consulting problem solving tools

McKinsey Problem Solving: Six steps to solve any problem and tell a persuasive story

The McKinsey problem solving process is a series of mindset shifts and structured approaches to thinking about and solving challenging problems. It is a useful approach for anyone working in the knowledge and information economy and needs to communicate ideas to other people.

Over the past several years of creating StrategyU, advising an undergraduates consulting group and running workshops for clients, I have found over and over again that the principles taught on this site and in this guide are a powerful way to improve the type of work and communication you do in a business setting.

When I first set out to teach these skills to the undergraduate consulting group at my alma mater, I was still working at BCG. I was spending my day building compelling presentations, yet was at a loss for how to teach these principles to the students I would talk with at night.

Through many rounds of iteration, I was able to land on a structured process and way of framing some of these principles such that people could immediately apply them to their work.

While the “official” McKinsey problem solving process is seven steps, I have outline my own spin on things – from experience at McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group. Here are six steps that will help you solve problems like a McKinsey Consultant:

Step #1: School is over, stop worrying about “what” to make and worry about the process, or the “how”

When I reflect back on my first role at McKinsey, I realize that my biggest challenge was unlearning everything I had learned over the previous 23 years. Throughout school you are asked to do specific things. For example, you are asked to write a 5 page paper on Benjamin Franklin — double spaced, 12 font and answering two or three specific questions.

In school, to be successful you follow these rules as close as you can. However, in consulting there are no rules on the “what.” Typically the problem you are asked to solve is ambiguous and complex — exactly why they hire you. In consulting, you are taught the rules around the “how” and have to then fill in the what.

The “how” can be taught and this entire site is founded on that belief. Here are some principles to get started:

Step #2: Thinking like a consultant requires a mindset shift

There are two pre-requisites to thinking like a consultant. Without these two traits you will struggle:

• A healthy obsession looking for a “better way” to do things
• Being open minded to shifting ideas and other approaches

In business school, I was sitting in one class when I noticed that all my classmates were doing the same thing — everyone was coming up with reasons why something should should not be done.

As I’ve spent more time working, I’ve realized this is a common phenomenon. The more you learn, the easier it becomes to come up with reasons to support the current state of affairs — likely driven by the status quo bias — an emotional state that favors not changing things. Even the best consultants will experience this emotion, but they are good at identifying it and pushing forward.

Key point : Creating an effective and persuasive consulting like presentation requires a comfort with uncertainty combined with a slightly delusional belief that you can figure anything out.

Step #3: Define the problem and make sure you are not solving a symptom

Before doing the work, time should be spent on defining the actual problem. Too often, people are solutions focused when they think about fixing something. Let’s say a company is struggling with profitability. Someone might define the problem as “we do not have enough growth.” This is jumping ahead to solutions — the goal may be to drive more growth, but this is not the actual issue. It is a symptom of a deeper problem.

Consider the following information:

• Costs have remained relatively constant and are actually below industry average so revenue must be the issue
• Revenue has been increasing, but at a slowing rate
• This company sells widgets and have had no slowdown on the number of units it has sold over the last five years
• However, the price per widget is actually below where it was five years ago
• There have been new entrants in the market in the last three years that have been backed by Venture Capital money and are aggressively pricing their products below costs

In a real-life project there will definitely be much more information and a team may take a full week coming up with a problem statement . Given the information above, we may come up with the following problem statement:

Problem Statement : The company is struggling to increase profitability due to decreasing prices driven by new entrants in the market. The company does not have a clear strategy to respond to the price pressure from competitors and lacks an overall product strategy to compete in this market.

Step 4: Dive in, make hypotheses and try to figure out how to “solve” the problem

Now the fun starts!

There are generally two approaches to thinking about information in a structured way and going back and forth between the two modes is what the consulting process is founded on.

First is top-down . This is what you should start with, especially for a newer “consultant.” This involves taking the problem statement and structuring an approach. This means developing multiple hypotheses — key questions you can either prove or disprove.

Given our problem statement, you may develop the following three hypotheses:

• Company X has room to improve its pricing strategy to increase profitability
• Company X can explore new market opportunities unlocked by new entrants
• Company X can explore new business models or operating models due to advances in technology

As you can see, these three statements identify different areas you can research and either prove or disprove. In a consulting team, you may have a “workstream leader” for each statement.

