in This Problem
Reprint: R1209F The rigor with which a problem is defined is the about important factor in finding a good solution. Many organizations, however, are non proficient at articulating their problems and identifying which ones are crucial to their strategies. They may even exist trying to solve the wrong problems—missing opportunities and wasting resource in the procedure. The key is to ask the correct questions. The author describes a procedure that his firm, InnoCentive, has used to help clients define and articulate business, technical, social, and policy challenges and and then nowadays them to an online customs of more than 250,000 solvers. The iv-step procedure consists of asking a series of questions and using the answers to create a trouble argument that volition arm-twist novel ideas from an array of experts. EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a nonprofit organization, used this procedure to find a depression-cost, lightweight, and convenient product that expands access to clean drinking water in the developing world.
"If I were given 1 hour to save the planet, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and i minute resolving it," Albert Einstein said.
Those were wise words, but from what I have observed, nigh organizations don't heed them when tackling innovation projects. Indeed, when developing new products, processes, or even businesses, most companies aren't sufficiently rigorous in defining the bug they're attempting to solve and articulating why those issues are important. Without that rigor, organizations miss opportunities, waste resources, and finish up pursuing innovation initiatives that aren't aligned with their strategies. How many times have you seen a projection go down ane path only to realize in hindsight that it should have gone down another? How many times have yous seen an innovation program deliver a seemingly breakthrough result only to notice that it tin't be implemented or information technology addresses the wrong problem? Many organizations demand to become better at asking the right questions and so that they tackle the right problems.
I offering here a process for defining bug that any organization can employ on its own. My firm, InnoCentive, has used information technology to assistance more than 100 corporations, government agencies, and foundations improve the quality and efficiency of their innovation efforts and, every bit a effect, their overall performance. Through this process, which we call challenge-driven innovation, clients define and articulate their business, technical, social, and policy issues and present them as challenges to a customs of more than 250,000 solvers—scientists, engineers, and other experts who hail from 200 countries—on InnoCentive.com, our innovation marketplace. Successful solvers have earned awards of $5,000 to $1 1000000.
Since our launch, more than than 10 years ago, we have managed more than ii,000 problems and solved more than half of them—a much higher proportion than most organizations attain on their ain. Indeed, our success rates have improved dramatically over the years (34% in 2006, 39% in 2009, and 57% in 2011), which is a function of the increasing quality of the questions we pose and of our solver customs. Interestingly, even unsolved bug have been tremendously valuable to many clients, allowing them to cancel ill-fated programs much before than they otherwise would have and so redeploy their resources.
In our early years, we focused on highly specific technical problems, but we take since expanded, taking on everything from basic R&D and product development to the wellness and safety of astronauts to banking services in developing countries. We now know that the rigor with which a problem is defined is the nearly important factor in finding a suitable solution. But we've seen that nearly organizations are not skillful at articulating their issues clearly and concisely. Many have considerable difficulty even identifying which problems are crucial to their missions and strategies.
In fact, many clients have realized while working with usa that they may non be tackling the correct issues. Consider a company that engages InnoCentive to observe a lubricant for its manufacturing mechanism. This commutation ensues:
InnoCentive staffer: "Why do yous need the lubricant?"
Client's engineer: "Because nosotros're now expecting our machinery to do things it was not designed to practise, and it needs a particular lubricant to operate."
InnoCentive staffer: "Why don't you supersede the machinery?"
Client'due south engineer: "Because no one makes equipment that exactly fits our needs."
This raises a deeper question: Does the visitor need the lubricant, or does information technology need a new way to make its product? Information technology could be that rethinking the manufacturing procedure would give the firm a new basis for competitive advantage. (Asking questions until you get to the root crusade of a trouble draws from the famous Five Whys trouble-solving technique developed at Toyota and employed in Six Sigma.)
The example is like many we've seen: Someone in the bowels of the organization is assigned to fix a very specific, near-term problem. Just because the house doesn't employ a rigorous process for understanding the dimensions of the problem, leaders miss an opportunity to address underlying strategic issues. The situation is exacerbated by what Stefan Thomke and Donald Reinertsen have identified as the fallacy of "The sooner the project is started, the sooner it volition be finished." (Encounter "Six Myths of Product Evolution," HBR May 2012.) Organizational teams speed toward a solution, fearing that if they spend too much time defining the problem, their superiors will punish them for taking so long to get to the starting line.
