old friends in a nostalgic
geological excursion in the Spanish Cantabrian Mountains. Lot of fun, lot
of geology, and faster heartbeat when standing in front of beautyful rocks
with my handlense and hammer; I miss the fieldwork of the old days. And
after being back at my office, two other weeks passed. Too busy to
respond. I hope that I have now the time to finish my response. I have
maybe too much in mind concerning this subject of problem solving.

At, I have read your replies to my original question. When I saw that
request of *THE* + *SEVEN* tools for problem solving, I was realy
surprised about the *THE* and about the number 7. My long silence was not
caused by any frankness.

The dialogue on this subject continued and the trouble of waiting too long
with a reply increased - too much to react on. I made a brief selection:

At de Lange in LO26744
>Let me explain it somewhat further. The algorithm was presented as a
>"flexible procedure" for solving any problem, whether authentic or solved
>previously by somebody else. By "flexible procedure" I mean a process
>(becoming) which had to be adapated from problem to problem as the
>problem requires. But far to soon students began to use the algorithm
>as a "rigid prescription" guaranteed to solve any problem. By "rigid
>prescription" I mean a structure (being) which will always ensure
>success. In a "flexible procedure" the content of the problem determines
>the form which its solution will follow. But in a "rigid prescription"
>the students want only problems of such a content that their solutions
>will follow a rigid form.

Flexibility! Yes, because in my mind any rigid method to solve problems is
useless and unwise. If such golden fomula would exist, there were no
problems. And a world without problems is dead - no flow; in such world I
don't like to live.

That is why I was so surprised to hear of 'The sevens steps'. But I was
also curious. Therefor I thank Barry Mallis:

Barry Mallis in LO26729
>1. Select the relatively narrow-focused theme for the problem solving
>2. Collect and analyze data
>3. Analyze causes
>4. Plan and Implement a solution
>5. Evaluate effects
>6. Standardize the solution, and
>7. Reflect on process and next problem.

And in a next contribution Barry continued:

Barry Mallis in LO26817:
>The aim of such training in a methodology is to allow employees at
>virtually every level of an organization to follow a road map which is
>rational and consistent, and which provides for flexibility at every
>step.

My objections are in the numbering of these steps, which suggest a rigid
order and I get the irritating shivers when I read about a 'road map'.
Barry, it is nothing against you personally. Again, I thank you for the
clarifications.

The contributions of Gavin pleased me. Among the many good words of him I
picked the following, because I think Gavin hit the nail right on its
head:
Gavin in LO26825
>ALL problems are related to gaps, constraints, blockages, bottlenecks,
>transformations, pumping and conversions (all includes timing and
>lagging, frequency and sometimes storage). Or all together God help us!
>All problems have to do with flow and structure.

And thus FORM and CONTENT.

Before I write some words on the tool set and "road map" which I use, I am
going back to words of At de Lange:

>I will try to avoid describing any procedure to solve some problems.
>However, I am shooting myself in the foot here because I am now pretty
>sure that the first step in problem-solving is to know "This is THE
>problem". In other words, I am actually concerned with the first step to
>solve ANY problem. Hence, if you want to extend this topic to all the
>steps needed to find a solution, feel free to explore these steps also.

>To understand what I mean by the consternation, here is a simple (and
>thus not a good MonCat) example.
>. Solve the problem, given three apples and the
>. price of pears is 50 cents each.

At, I think this is realy a very good example. An answer is to this
problem:
'this is an example'

But maybe this answer is too simple, or does not satisfy. I will soon come
back to this problem/solution hoping to increase satisfaction.

In my 5-day workshops to PhD-students I spend 4 days interwoven between
other aspects of transdisciplinary thinking (Thanks At, for this perfect
expression) on problem solving. Why so long? Because the students must
find out by own thinking and group thinking and group dialogue clues for
the following questions:
 - what is a problem; what are the characteristics?
 - are there categories of problems?
 - And if yes, what are the characteristics, differences and similarities?

By making lists of possible problems, a discussion starts on how to tackle
each of them. And by group thinking and working, the common outcome is
that one should start with:

problem definition - getting an answer to the question:
"WHAT IS THE PROBLEM"

And roughly in one line as a result of analysis:
"WHAT ARE ELEMENTS/CHARACTERISTICS"

And sometimes there are students who have recognised that the original
excercise was nothing else than a very problem, and that they already
started with analysis and definition.

After this first step, a meandering process starts. Meandering between
form and content, essentialities and process(es), convergent thinking and
divergent thinking, looking for differences and systems thinking. It is a
meandering between a level IN the problem and a level ABOVE (abstract) the
problem. The order of the meanders is not so important. Important is that
after each meander a series of ideas could be generated and also that a
phase of analysis could follow.

So, during and after this 'meander-thinking' a whole list of ideas could
emerge. Among these ideas could be A or THE solution. But after that stage
I am not so interested anymore in a solution. That is why I end my mails
with:
"Let your thoughts meander to a sea of ideas"

Chemically, a sea is a solution, the ideas are the contents of that
solution.

Now, for the satisfaction, back to At:
 
>To understand what I mean by the consternation, here is a simple (and
>thus not a good MonCat) example.
>. Solve the problem, given three apples and the
>. price of pears is 50 cents each.

At, before reading further, could you give me also an example of a
LimBeg-problem? :-)

My own meanderings oscillated between IN this problem and ABOVE this
problem. After analysis and definition-phase, I soon saw that going
further IN the problem was not wise. That was probably also the experience
of most of At's students.
But what 'above'-sights could we generate?
>From a distance we immediately see the intro of At to this problem,
including an answer: it is an example (of a problem).
This was my first answer.
But as I said above, I am not so interested in solutions, but more in
ideas.
At's problem is a peculiar one. It seems that it only consists of elements
and characteristics. Things that usually are hidden in a problem. Here, it
is the otherway round. Is At stimulating us in the attitude to find and
see problems, where must people (colleagues) don't see them?

The is still an answer to be given. An answer to the question:
"WHAT TYPE OF PROBLEM IS THIS?"

And now the words of Gavin (cited above) came in mind. Things that have to
do with process and elements that impair a process: At's seven
essentialities (NOT steps!).

To remind you, here they are:

LIST OF SEVEN ESSENTIALITIES
"becoming-being" (liveness)
"identitity-categoricity" (sureness)
"associativity-monadicity" (wholeness)
"connect-beget" (fruitfulness)
"quantity-limit" (spareness)
"quality-variety" (otherness)
"open-paradigm" (openness)

And becomes it clear to you? Answers to At's example of a MonCat problem
could be find in its type - Categoricity - and only when looking from a
distance to be able to see the wholeness - Monadicity.

So At, please give an example of a LimBeg-problem.

At, thank you for the stimulation of my meanderings.

dr. Leo D. Minnigh
l.d.minnigh@library.tudelft.nl
Library Technical University Delft
PO BOX 98, 2600 MG Delft, The Netherlands
Tel.: 31 15 2782226
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        Let your thoughts meander towards a sea of ideas.
       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- 

Leo Minnigh <l.d.minnigh@library.tudelft.nl>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>


"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.