Once you establish the structure you you may shift to the second type of analysis: a bottom-up approach . This involves doing deep research around your problem statement, testing your hypotheses, running different analysis and continuing to ask more questions. As you do the analysis, you will begin to see different patterns that may unlock new questions, change your thinking or even confirm your existing hypotheses. You may need to tweak your hypotheses and structure as you learn new information.

A project vacillates many times between these two approaches. Here is a hypothetical timeline of a project:

Step 5: Make a slides like a consultant

The next step is taking the structure and research and turning it into a slide. When people see slides from McKinsey and BCG, they see something that is compelling and unique, but don’t really understand all the work that goes into those slides. Both companies have a healthy obsession (maybe not to some people!) with how things look, how things are structured and how they are presented.

They also don’t understand how much work is spent on telling a compelling “story.” The biggest mistake people make in the business world is mistaking showing a lot of information versus telling a compelling story. This is an easy mistake to make — especially if you are the one that did hours of analysis. It may seem important, but when it comes down to making a slide and a presentation, you end up deleting more information rather than adding. You really need to remember the following:

Data matters, but stories change hearts and minds

Here are four quick ways to improve your presentations:

Tip #1 — Format, format, format

Both McKinsey and BCG had style templates that were obsessively followed. Some key rules I like to follow:

• Make sure all text within your slide body is the same font size (harder than you would think)
• Do not go outside of the margins into the white space on the side
• All titles throughout the presentation should be 2 lines or less and stay the same font size
• Each slide should typically only make one strong point

Tip #2 — Titles are the takeaway

The title of the slide should be the key insight or takeaway and the slide area should prove the point. The below slide is an oversimplification of this:

Even in consulting, I found that people struggled with simplifying a message to one key theme per slide. If something is going to be presented live, the simpler the better. In reality, you are often giving someone presentations that they will read in depth and more information may make sense.

To go deeper, check out these 20 presentation and powerpoint tips .

Tip #3 — Have “MECE” Ideas for max persuasion

“MECE” means mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive — meaning all points listed cover the entire range of ideas while also being unique and differentiated from each other.

An extreme example would be this:

• Slide title: There are seven continents
• Slide content: The seven continents are North America, South America, Europe, Africa Asia, Antarctica, Australia

The list of continents provides seven distinct points that when taken together are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive . The MECE principle is not perfect — it is more of an ideal to push your logic in the right direction. Use it to continually improve and refine your story.

Applying this to a profitability problem at the highest level would look like this:

Goal: Increase profitability

2nd level: We can increase revenue or decrease costs

3rd level: We can increase revenue by selling more or increasing prices

Each level is MECE. It is almost impossible to argue against any of this (unless you are willing to commit accounting fraud!).

Tip #4 — Leveraging the Pyramid Principle

The pyramid principle is an approach popularized by Barbara Minto and essential to the structured problem solving approach I learned at McKinsey. Learning this approach has changed the way I look at any presentation since.

Here is a rough outline of how you can think about the pyramid principle as a way to structure a presentation:

As you build a presentation, you may have three sections for each hypothesis. As you think about the overall story, the three hypothesis (and the supporting evidence) will build on each other as a “story” to answer the defined problem. There are two ways to think about doing this — using inductive or deductive reasoning:

If we go back to our profitability example from above, you would say that increasing profitability was the core issue we developed. Lets assume that through research we found that our three hypotheses were true. Given this, you may start to build a high level presentation around the following three points:

These three ideas not only are distinct but they also build on each other. Combined, they tell a story of what the company should do and how they should react. Each of these three “points” may be a separate section in the presentation followed by several pages of detailed analysis. There may also be a shorter executive summary version of 5–10 pages that gives the high level story without as much data and analysis.

Step 6: The only way to improve is to get feedback and continue to practice

Ultimately, this process is not something you will master overnight. I’ve been consulting, either working for a firm or on my own for more than 10 years and am still looking for ways to make better presentations, become more persuasive and get feedback on individual slides.

The process never ends.

The best way to improve fast is to be working on a great team . Look for people around you that do this well and ask them for feedback. The more feedback, the more iterations and more presentations you make, the better you will become. Good luck!

If you enjoyed this post, you’ll get a kick out of all the free lessons I’ve shared that go a bit deeper. Check them out here .