Ironically, that approach is more than likely to waste material fourth dimension and money and reduce the odds of success than i that strives at the outset to achieve an in-depth agreement of the problem and its importance to the firm. With this in listen, we developed a four-step procedure for defining and articulating bug, which nosotros have honed with our clients. It consists of asking a series of questions and using the answers to create a thorough problem argument. This process is important for 2 reasons. First, it rallies the organization effectually a shared agreement of the problem, why the house should tackle information technology, and the level of resource it should receive. Firms that don't engage in this process oftentimes allocate too few resource to solving major problems or too many to solving low-priority or wrongly divers ones. It's useful to assign a value to the solution: An organization will be more willing to devote considerable fourth dimension and resource to an attempt that is shown to represent a $100 million marketplace opportunity than to an initiative whose value is much less or is unclear. Second, the process helps an organization bandage the widest possible net for potential solutions, giving internal and external experts in disparate fields the data they demand to cleft the problem.
This article as well appears in:
To illustrate how the process works, we'll describe an initiative to expand access to make clean drinking water undertaken by the nonprofit EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a division of Relief International. EWV's mission is to foster economic growth and enhance the standard of living in developing countries by expanding access to technologies and helping entrepreneurs build sustainable businesses.
The organization chose Jon Naugle, its technical director, as the initiative's "problem champion." Individuals in this role should have a deep understanding of the field or domain and be capable program administrators. Because trouble champions may likewise be charged with implementing solutions, a proven leader with the authority, responsibleness, and resource to see the projection through can be invaluable in this office, especially for a larger and more strategic undertaking. Naugle, an engineer with more than than 25 years of agricultural and rural-development feel in East and W Africa and the Caribbean, fit the bill. He was supported by specialists who understood local market weather, available materials, and other critical issues related to the commitment of drinking water.
Pace one: Plant the Need for a Solution
The purpose of this step is to articulate the problem in the simplest terms possible: "Nosotros are looking for X in club to achieve Z equally measured past West." Such a statement, akin to an elevator pitch, is a call to artillery that clarifies the importance of the issue and helps secure resources to address information technology. This initial framing answers three questions:
What is the bones need?
This is the essential problem, stated clearly and concisely. It is important at this stage to focus on the need that's at the centre of the problem instead of jumping to a solution. Defining the telescopic is besides important. Clearly, looking for lubricant for a piece of machinery is dissimilar from seeking a radically new manufacturing procedure.
The basic need EWV identified was admission to clean drinking water for the estimated 1.i billion people in the globe who lack information technology. This is a pressing outcome even in areas that take plenty of rainfall, considering the water is not finer captured, stored, and distributed.
What is the desired outcome?
Answering this question requires understanding the perspectives of customers and other beneficiaries. (The V Whys approach tin be very helpful.) Once more, avert the temptation to favor a particular solution or approach. This question should be addressed qualitatively and quantitatively whenever possible. A high-level merely specific goal, such as "improving fuel efficiency to 100 mpg past 2020," tin can be helpful at this phase.
In answering this question, Naugle and his squad realized that the outcome had to be more than access to water; the access had to be user-friendly. Women and children in countries such as Republic of uganda often must walk long distances to fetch water from valleys and so comport information technology uphill to their villages. The desired outcome EWV defined was to provide water for daily family needs without requiring enormous expenditures of time and energy.
Who stands to do good and why?
Answering this question compels an organization to identify all potential customers and beneficiaries. Information technology is at this stage that you understand whether, say, you are solving a lubricant trouble for the engineer or for the caput of manufacturing—whose definitions of success may vary considerably.
If the problem you desire to solve is industrywide, it'south crucial to understand why the market has failed to address information technology.
By pondering this question, EWV came to come across that the benefits would accumulate to individuals and families as well as to regions and countries. Women would spend less fourth dimension walking to recollect h2o, giving them more time for working in the field or in outside employment that would bring their families needed income. Children would be able to attend schoolhouse. And over the longer term, regions and countries would benefit from the improved didactics and productivity of the population.
Step two: Justify the Need
The purpose of answering the questions in this step is to explain why your system should endeavour to solve the problem.
Is the endeavor aligned with our strategy?
In other words, volition satisfying the need serve the organization's strategic goals? Information technology is non unusual for an organization to be working on issues that are no longer in sync with its strategy or mission. In that example, the attempt (and peradventure the whole initiative) should be reconsidered.
In the case of EWV, simply improving access to clean drinking h2o wouldn't exist enough; to fit the organization'southward mission, the solution should generate economic development and opportunities for local businesses. It needed to involve something that people would purchase.
In improver, y'all should consider whether the problem fits with your firm's priorities. Since EWV's other projects included providing access to affordable products such as cookstoves and treadle pumps, the drinking water project was appropriate.
