Invariably, when presenting a new approach to solving problems,
authors, pundits and commentators go to great lengths to “prove” why
everything that existed before they presented their argument has been a
waste of time.
That’s just silly.
You know why people attack everything that has come before. We live
in a hyper-competitive environment when it comes to getting someone’s
attention and so if you have something new, you may feel compelled to
come up with a gimmick such as “everything you know is wrong” in order
to get people’s attention.
We understand why they do this, because it would have been extremely tempting to go down this road ourselves.
We have developed a proven approach to dealing with uncertainty in
all forms, i.e. what you should do when you don’t know what to do.
We know it works because it is the same approach that the
people who are masters at dealing with uncertainty—successful serial
entrepreneurs—use. (There is nothing more uncertain than starting a
business, and serial entrepreneurs are masters at it.)
The
clichéd image of entrepreneurs coming up with an idea, laboring
feverishly to perfect it, and delivering their creation to the market
fully-formed is not what usually happens. The much more typical path is
that they come up with an idea. They
take a small step toward implementation to see if anyone is interested,
and if it looks like some people are, they take another step forward. If
they don’t get the reaction they want, they regroup and then take
another step in a different direction.
In other words, they:
- Act.
- Learn (from that action)
- Build (off that learning)
- Repeat, i.e. they act again.
That cycle continues repeats until the entrepreneur succeeds, knows
she is not going to, or decides there is another, more appealing
opportunity to pursue. As we said, the approach serial entrepreneurs use
when faced with the unknown (starting a business) will work for you
when you face the unknown of any kind.
So, does this mean you should scrap your traditional ways of problem solving?
Absolutely not.
You shouldn’t use this approach exclusively. The way we all were
taught to solve problems that are predictable—how do we introduce our
existing product into an adjacent market; how many refrigerators will we
sell during a recession—works just fine. You have historical precedents
and data to draw on.
When you do, predict away.
When you don’t, try what we are advocating. It gives you an additional tool. It does not replace the ones you have.
We concede presenting a new idea this way is far less dramatic then screaming “EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG.”
But it is honest, the process has been proven, and it should be helpful.
Paul B. Brown is the co-author (along with Leonard A. Schlesinger and Charles F. Kiefer) of Just Start: Take Action; Embrace Uncertainty and Create the Future recently published by Harvard Business Review Press.
Invariably, when presenting a new approach to solving problems,
authors, pundits and commentators go to great lengths to “prove” why
everything that existed before they presented their argument has been a
waste of time.
That’s just silly.
You know why people attack everything that has come before. We live
in a hyper-competitive environment when it comes to getting someone’s
attention and so if you have something new, you may feel compelled to
come up with a gimmick such as “everything you know is wrong” in order
to get people’s attention.
We understand why they do this, because it would have been extremely tempting to go down this road ourselves.
We have developed a proven approach to dealing with uncertainty in
all forms, i.e. what you should do when you don’t know what to do.
We know it works because it is the same approach that the
people who are masters at dealing with uncertainty—successful serial
entrepreneurs—use. (There is nothing more uncertain than starting a
business, and serial entrepreneurs are masters at it.)
The
clichéd image of entrepreneurs coming up with an idea, laboring
feverishly to perfect it, and delivering their creation to the market
fully-formed is not what usually happens. The much more typical path is
that they come up with an idea. They
take a small step toward implementation to see if anyone is interested,
and if it looks like some people are, they take another step forward. If
they don’t get the reaction they want, they regroup and then take
another step in a different direction.
In other words, they:
- Act.
- Learn (from that action)
- Build (off that learning)
- Repeat, i.e. they act again.
That cycle continues repeats until the entrepreneur succeeds, knows
she is not going to, or decides there is another, more appealing
opportunity to pursue. As we said, the approach serial entrepreneurs use
when faced with the unknown (starting a business) will work for you
when you face the unknown of any kind.
So, does this mean you should scrap your traditional ways of problem solving?
Absolutely not.
You shouldn’t use this approach exclusively. The way we all were
taught to solve problems that are predictable—how do we introduce our
existing product into an adjacent market; how many refrigerators will we
sell during a recession—works just fine. You have historical precedents
and data to draw on.
When you do, predict away.
When you don’t, try what we are advocating. It gives you an additional tool. It does not replace the ones you have.
We concede presenting a new idea this way is far less dramatic then screaming “EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG.”
But it is honest, the process has been proven, and it should be helpful.
Paul B. Brown is the co-author (along with Leonard A. Schlesinger and Charles F. Kiefer) of Just Start: Take Action; Embrace Uncertainty and Create the Future recently published by Harvard Business Review Press.
Problem
solving has, in this new generation found a more positive approach in
that more focus is provided to the solution than the problem itself.
This is a good shift away from the old problem-based orientation as it
provides a variety of methods to apply. Thus, instead of focusing on
passive 'problem-solving', it is the more active 'solving problems'.
In
the EnSync methodology of solving problems called SPEED, there are
several levels of focus: 1 principle which outlines the approach, 2
strategies that provide high-level orientations, 4 pillars of values and
4 types of problem types.
SPEED Principle
The principle of SPEED is "Menarik rambut dalam tepung. Rambut tidak putus, tepung tidak berselerak".
The Melayu proverb speaks of making small but significant changes that
minimise disruption yet achieves the objectives of the changes.
SPEED Strategies
The 2 core strategies of SPEED are:
1.
"Help others sincerely in solving THEIR problems and Allah will make
YOUR problems easier to resolve" - This is accepting that man was
created to serve Allah, thus play a role in creating peace on Earth as
His vicegerents. As such, His blessings are available for anyone who
truly assist others to save them from difficulty. Even if you do not
know how, Allah will show you the way. Just want to help, and help will
come.
