Managing Problem Solving
1. Introduction
a. An overview of problem solving approach today
Problem solving by nature is an art and, unfortunately, not a science. As such, there are multiple approaches, tools, techniques used to addressing the problems at hand. One must survey & delve into various possible methodologies that could be applicable to the problematic situation & in turn apply the best one believes is applicable. Besides, past experiences from similar situations do provide a helping hand in choosing a right technique to resolving the issues. Of course, we are not talking about quantifiable or analytical problems here like software bugs which obviously can be solved by fixing the code. We are discussing here the strategic management problems faced in today’s organizational context, associated with ‘people’.
Today’s corporate world is faced with complex problematic situations due to the complex nature of humans in a social context. Thus problem solving equally shares those complexities as well. Various problem solving techniques have emerged over the years like brainstorming, root cause analysis, reductionism, world-view thinking, trail-and-error, abstraction, De Bono Hats, Pareto Principle, SWOT analysis, application of analogous methodology, etc.
Let us compare & contrast two of these widely used approaches – Reductionism and Holism!
b. Reductionism Vs Holism
Two of the most widely applied theories to strategic management problem solving techniques are Reductionism and Holism. Both these contrast each other. Reductionism is a more scientific approach to problem solving where the reference is to the classical Newtonian assumption that the dynamics of any complex system can be understood from studying the properties of its parts. At the deepest level Reductionism would offer physiological explanations by explaining behavior in terms of neuro-chemical & genes. In its highest level of justification it focuses on socio-cultural aspects. As such while
a. An overview of problem solving approach today
Problem solving by nature is an art and, unfortunately, not a science. As such, there are multiple approaches, tools, techniques used to addressing the problems at hand. One must survey & delve into various possible methodologies that could be applicable to the problematic situation & in turn apply the best one believes is applicable. Besides, past experiences from similar situations do provide a helping hand in choosing a right technique to resolving the issues. Of course, we are not talking about quantifiable or analytical problems here like software bugs which obviously can be solved by fixing the code. We are discussing here the strategic management problems faced in today’s organizational context, associated with ‘people’.
Today’s corporate world is faced with complex problematic situations due to the complex nature of humans in a social context. Thus problem solving equally shares those complexities as well. Various problem solving techniques have emerged over the years like brainstorming, root cause analysis, reductionism, world-view thinking, trail-and-error, abstraction, De Bono Hats, Pareto Principle, SWOT analysis, application of analogous methodology, etc.
Let us compare & contrast two of these widely used approaches – Reductionism and Holism!
b. Reductionism Vs Holism
Two of the most widely applied theories to strategic management problem solving techniques are Reductionism and Holism. Both these contrast each other. Reductionism is a more scientific approach to problem solving where the reference is to the classical Newtonian assumption that the dynamics of any complex system can be understood from studying the properties of its parts. At the deepest level Reductionism would offer physiological explanations by explaining behavior in terms of neuro-chemical & genes. In its highest level of justification it focuses on socio-cultural aspects. As such while
References: MULLEN, J.D., (1995). p.4, Hard thinking: the reintroduction of logic into everyday life, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. BJERKE, O.L., (2008), Soft System Methodology in action: A case study at a purchasing department Williams, B., (2005), Soft Systems Methodology, The Kellogg Foundation Checkland, P. & Scholes, J. (1999), Soft System Methodology in action, Wiley Wilson, B., (2001), Soft System Methodology: Conceptual model building and its contribution, Wiley Schweizer, M., (2007), Operational & Strategic Decision-making: Soft Systems Methodology, GRIN Gharajedaghi, J., (2006), Systems Thinking – Managing Chaos & Complexity: A Platform for Designing Business Architecture,Butterworth-Heinemann