What are the desired benefits for the visitor, and how volition nosotros measure them?
In for-profit companies, the desired benefit could be to attain a revenue target, achieve a certain market share, or achieve specific cycle-time improvements. EWV hoped to further its goal of beingness a recognized leader in helping the world'due south poor by transferring engineering through the individual sector. That benefit would be measured by market impact: How many families are paying for the solution? How is information technology affecting their lives? Are sales and installation creating jobs? Given the potential benefits, EWV deemed the priority to be high.
How volition we ensure that a solution is implemented?
Assume that a solution is institute. Someone in the organization must be responsible for carrying it out—whether that means installing a new manufacturing technology, launching a new business, or commercializing a production innovation. That person could be the trouble champion, but he or she could likewise be the manager of an existing division, a cross-functional team, or a new section.
At EWV, Jon Naugle was also put in charge of conveying out the solution. In addition to his technical groundwork, Naugle had a track record of successfully implementing similar projects. For instance, he had served as EWV'southward land director in Niger, where he oversaw a component of a Earth Bank airplane pilot project to promote minor individual irrigation. His part of the project involved getting the private sector to manufacture treadle pumps and manually drill wells.
It is important at this stage to initiate a high-level conversation in the organization about the resources a solution might crave. This can seem premature—after all, yous're still defining the trouble, and the field of possible solutions could be very large—but information technology's actually not besides early to begin exploring what resource your organization is willing and able to devote to evaluating solutions and then implementing the best one. Fifty-fifty at the starting time, y'all may have an inkling that implementing a solution will be much more expensive than others in the system realize. In that case, it's important to communicate a crude gauge of the money and people that will be required and to make sure that the system is willing to continue down this path. The issue of such a discussion might exist that some constraints on resourcing must exist built into the problem statement. Early on in its drinking water projection, EWV set up a cap on how much it would devote to initial research and the testing of possible solutions.
Now that you have laid out the need for a solution and its importance to the organization, you lot must ascertain the problem in particular. This involves applying a rigorous method to ensure that yous have captured all the information that someone—including people in fields far removed from your manufacture—might need to solve the trouble.
Step iii: Contextualize the Trouble
Examining past efforts to detect a solution tin save time and resources and generate highly innovative thinking. If the problem is industrywide, it's crucial to understand why the market place has failed to address information technology.
What approaches have we tried?
The aim here is to find solutions that might already exist in your organisation and identify those that it has disproved. By answering this question, you can avoid reinventing the bike or going down a dead finish.
In previous efforts to aggrandize access to clean water, EWV had offered products and services ranging from manually drilled wells for irrigation to filters for household water treatment. As with all its projects, EWV identified products that low-income consumers could beget and, if possible, that local entrepreneurs could manufacture or service. As Naugle and his team revisited those efforts, they realized that both solutions worked merely if a water source, such as surface water or a shallow aquifer, was shut to the household. As a event, they decided to focus on rainwater—which falls everywhere in the earth to a greater or lesser extent—every bit a source that could reach many more people. More specifically, the team turned its attention to the concept of rainwater harvesting. "Rainwater is delivered straight to the end user," Naugle says. "It'south as close as you can become to a piped h2o system without having a piped h2o supply."
What have others tried?
EWV's investigation of previous attempts at rainwater harvesting involved reviewing research on the topic, conducting five field studies, and surveying xx countries to inquire what technology was being used, what was and was not working, what prevented or encouraged the use of various solutions, how much the solutions cost, and what office regime played.
"One of the key things nosotros learned from the surveys," Naugle says, "was that in one case you have a hard roof—which many people do—to utilize every bit a collection surface, the most expensive thing is storage."
Here was the problem that needed to be solved. EWV establish that existing solutions for storing rainwater, such as concrete tanks, were too expensive for low-income families in developing countries, so households were sharing storage tanks. Just because no one took ownership of the communal facilities, they often roughshod into disrepair. Consequently, Naugle and his team homed in on the concept of a low-cost household rainwater-storage device.
Their enquiry into prior solutions surfaced what seemed initially like a promising approach: storing rainwater in a 525-gallon jar that was near every bit tall as an adult and three times equally wide. In Thailand, they learned, 5 one thousand thousand of those jars had been deployed over 5 years. After further investigation, withal, they found that the jars were fabricated of cement, which was available in Thailand at a low price. More important, the country'south good roads fabricated information technology possible to industry the jars in one location and transport them in trucks around the state. That solution wouldn't work in areas that had neither cement nor loftier-quality roads. Indeed, through interviews with villagers in Republic of uganda, EWV found that fifty-fifty empty polyethylene barrels large enough to hold only 50 gallons of water were difficult to conduct forth a path. Information technology became articulate that a viable storage solution had to be calorie-free enough to exist carried some distance in areas without roads.