2. "Ask for help" - Keeping a problem to oneself will only
stretch the limit of human capacity. By sharing his challenges and
goals, one widens his capacity to receive assistance by other people or
communities. Asking for help from Allah and His creation is not a sign
of weakness. It is, in fact, a sign of humility.
SPEED PillarsSPEED
is built upon 4 pillars, meaning when you inculcate these as your
lifelong values, they will support your solving efforts. They are:
1. Acceptance - this is redha. Accept the reality of the situation and quickly move to resolve it.
2. Confidence - this is yaqin.
Every disease has its cure. Every problem has a resolution, whether it
resolves in your favour or otherwise. Therefore, become involved in the
problem and solve it in your favour rather than stand back and do
nothing.
3. Determination - this is doing everything with stamina
and passion to find a solution, even if you don't see it yet. Have
faith. "Dalam segala apa yang kita lakukan, lakukanlah bersungguh-sungguh".
4. Improvement - this is muhasabah.
When you are once burned, why get a credit card again? After the
tsunami, Malaysia is now better prepared. After our personal tsunamis,
we want to be better prepared too.
Risk or Issue?
A
problem is identified first as a Risk or an Issue. A risk is a
potential problem and an issue is a present problem. Most people solve
issues yet forget that risks, when left unprepared for, can develop
exponentially into issues.
In a car, a neglecting to change a
RM300 timing belt can easily escalate to becoming a RM3000 engine
overhaul. A habit of not wearing the seatbelt can easily cause sudden
and painful orphanhood.
Pay as much attention to identifying risks and nipping them in the bud as you do solving issues. "Sediakan payung sebelum hujan".
Problem Types
SPEED
recognises that analysing problems is the first step to understanding
its complexity since most problems have many moving parts. It is because
of this that solvers sometimes oversimplify a problem and aren't able
to resolve the cause-and-effects of complex 'problem'.
To see clearer, SPEED categorises all problems into only 4 types, represented by the acronym PDRM:
1.
Process - resolving bottlenecks, blockages, lack of resources, delays,
etc to maintain a controllable and desirable flow of value
2.
Decisions - weighing between two or more similar options and choosing
between them based on merit and being able to defend the decision.
3. Relationships - communicating clearly and persuading other people with as minimal emotional turmoil as possible.
4. Motivation - individual drive.
Most
problems come as a mix of two or all four of the above, which, as
previously mentioned, makes solving them challenging. Some people
categorise health problems as a process issue. All they need is the
money for an operation. Once they have it, they believe the problem is
solved.
There is also the possibility that one's health problem
affects one's motivation to live thus contributes them to die in the
operating room or to take too long to heal.
This strains familial relationships. Thus, in this case, the 'health' problem comes bundled 3 disguised as 1.
Therefore, analyse the problems separately and solve them at the same time rather than sequentially.
Final SolutionAs
human beings, we must accept that our ability to process problems are
very limited, even when work together en masse. Thus, the realisation
that Allah is the Ultimate Solver leads us to use that final and most
powerful of tools in our toolbox, and that is supplication (du'a). For solving problems certainly feels like going to war, and Du'a is the weapon of the mu'minun.
---
Nadzrin
is a Professional Learning Facilitator and is currently a Learning
Coach and Master Trainer at Accenture Learning's Kuala Lumpur Centre of
Excellence. He is also the founder of the EnSync Workplace Performance
Skills methodology based on his experience in Silat Melayu and corporate
learning.
Posted by:
Mohd Nadzrin Wahab
Invariably, when presenting a new approach to solving problems,
authors, pundits and commentators go to great lengths to “prove” why
everything that existed before they presented their argument has been a
waste of time.
That’s just silly.
You know why people attack everything that has come before. We live
in a hyper-competitive environment when it comes to getting someone’s
attention and so if you have something new, you may feel compelled to
come up with a gimmick such as “everything you know is wrong” in order
to get people’s attention.
We understand why they do this, because it would have been extremely tempting to go down this road ourselves.
We have developed a proven approach to dealing with uncertainty in
all forms, i.e. what you should do when you don’t know what to do.
We know it works because it is the same approach that the
people who are masters at dealing with uncertainty—successful serial
entrepreneurs—use. (There is nothing more uncertain than starting a
business, and serial entrepreneurs are masters at it.)
The clichéd image of entrepreneurs coming up with an idea, laboring
feverishly to perfect it, and delivering their creation to the market
fully-formed is not what usually happens. The much more typical path is that they come up with an idea. They
take a small step toward implementation to see if anyone is interested,
and if it looks like some people are, they take another step forward. If they don’t get the reaction they want, they regroup and then take another step in a different direction.
In other words, they:
- Act.
- Learn (from that action)
- Build (off that learning)
- Repeat, i.e. they act again.
That cycle continues repeats until the entrepreneur succeeds, knows
she is not going to, or decides there is another, more appealing
opportunity to pursue. As we said, the approach serial entrepreneurs use
when faced with the unknown (starting a business) will work for you
when you face the unknown of any kind.
So, does this mean you should scrap your traditional ways of problem solving?
Absolutely not.
You shouldn’t use this approach exclusively. The way we all were
taught to solve problems that are predictable—how do we introduce our
existing product into an adjacent market; how many refrigerators will we
sell during a recession—works just fine. You have historical precedents
and data to draw on.
When you do, predict away.
When you don’t, try what we are advocating. It gives you an additional tool. It does not replace the ones you have.
We concede presenting a new idea this way is far less dramatic then screaming “EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG.”
But it is honest, the process has been proven, and it should be helpful.
Paul B. Brown is the co-author (along with Leonard A. Schlesinger and Charles F. Kiefer) of Just Start: Take Action; Embrace Uncertainty and Create the Future recently published by Harvard Business Review Press.
Paul B. Brown, Contributor