Do you have a toolkit for business problem solving? I created Think Like a Strategy Consultant as an online course to make the tools of strategy consultants accessible to driven professionals, executives, and consultants. This course teaches you how to synthesize information into compelling insights, structure your information in ways that help you solve problems, and develop presentations that resonate at the C-Level. Click here to learn more or if you are interested in getting started now, enroll in the self-paced version ($497) or hands-on coaching version ($997). Both versions include lifetime access and all future updates.

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

40 problem-solving techniques and processes

All teams and organizations encounter challenges. Approaching those challenges without a structured problem solving process can end up making things worse.

Proven problem solving techniques such as those outlined below can guide your group through a process of identifying problems and challenges , ideating on possible solutions , and then evaluating and implementing the most suitable .

In this post, you'll find problem-solving tools you can use to develop effective solutions. You'll also find some tips for facilitating the problem solving process and solving complex problems.

Design your next session with SessionLab

Join the 150,000+ facilitators 
using SessionLab.

Recommended Articles

A step-by-step guide to planning a workshop, 54 great online tools for workshops and meetings, how to create an unforgettable training session in 8 simple steps.

• 18 Free Facilitation Resources We Think You’ll Love

What is problem solving?

Problem solving is a process of finding and implementing a solution to a challenge or obstacle. In most contexts, this means going through a problem solving process that begins with identifying the issue, exploring its root causes, ideating and refining possible solutions before implementing and measuring the impact of that solution.

For simple or small problems, it can be tempting to skip straight to implementing what you believe is the right solution. The danger with this approach is that without exploring the true causes of the issue, it might just occur again or your chosen solution may cause other issues.

Particularly in the world of work, good problem solving means using data to back up each step of the process, bringing in new perspectives and effectively measuring the impact of your solution.

Effective problem solving can help ensure that your team or organization is well positioned to overcome challenges, be resilient to change and create innovation. In my experience, problem solving is a combination of skillset, mindset and process, and it’s especially vital for leaders to cultivate this skill.

What is the seven step problem solving process?

A problem solving process is a step-by-step framework from going from discovering a problem all the way through to implementing a solution.

With practice, this framework can become intuitive, and innovative companies tend to have a consistent and ongoing ability to discover and tackle challenges when they come up.

You might see everything from a four step problem solving process through to seven steps. While all these processes cover roughly the same ground, I’ve found a seven step problem solving process is helpful for making all key steps legible.

We’ll outline that process here and then follow with techniques you can use to explore and work on that step of the problem solving process with a group.

The seven-step problem solving process is:

1. Problem identification 

The first stage of any problem solving process is to identify the problem(s) you need to solve. This often looks like using group discussions and activities to help a group surface and effectively articulate the challenges they’re facing and wish to resolve.

Be sure to align with your team on the exact definition and nature of the problem you’re solving. An effective process is one where everyone is pulling in the same direction – ensure clarity and alignment now to help avoid misunderstandings later.

2. Problem analysis and refinement

The process of problem analysis means ensuring that the problem you are seeking to solve is  the   right problem . Choosing the right problem to solve means you are on the right path to creating the right solution.

At this stage, you may look deeper at the problem you identified to try and discover the root cause at the level of people or process. You may also spend some time sourcing data, consulting relevant parties and creating and refining a problem statement.

Problem refinement means adjusting scope or focus of the problem you will be aiming to solve based on what comes up during your analysis. As you analyze data sources, you might discover that the root cause means you need to adjust your problem statement. Alternatively, you might find that your original problem statement is too big to be meaningful approached within your current project.

Remember that the goal of any problem refinement is to help set the stage for effective solution development and deployment. Set the right focus and get buy-in from your team here and you’ll be well positioned to move forward with confidence.

3. Solution generation

Once your group has nailed down the particulars of the problem you wish to solve, you want to encourage a free flow of ideas connecting to solving that problem. This can take the form of problem solving games that encourage creative thinking or techniquess designed to produce working prototypes of possible solutions. 

The key to ensuring the success of this stage of the problem solving process is to encourage quick, creative thinking and create an open space where all ideas are considered. The best solutions can often come from unlikely places and by using problem solving techniques that celebrate invention, you might come up with solution gold. 