What are the internal and external constraints on implementing a solution?
Now that you accept a meliorate idea of what yous want to accomplish, it'south fourth dimension to revisit the outcome of resources and organizational delivery: Do you have the necessary support for soliciting and so evaluating possible solutions? Are you certain that yous can obtain the money and the people to implement the most promising one?
External constraints are just as of import to evaluate: Are there issues concerning patents or intellectual-property rights? Are there laws and regulations to exist considered? Answering these questions may require consultation with various stakeholders and experts.
Do you accept the necessary support for soliciting and evaluating possible solutions? Do you have the coin and the people to implement the near promising 1?
EWV'southward exploration of possible external constraints included examining authorities policies regarding rainwater storage. Naugle and his team found that the governments of Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam supported the idea, but the strongest proponent was Uganda's minister of water and the environment, Maria Mutagamba. Consequently, EWV decided to test the storage solution in Uganda.
Step four: Write the Problem Statement
Now it'south time to write a full description of the problem you're seeking to solve and the requirements the solution must meet. The problem statement, which captures all that the system has learned through answering the questions in the previous steps, helps establish a consensus on what a viable solution would be and what resource would be required to achieve it.
A total, articulate description likewise helps people both within and outside the system quickly grasp the upshot. This is specially of import because solutions to complex problems in an industry or discipline often come from experts in other fields (see "Getting Unusual Suspects to Solve R&D Puzzles," HBR May 2007). For example, the method for moving viscous oil from spills in Arctic and subarctic waters from collection barges to disposal tanks came from a chemist in the cement industry, who responded to the Oil Spill Recovery Establish's description of the trouble in terms that were precise merely not specific to the petroleum industry. Thus the found was able to solve in a affair of months a challenge that had stumped petroleum engineers for years. (To read the institute's full problem argument, visit hbr.org/problem-statement1.)
Hither are some questions that tin can assistance yous develop a thorough trouble statement:
Is the problem actually many bug?
The aim here is to drill down to root causes. Circuitous, seemingly insoluble problems are much more approachable when broken into detached elements.
For EWV, this meant making it articulate that the solution needed to be a storage product that individual households could afford, that was calorie-free enough to be easily transported on poor-quality roads or paths, and that could exist hands maintained.
What requirements must a solution meet?
EWV conducted extensive on-the-ground surveys with potential customers in Uganda to identify the must-have versus the nice-to-have elements of a solution. (See the sidebar "Elements of a Successful Solution.") It didn't matter to EWV whether the solution was a new device or an accommodation of an existing one. Also, the solution didn't need to be one that could exist mass-produced. That is, it could exist something that local small-scale entrepreneurs could industry.
Experts in rainwater harvesting told Naugle and his team that their target price of $xx was unachievable, which meant that subsidies would be required. But a subsidized product was against EWV's strategy and philosophy.
Which trouble solvers should nosotros engage?
The expressionless end EWV hit in seeking a $20 solution from those experts led the organization to conclude that information technology needed to enlist equally many experts outside the field every bit possible. That is when EWV decided to engage InnoCentive and its network of 250,000 solvers.
What information and language should the problem statement include?
To appoint the largest number of solvers from the widest variety of fields, a problem statement must meet the twin goals of being extremely specific simply not unnecessarily technical. It shouldn't contain industry or discipline jargon or presuppose knowledge of a particular field. It may (and probably should) include a summary of previous solution attempts and detailed requirements.
With those criteria in listen, Naugle and his team crafted a trouble statement. (The following is the abstract; for the full problem statement, visit hbr.org/problem-statement2.) "EnterpriseWorks is seeking blueprint ideas for a depression-cost rainwater storage arrangement that can exist installed in households in developing countries. The solution is expected to facilitate access to make clean water at a household level, addressing a problem that affects millions of people worldwide who are living in impoverished communities or rural areas where access to clean water is express. Domestic rainwater harvesting is a proven technology that tin be a valuable option for accessing and storing water year round. However, the high cost of available rainwater storage systems makes them well beyond the reach of low-income families to install in their homes. A solution to this problem would non just provide user-friendly and affordable access to scarce h2o resources simply would also allow families, specially the women and children who are ordinarily tasked with water drove, to spend less time walking distances to collect water and more fourth dimension on activities that can bring in income and meliorate the quality of life."
