Analytical approaches to problem solving and identifying opportunities for innovation has met with limited success, and the success rate seems to decrease the more complex the environment becomes. When we use analytical thinking we break the problem down into component parts and keep drilling down until we identify the root of the problem, but when we implement a solution often we see another problem appearing somewhere else in the system. As there is no direct cause and effect relationship between these events, we discount them as anomalies. Often the
When we understand the systems around us we can start to identify how we behave within these systems and we can adapt or change our behaviour. I believe the challenge to problem solving often lies in mind-sets of the people solving the problem. How many times do we see a team of highly capable individuals who struggle to solve a complex problem, until someone (a non-expert) quickly and easily finds an eloquent solution? They approached it from a different paradigm and are not constraint by the same ‘system”.
A ‘MESS’ IS A SET OF STRONGLY INTERACTING PROBLEMS. IT IS STANDARD PRACTICE TO REDUCE MESSES TO AGGREGATIONS OF PROBLEMS: TO PRIORITIZE AND TREAT THEM SEPARATELY, AS SELF-CONTAINED ENTITIES. MANAGERS DO NOT GENERALLY KNOW HOW TO DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH ANY SYSTEM, LET ALONE MESSES.
RUSSEL ACKOFF
outcome when we apply analytical thinking to a complex problem, is that we end up making the situation worse.
Systems thinking offers us a set of tools and
approaches to understand the ecosystems that we work and live in by helping us to see how each component relates to other components in the system. By understanding the relationships between the components, we can start to identify the leverage points in the system and these are often the points where innovation can have the greatest benefit.
By better understanding the properties of
the systems and relationships, it is easier to see the patterns that emerge in the systems. Emergent properties often lead to unexpected outcomes which can work in our favour or not.
54 Management Today | September 2012 Design Thinking
Design thinking has nothing to do with the practice of design, which is a common misconception. Design Thinking is an approach that applies a design sensibility and methodology to problem solving, no matter what the problem is. A number of management sciences believe there is a lot to be learnt from the abductive approaches that designers use to solve problems, especially in the field of innovation.
What makes Design Thinkers unique is
their ability to utilise deductive, inductive and abductive logic to solve problems. Roger Martin describes Design Thinking as a tool that enables organisations to move from mystery to a heuristic understanding of its business environment and finally to a reliable and sustainable algorithm4
. The Innovation Journal
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111