4. Solution development

No solution is perfect right out of the gate. It’s important to discuss and develop the solutions your group has come up with over the course of following the previous problem solving steps in order to arrive at the best possible solution. Problem solving games used in this stage involve lots of critical thinking, measuring potential effort and impact, and looking at possible solutions analytically. 

During this stage, you will often ask your team to iterate and improve upon your front-running solutions and develop them further. Remember that problem solving strategies always benefit from a multitude of voices and opinions, and not to let ego get involved when it comes to choosing which solutions to develop and take further.

Finding the best solution is the goal of all problem solving workshops and here is the place to ensure that your solution is well thought out, sufficiently robust and fit for purpose. 

5. Decision making and planning

Nearly there! Once you’ve got a set of possible, you’ll need to make a decision on which to implement. This can be a consensus-based group decision or it might be for a leader or major stakeholder to decide. You’ll find a set of effective decision making methods below.

Once your group has reached consensus and selected a solution, there are some additional actions that also need to be decided upon. You’ll want to work on allocating ownership of the project, figure out who will do what, how the success of the solution will be measured and decide the next course of action.

Set clear accountabilities, actions, timeframes, and follow-ups for your chosen solution. Make these decisions and set clear next-steps in the problem solving workshop so that everyone is aligned and you can move forward effectively as a group. 

Ensuring that you plan for the roll-out of a solution is one of the most important problem solving steps. Without adequate planning or oversight, it can prove impossible to measure success or iterate further if the problem was not solved. 

6. Solution implementation 

This is what we were waiting for! All problem solving processes have the end goal of implementing an effective and impactful solution that your group has confidence in.

Project management and communication skills are key here – your solution may need to adjust when out in the wild or you might discover new challenges along the way. For some solutions, you might also implement a test with a small group and monitor results before rolling it out to an entire company.

You should have a clear owner for your solution who will oversee the plans you made together and help ensure they’re put into place. This person will often coordinate the implementation team and set-up processes to measure the efficacy of your solution too.

7. Solution evaluation 

So you and your team developed a great solution to a problem and have a gut feeling it’s been solved. Work done, right? Wrong. All problem solving strategies benefit from evaluation, consideration, and feedback.

You might find that the solution does not work for everyone, might create new problems, or is potentially so successful that you will want to roll it out to larger teams or as part of other initiatives. 

None of that is possible without taking the time to evaluate the success of the solution you developed in your problem solving model and adjust if necessary.

Remember that the problem solving process is often iterative and it can be common to not solve complex issues on the first try. Even when this is the case, you and your team will have generated learning that will be important for future problem solving workshops or in other parts of the organization. 

It’s also worth underlining how important record keeping is throughout the problem solving process. If a solution didn’t work, you need to have the data and records to see why that was the case. If you go back to the drawing board, notes from the previous workshop can help save time.

What does an effective problem solving process look like?

Every effective problem solving process begins with an agenda . In our experience, a well-structured problem solving workshop is one of the best methods for successfully guiding a group from exploring a problem to implementing a solution.

The format of a workshop ensures that you can get buy-in from your group, encourage free-thinking and solution exploration before making a decision on what to implement following the session.

This Design Sprint 2.0 template is an effective problem solving process from top agency AJ&Smart. It’s a great format for the entire problem solving process, with four-days of workshops designed to surface issues, explore solutions and even test a solution.

Check it for an example of how you might structure and run a problem solving process and feel free to copy and adjust it your needs!

For a shorter process you can run in a single afternoon, this remote problem solving agenda will guide you effectively in just a couple of hours.

Whatever the length of your workshop, by using SessionLab, it’s easy to go from an idea to a complete agenda . Start by dragging and dropping your core problem solving activities into place . Add timings, breaks and necessary materials before sharing your agenda with your colleagues.

The resulting agenda will be your guide to an effective and productive problem solving session that will also help you stay organized on the day!

Complete problem-solving methods

In this section, we’ll look at in-depth problem-solving methods that provide a complete end-to-end process for developing effective solutions. These will help guide your team from the discovery and definition of a problem through to delivering the right solution.

If you’re looking for an all-encompassing method or problem-solving model, these processes are a great place to start. They’ll ask your team to challenge preconceived ideas and adopt a mindset for solving problems more effectively.