To engage the largest number of solvers from the widest multifariousness of fields, a problem statement must run into the twin goals of being extremely specific but not unnecessarily technical.
What practice solvers need to submit?
What information about the proposed solution does your organization need in order to invest in it? For example, would a well-founded hypothetical arroyo exist sufficient, or is a full-blown prototype needed? EWV decided that a solver had to submit a written explanation of the solution and detailed drawings.
What incentives practise solvers demand?
The point of asking this question is to ensure that the right people are motivated to address the problem. For internal solvers, incentives can be written into chore descriptions or offered every bit promotions and bonuses. For external solvers, the incentive might be a cash honour. EWV offered to pay $xv,000 to the solver who provided the all-time solution through the InnoCentive network.
How volition solutions be evaluated and success measured?
Addressing this question forces a company to be explicit about how it will evaluate the solutions information technology receives. Clarity and transparency are crucial to arriving at viable solutions and to ensuring that the evaluation process is fair and rigorous. In some cases a "we'll know it when we run into information technology" approach is reasonable—for case, when a visitor is looking for a new branding strategy. Most of the time, however, it is a sign that earlier steps in the process have not been approached with sufficient rigor.
EWV stipulated that it would evaluate solutions on their power to meet the criteria of depression cost, high storage capacity, low weight, and easy maintenance. It added that it would prefer designs that were modular (so that the unit would be easier to transport) and adaptable or salvageable or had multiple functions (so that owners could reuse the materials after the production'due south lifetime or sell them to others for various applications). The overarching goal was to keep costs low and to help poor families justify the buy.
The Winner
Ultimately, the solution to EWV's rainwater-storage problem came from someone exterior the field: a German inventor whose company specialized in the design of tourist submarines. The solution he proposed required no elaborate machinery; in fact, it had no pumps or moving parts. It was an established industrial technology that had not been applied to h2o storage: a plastic bag inside a plastic purse with a tube at the top. The outer pocketbook (made of less-expensive, woven polypropylene) provided the structure's strength, while the inner bag (made of more-expensive, linear depression-density polyethylene) was impermeable and could hold 125 gallons of water. The 2-handbag approach immune the inner bag to be thinner, reducing the price of the product, while the outer handbag was strong enough to incorporate a ton and a one-half of water.
The construction folded into a parcel the size of a briefcase and weighed about eight pounds. In brusk, the solution was affordable, commercially feasible, could exist hands transported to remote areas, and could be sold and installed by local entrepreneurs. (Retailers make from $4 to $8 per unit of measurement, depending on the volume they purchase. Installers of the gutters, downspout, and base of operations earn well-nigh $6.)
EWV adult an initial version and tested information technology in Uganda, where the arrangement asked end users such questions as What do you retrieve of its weight? Does information technology encounter your needs? Even mundane bug like colour came into play: The woven outer bags were white, which women pointed out would immediately look dirty. EWV modified the blueprint on the basis of this input: For example, it changed the color of the device to brownish, expanded its size to 350 gallons (while keeping the target price of no more than $twenty per 125 gallons of water storage), altered its shape to brand it more than stable, and replaced the original siphon with an outlet tap.
After 14 months of field testing, EWV rolled out the commercial production in Uganda in March 2011. Past the end of May 2012, l to threescore shops, village sales agents, and cooperatives were selling the product; more than lxxx entrepreneurs had been trained to install information technology; and 1,418 units had been deployed in 8 districts in southwestern Uganda.
EWV deems this a success at this stage in the rollout. Information technology hopes to make the units available in 10 countries—and have tens or hundreds of thousands of units installed—within five years. Ultimately, information technology believes, millions of units volition be in use for a variety of applications, including household drinking water, irrigation, and construction. Interestingly, the primary obstruction to getting people to buy the device has been skepticism that something that comes in such a minor bundle (the size of a typical 5-gallon jerrican) can agree the equivalent of lxx jerricans. Believing that the remedy is to evidence villagers the installed product, EWV is currently testing diverse promotion and marketing programs.As the EWV story illustrates, critically analyzing and clearly articulating a trouble can yield highly innovative solutions. Organizations that utilize these elementary concepts and develop the skills and discipline to ask better questions and define their problems with more rigor tin create strategic advantage, unlock truly groundbreaking innovation, and drive better concern performance. Request improve questions delivers amend results.
A version of this article appeared in the September 2012 result of Harvard Business Review.
Source: https://hbr.org/2012/09/are-you-solving-the-right-problem
0 Response to "in This Problem"
Post a Comment