What Do We Mean by "Solve the Problem"?
“No problem stays solved in a dynamic environment.”
Part 1
“Isn’t it obvious? Just solve the problem”. But when you take a step back, it isn’t all that obvious. Key to answering the question is the definition of SOLVE. Solve by making the problem go away? by ignoring it? by fixing it in a way that everything goes back to the way it was? fixing it in a way to prevent it from happening again?
What do we really mean by “solve the problem”?
I’ve always been interested in meta rules as a guide for solving problems. I once heard Russell Ackoff give an excellent description of “four ways of treating a problem.” He articulated this description in an excellent book, Turning Learning Right Side Up. What follows is a summary of Ackoff’s four points, some verbatim (noted by quote marks and italics) and some, my interpretations and comments. In Part 2, I have added an example and a caution:
“There are four different ways to treat problems:
1. Absolution 2. Resolution
3. Solution. 4. Dissolution
These form a hierarchy of effectiveness, from least to most. They are seldom made accessible to students in school and the fourth, and most effective way, is rarely dealt with in the educational system at all.Absolution. Do nothing and let the problem solve itself or fade away. The problem is dealt with by default. When everything is in steady state and the environment is not changing, this way of dealing with problems is not bad. However, in a rapidly changing and turbulent environment, as ours is now, it can be disastrous. Problem absolution is like flying through a hurricane on automatic pilot.
Resolution. This involves returning to a previous state in one of two ways. In the first, one looks for a similar problem's occurrence in the past. What was done then? Did it work? A second way to resolve a problem is to ask what has caused the problem, what is to blame for it? Then, if the cause or source of the problem is removed, one will be back where one was before the problem arose. Resolution is an experiential way of treating problems based on qualitative judgments and common sense. It seeks treatments that are good enough, better than doing nothing but not necessarily the best that can be done.”
The art of medicine is based primarily on Resolution. It is based on experimentation within a range of acceptable parameters and statistically evaluating the results. Most pharmaceutical drug developments also use resolution as their primary method. Results and conclusions are primarily correct within the range that experiments were conducted (including the time frame). Six-Sigma method squarely falls in this category.
“Solution. To “solve” a problem is to use scientific methods, techniques, and tools to find the best that can be done, or the closest one can come to it. It uses quantitative techniques and often experimentation, in contrast to "raw" experience.”
When using “solving” as the way of treating the problem, the solution space for that problem is fairly large. It can be interpolated or extrapolated in a wide range. It obviously will reach its limit at some point.
“Many problems that are “solved” do not stay solved because the context within which they were solved changes in fundamental ways.”
Dissolution. “To dissolve a problem is to redesign the entity or system that has it, or its environment, so that it cannot arise again and is less likely to generate new problems. This approach prevents the problem from recurring and is less likely to generate new problems.”
This method of dealing with problems, designing the problem out, is often ignored. We tend to devote ample resources to resolve or solve problems that sometimes could be eliminated all together.
These concepts can appear abstract at first. The following examples, in Part 2, more concretely describe these abstract concepts.
Part 2
Part 1 review:
“There are four different ways to treat problems:
1. Absolution 2. Resolution
3. Solution. 4. Dissolution
Example:
Figure 1. Copied CD with paper label on top
Back in the days before iTunes and Bluetooth, when CD players were new technology, a major automotive OEM had a warranty issue of tens of millions of dollars on CD players for music. A number of customers took their cars to dealers because the CDs got stuck in the player and would not eject. Dealers “solved the problem” by replacing the entire CD player with a new unit. Often, the same problem occurred with the new unit as well. The primary cause of the problem was that customers had copied an original CD and stuck a paper label on it (see Figure 1).
Obviously, “Absolution” (ignoring it) was not an option when tens of millions of dollars were at stake. So the company formed a team of 6-Sigma Black Belts to use the 6-Sigma process (“Resolution”) to find the root causes. They spent close to a year and several hundred thousand dollars to study data from different suppliers of CD players in the industry. For the sake of simplicity, their findings are shown in two categories, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Two categories of CD players loading and ejecting a CD
The mechanism for loading and ejecting a CD is simply a spring loaded guiding arm and a roller. Depending on the direction of the roller, it will either load or eject the CD. After exhaustive tests, they discovered that both mechanisms work well. The twist was that some customers used copied CDs with paper labels on top (see Figure 3). This was the condition that created the sticking problem for CD player A, but not for CD player B. The 6-Sigma team’s conclusion was to use only Supplier B.
Figure 3. Two categories of CD players loading and ejecting a CD with paper label
In this case they found a remedy, but in reality, did not find the root cause.
The root cause can be found by using “Solution” as the method. Any student of mechanical engineering who has taken a class in Dynamics would easily determine all the forces involved (in what they call free body diagram) and conclude that the coefficient of friction is higher for paper than the material used to make the CD. So, you can easily push the CD in but the resistance for ejecting is higher in the case of supplier A. In the case of supplier B the increased friction will result in increased traction for the roller.
Now the final question: How can we “Dissolve” this problem? Simply use MP3 players to connect through the car radio and eliminate the CD player! Problem dissolved. This cycle continues, with the next step of wireless technology, streaming, and cloud computing (see Figure 4).
The CD player example shows the hierarchy of “Absolution, Resolution, Solution, and Dissolution” and is summarized in the table below.
Figure 4. Example of Absolution, Resolution, Solution, and Dissolution
Important Caution. It is very important to remember that any one of these approaches (Absolution, Resolution, Solution, and Dissolution) is valid. Selection of the approach depends on the type of the problem, its complexity, its time horizon, availability of resources, and other factors. The example above implied that we should always try to dissolve the problem. This is not always possible. If not possible, we should solve the problem, if that is not possible we should resolve it, and as a last resort we should absolve ourselves of dealing with it.
In the real world there are other parameters to be considered, such as cost, resources, technology, timing and so on. For example, the problem that has a life span of one week and it takes six months to dissolve, solve, or resolve, should clearly be left alone. In that case, absolution is perfectly fine; just live with it. In other situations where finding a solution based on the first principles of science may be too costly or too time consuming, resolution is a much better approach. In summary, you need to use wisdom in selecting your method of dealing with a problem and resist using only that method with which you are most comfortable or most familiar.
“Knowledge is knowing that tomato is a fruit; wisdom is not mixing it in a fruit salad.”