Six Thinking Hats

Individual approaches to solving a problem can be very different based on what team or role an individual holds. It can be easy for existing biases or perspectives to find their way into the mix, or for internal politics to direct a conversation.

Six Thinking Hats is a classic method for identifying the problems that need to be solved and enables your team to consider them from different angles, whether that is by focusing on facts and data, creative solutions, or by considering why a particular solution might not work.

Like all problem-solving frameworks, Six Thinking Hats is effective at helping teams remove roadblocks from a conversation or discussion and come to terms with all the aspects necessary to solve complex problems.

The Six Thinking Hats   #creative thinking   #meeting facilitation   #problem solving   #issue resolution   #idea generation   #conflict resolution   The Six Thinking Hats are used by individuals and groups to separate out conflicting styles of thinking. They enable and encourage a group of people to think constructively together in exploring and implementing change, rather than using argument to fight over who is right and who is wrong.

Lightning Decision Jam

Featured courtesy of Jonathan Courtney of AJ&Smart Berlin, Lightning Decision Jam is one of those strategies that should be in every facilitation toolbox. Exploring problems and finding solutions is often creative in nature, though as with any creative process, there is the potential to lose focus and get lost.

Unstructured discussions might get you there in the end, but it’s much more effective to use a method that creates a clear process and team focus.

In Lightning Decision Jam, participants are invited to begin by writing challenges, concerns, or mistakes on post-its without discussing them before then being invited by the moderator to present them to the group.

From there, the team vote on which problems to solve and are guided through steps that will allow them to reframe those problems, create solutions and then decide what to execute on. 

By deciding the problems that need to be solved as a team before moving on, this group process is great for ensuring the whole team is aligned and can take ownership over the next stages. 

Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ)   #action   #decision making   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #innovation   #design   #remote-friendly   It doesn’t matter where you work and what your job role is, if you work with other people together as a team, you will always encounter the same challenges: Unclear goals and miscommunication that cause busy work and overtime Unstructured meetings that leave attendants tired, confused and without clear outcomes. Frustration builds up because internal challenges to productivity are not addressed Sudden changes in priorities lead to a loss of focus and momentum Muddled compromise takes the place of clear decision- making, leaving everybody to come up with their own interpretation. In short, a lack of structure leads to a waste of time and effort, projects that drag on for too long and frustrated, burnt out teams. AJ&Smart has worked with some of the most innovative, productive companies in the world. What sets their teams apart from others is not better tools, bigger talent or more beautiful offices. The secret sauce to becoming a more productive, more creative and happier team is simple: Replace all open discussion or brainstorming with a structured process that leads to more ideas, clearer decisions and better outcomes. When a good process provides guardrails and a clear path to follow, it becomes easier to come up with ideas, make decisions and solve problems. This is why AJ&Smart created Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ). It’s a simple and short, but powerful group exercise that can be run either in-person, in the same room, or remotely with distributed teams.

Problem Definition Process

While problems can be complex, the problem-solving methods you use to identify and solve those problems can often be simple in design. 

By taking the time to truly identify and define a problem before asking the group to reframe the challenge as an opportunity, this method is a great way to enable change.

Begin by identifying a focus question and exploring the ways in which it manifests before splitting into five teams who will each consider the problem using a different method: escape, reversal, exaggeration, distortion or wishful. Teams develop a problem objective and create ideas in line with their method before then feeding them back to the group.

This method is great for enabling in-depth discussions while also creating space for finding creative solutions too!

Problem Definition   #problem solving   #idea generation   #creativity   #online   #remote-friendly   A problem solving technique to define a problem, challenge or opportunity and to generate ideas.

The 5 Whys 

Sometimes, a group needs to go further with their strategies and analyze the root cause at the heart of organizational issues. An RCA or root cause analysis is the process of identifying what is at the heart of business problems or recurring challenges. 

The 5 Whys is a simple and effective method of helping a group go find the root cause of any problem or challenge and conduct analysis that will deliver results. 

By beginning with the creation of a problem statement and going through five stages to refine it, The 5 Whys provides everything you need to truly discover the cause of an issue.

The 5 Whys   #hyperisland   #innovation   This simple and powerful method is useful for getting to the core of a problem or challenge. As the title suggests, the group defines a problems, then asks the question “why” five times, often using the resulting explanation as a starting point for creative problem solving.

