Complex Problems Can’t Be Solved With Simple Solutions

While having coffee with an old friend, we talked about our observations with companies lately. He talked about complacency. About people taking short cuts. This was a typical conversation I’ve had with other high-level performers.

But then he dropped something on me. “People are trying to solve complex problems with simple solutions.” What an observation!

On my drive home, I thought more about his statement. It reminded me of previous conversations with another friend. He talked about an approach called systematic innovation. It can be thought of as a contradiction matrix. In this case, the matrix is filled out as described below.

Lower left: Simple solution for simple problems

Production was running well. Today, something shifted. We find the issue, and return to our previous performance. It is immediate. It feels good. I’d argue, we don’t notice this happening because it is so common. He calls this a null situation. Something that isn’t very interesting.

Lower right: Simple solution for complex problems

Because of our experiences with the “quick win” above, we behave the same for every situation. We try our solution. It doesn’t work. We try another one. It also doesn’t work! We start to get questioned. We find a different problem, and hope for a quick win there. But it leaves our complex problems unsolved. We say it was “closed” because we “retrained the operators” but we know we didn’t really solve anything. The expert problem solver may start here, but then realize when they need a more advanced approach. I have long called this “hitting the wall” and needing more understanding.

Related:Try This Decision-Making Process for Engineering Projects

Upper left: Complex solution for a simple problem

Sadly, this happens a lot. Large organizations create systems and tools that work for the most complex situation. Maybe because they are tired of people getting trapped in simple solutions. Yet, they force it on every project. Now, simple projects take too long. Teams get frustrated. Management pushes harder. We can see this is wrong, but most systems are rigid and do not allow thinking. This happens with Six Sigma projects. I also see companies who mandate a project charter for every problem-solving project executed, regardless of size. Of course, the managers were getting bonuses for how many charters were written. The concept was right, but the implementation was poor.

Upper right: Complex solutions for complex problems

We hope every problem is simple in a new situation. There is no way we will use complex solutions when just starting out. Again, an expert problem solver will move to this area when quick answers do not appear. The key is to avoid more complexity for the problem-solving approach than needed. For example, if we just need a simple before and after test, we should not create a Monte Carlo model and perform analysis on it.

Related:Stop Wasting Your Technical Talent, Part 1

I believe organizations flow through the phases of maturity as shown above. Early on, things are simple and we find quick fixes. Then, we end up with complex situations but use the same simple solutions out of habit. To create a sense of control, organizations “mandate” a comprehensive process to solve all problems. When they become wise, they realize the need for flexibility.

It is important to allow for simple, intuitive solutions by a wide range of people early on. When we recognize they are more complex, then we can bring in the appropriate resources to determine a stable, long-term solution.

Master the matrix

How can we avoid the unproductive corners of the matrix? Know that one size doesn’t fit all. It is quicker to assume things are simple first. But when situations “hit the wall,” then we can move to more advanced tools.

Good risk management is another way to avoid the unproductive corners. It helps us identify potential complex problems early. As a manager, we can keep our eye on these higher risk areas. We can still allow freedom, but then step in to keep the project on track.

Related:Stop Wasting Your Technical Talent, Part 2

Less rigid processes can help us avoid forcing our simple situations into a complex process. We should make our processes about guidance instead of mandates.

Where are you in your problem-solving maturity? Can you let the simple be simple? Can you recognize complex and make the quick move to understand it and move forward?