World Cafe is a simple but powerful facilitation technique to help bigger groups to focus their energy and attention on solving complex problems.

World Cafe enables this approach by creating a relaxed atmosphere where participants are able to self-organize and explore topics relevant and important to them which are themed around a central problem-solving purpose. Create the right atmosphere by modeling your space after a cafe and after guiding the group through the method, let them take the lead!

Making problem-solving a part of your organization’s culture in the long term can be a difficult undertaking. More approachable formats like World Cafe can be especially effective in bringing people unfamiliar with workshops into the fold. 

World Cafe   #hyperisland   #innovation   #issue analysis   World Café is a simple yet powerful method, originated by Juanita Brown, for enabling meaningful conversations driven completely by participants and the topics that are relevant and important to them. Facilitators create a cafe-style space and provide simple guidelines. Participants then self-organize and explore a set of relevant topics or questions for conversation.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)

One of the best approaches is to create a safe space for a group to share and discover practices and behaviors that can help them find their own solutions.

With DAD, you can help a group choose which problems they wish to solve and which approaches they will take to do so. It’s great at helping remove resistance to change and can help get buy-in at every level too!

This process of enabling frontline ownership is great in ensuring follow-through and is one of the methods you will want in your toolbox as a facilitator.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)   #idea generation   #liberating structures   #action   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   DADs make it easy for a group or community to discover practices and behaviors that enable some individuals (without access to special resources and facing the same constraints) to find better solutions than their peers to common problems. These are called positive deviant (PD) behaviors and practices. DADs make it possible for people in the group, unit, or community to discover by themselves these PD practices. DADs also create favorable conditions for stimulating participants’ creativity in spaces where they can feel safe to invent new and more effective practices. Resistance to change evaporates as participants are unleashed to choose freely which practices they will adopt or try and which problems they will tackle. DADs make it possible to achieve frontline ownership of solutions.

Design Sprint 2.0

Want to see how a team can solve big problems and move forward with prototyping and testing solutions in a few days? The Design Sprint 2.0 template from Jake Knapp, author of Sprint, is a complete agenda for a with proven results.

Developing the right agenda can involve difficult but necessary planning. Ensuring all the correct steps are followed can also be stressful or time-consuming depending on your level of experience.

Use this complete 4-day workshop template if you are finding there is no obvious solution to your challenge and want to focus your team around a specific problem that might require a shortcut to launching a minimum viable product or waiting for the organization-wide implementation of a solution.

Open space technology

Open space technology- developed by Harrison Owen – creates a space where large groups are invited to take ownership of their problem solving and lead individual sessions. Open space technology is a great format when you have a great deal of expertise and insight in the room and want to allow for different takes and approaches on a particular theme or problem you need to be solved.

Start by bringing your participants together to align around a central theme and focus their efforts. Explain the ground rules to help guide the problem-solving process and then invite members to identify any issue connecting to the central theme that they are interested in and are prepared to take responsibility for.

Once participants have decided on their approach to the core theme, they write their issue on a piece of paper, announce it to the group, pick a session time and place, and post the paper on the wall. As the wall fills up with sessions, the group is then invited to join the sessions that interest them the most and which they can contribute to, then you’re ready to begin!

Everyone joins the problem-solving group they’ve signed up to, record the discussion and if appropriate, findings can then be shared with the rest of the group afterward.

Open Space Technology   #action plan   #idea generation   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #large group   #online   #remote-friendly   Open Space is a methodology for large groups to create their agenda discerning important topics for discussion, suitable for conferences, community gatherings and whole system facilitation

Techniques to identify and analyze problems

Using a problem-solving method to help a team identify and analyze a problem can be a quick and effective addition to any workshop or meeting.

While further actions are always necessary, you can generate momentum and alignment easily, and these activities are a great place to get started.

We’ve put together this list of techniques to help you and your team with problem identification, analysis, and discussion that sets the foundation for developing effective solutions.

Let’s take a look!

Fishbone Analysis

Organizational or team challenges are rarely simple, and it’s important to remember that one problem can be an indication of something that goes deeper and may require further consideration to be solved.

Fishbone Analysis helps groups to dig deeper and understand the origins of a problem. It’s a great example of a root cause analysis method that is simple for everyone on a team to get their head around. 

Participants in this activity are asked to annotate a diagram of a fish, first adding the problem or issue to be worked on at the head of a fish before then brainstorming the root causes of the problem and adding them as bones on the fish. 

Using abstractions such as a diagram of a fish can really help a team break out of their regular thinking and develop a creative approach.

Fishbone Analysis   #problem solving   ##root cause analysis   #decision making   #online facilitation   A process to help identify and understand the origins of problems, issues or observations.

Problem Tree 

Encouraging visual thinking can be an essential part of many strategies. By simply reframing and clarifying problems, a group can move towards developing a problem solving model that works for them. 

In Problem Tree, groups are asked to first brainstorm a list of problems – these can be design problems, team problems or larger business problems – and then organize them into a hierarchy. The hierarchy could be from most important to least important or abstract to practical, though the key thing with problem solving games that involve this aspect is that your group has some way of managing and sorting all the issues that are raised.

Once you have a list of problems that need to be solved and have organized them accordingly, you’re then well-positioned for the next problem solving steps.

Problem tree   #define intentions   #create   #design   #issue analysis   A problem tree is a tool to clarify the hierarchy of problems addressed by the team within a design project; it represents high level problems or related sublevel problems.

SWOT Analysis

Chances are you’ve heard of the SWOT Analysis before. This problem-solving method focuses on identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is a tried and tested method for both individuals and teams.

Start by creating a desired end state or outcome and bare this in mind – any process solving model is made more effective by knowing what you are moving towards. Create a quadrant made up of the four categories of a SWOT analysis and ask participants to generate ideas based on each of those quadrants.

Once you have those ideas assembled in their quadrants, cluster them together based on their affinity with other ideas. These clusters are then used to facilitate group conversations and move things forward. 

SWOT analysis   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   #meeting facilitation   The SWOT Analysis is a long-standing technique of looking at what we have, with respect to the desired end state, as well as what we could improve on. It gives us an opportunity to gauge approaching opportunities and dangers, and assess the seriousness of the conditions that affect our future. When we understand those conditions, we can influence what comes next.

Agreement-Certainty Matrix

Not every problem-solving approach is right for every challenge, and deciding on the right method for the challenge at hand is a key part of being an effective team.

The Agreement Certainty matrix helps teams align on the nature of the challenges facing them. By sorting problems from simple to chaotic, your team can understand what methods are suitable for each problem and what they can do to ensure effective results. 

If you are already using Liberating Structures techniques as part of your problem-solving strategy, the Agreement-Certainty Matrix can be an invaluable addition to your process. We’ve found it particularly if you are having issues with recurring problems in your organization and want to go deeper in understanding the root cause. 

Agreement-Certainty Matrix   #issue analysis   #liberating structures   #problem solving   You can help individuals or groups avoid the frequent mistake of trying to solve a problem with methods that are not adapted to the nature of their challenge. The combination of two questions makes it possible to easily sort challenges into four categories: simple, complicated, complex , and chaotic .  A problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy to duplicate.  It is complicated when experts are required to devise a sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably.  A problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but outcomes are not predictable in detail.  Chaotic is when the context is too turbulent to identify a path forward.  A loose analogy may be used to describe these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.”  The Liberating Structures Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.

Organizing and charting a team’s progress can be important in ensuring its success. SQUID (Sequential Question and Insight Diagram) is a great model that allows a team to effectively switch between giving questions and answers and develop the skills they need to stay on track throughout the process. 

Begin with two different colored sticky notes – one for questions and one for answers – and with your central topic (the head of the squid) on the board. Ask the group to first come up with a series of questions connected to their best guess of how to approach the topic. Ask the group to come up with answers to those questions, fix them to the board and connect them with a line. After some discussion, go back to question mode by responding to the generated answers or other points on the board.

It’s rewarding to see a diagram grow throughout the exercise, and a completed SQUID can provide a visual resource for future effort and as an example for other teams.

SQUID   #gamestorming   #project planning   #issue analysis   #problem solving   When exploring an information space, it’s important for a group to know where they are at any given time. By using SQUID, a group charts out the territory as they go and can navigate accordingly. SQUID stands for Sequential Question and Insight Diagram.

To continue with our nautical theme, Speed Boat is a short and sweet activity that can help a team quickly identify what employees, clients or service users might have a problem with and analyze what might be standing in the way of achieving a solution.

Methods that allow for a group to make observations, have insights and obtain those eureka moments quickly are invaluable when trying to solve complex problems.

In Speed Boat, the approach is to first consider what anchors and challenges might be holding an organization (or boat) back. Bonus points if you are able to identify any sharks in the water and develop ideas that can also deal with competitors!   

Speed Boat   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Speedboat is a short and sweet way to identify what your employees or clients don’t like about your product/service or what’s standing in the way of a desired goal.

The Journalistic Six

Some of the most effective ways of solving problems is by encouraging teams to be more inclusive and diverse in their thinking.

Based on the six key questions journalism students are taught to answer in articles and news stories, The Journalistic Six helps create teams to see the whole picture. By using who, what, when, where, why, and how to facilitate the conversation and encourage creative thinking, your team can make sure that the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the are covered exhaustively and thoughtfully. Reporter’s notebook and dictaphone optional.

The Journalistic Six – Who What When Where Why How   #idea generation   #issue analysis   #problem solving   #online   #creative thinking   #remote-friendly   A questioning method for generating, explaining, investigating ideas.

Individual and group perspectives are incredibly important, but what happens if people are set in their minds and need a change of perspective in order to approach a problem more effectively?

Flip It is a method we love because it is both simple to understand and run, and allows groups to understand how their perspectives and biases are formed. 

Participants in Flip It are first invited to consider concerns, issues, or problems from a perspective of fear and write them on a flip chart. Then, the group is asked to consider those same issues from a perspective of hope and flip their understanding.  

No problem and solution is free from existing bias and by changing perspectives with Flip It, you can then develop a problem solving model quickly and effectively.

Flip It!   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Often, a change in a problem or situation comes simply from a change in our perspectives. Flip It! is a quick game designed to show players that perspectives are made, not born.

LEGO Challenge

Now for an activity that is a little out of the (toy) box. LEGO Serious Play is a facilitation methodology that can be used to improve creative thinking and problem-solving skills. 

The LEGO Challenge includes giving each member of the team an assignment that is hidden from the rest of the group while they create a structure without speaking.

What the LEGO challenge brings to the table is a fun working example of working with stakeholders who might not be on the same page to solve problems. Also, it’s LEGO! Who doesn’t love LEGO! 

LEGO Challenge   #hyperisland   #team   A team-building activity in which groups must work together to build a structure out of LEGO, but each individual has a secret “assignment” which makes the collaborative process more challenging. It emphasizes group communication, leadership dynamics, conflict, cooperation, patience and problem solving strategy.

What, So What, Now What?

If not carefully managed, the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the problem-solving process can actually create more problems and misunderstandings.

The What, So What, Now What? problem-solving activity is designed to help collect insights and move forward while also eliminating the possibility of disagreement when it comes to identifying, clarifying, and analyzing organizational or work problems. 

Facilitation is all about bringing groups together so that might work on a shared goal and the best problem-solving strategies ensure that teams are aligned in purpose, if not initially in opinion or insight.

Throughout the three steps of this game, you give everyone on a team to reflect on a problem by asking what happened, why it is important, and what actions should then be taken. 

This can be a great activity for bringing our individual perceptions about a problem or challenge and contextualizing it in a larger group setting. This is one of the most important problem-solving skills you can bring to your organization.

W³ – What, So What, Now What?   #issue analysis   #innovation   #liberating structures   You can help groups reflect on a shared experience in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction. Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what actions logically follow with Now What . The shared progression eliminates most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what to do. Voila!

Journalists  

Problem analysis can be one of the most important and decisive stages of all problem-solving tools. Sometimes, a team can become bogged down in the details and are unable to move forward.

Journalists is an activity that can avoid a group from getting stuck in the problem identification or problem analysis stages of the process.

In Journalists, the group is invited to draft the front page of a fictional newspaper and figure out what stories deserve to be on the cover and what headlines those stories will have. By reframing how your problems and challenges are approached, you can help a team move productively through the process and be better prepared for the steps to follow.

Journalists   #vision   #big picture   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   This is an exercise to use when the group gets stuck in details and struggles to see the big picture. Also good for defining a vision.

Problem-solving techniques for brainstorming solutions

Now you have the context and background of the problem you are trying to solving, now comes the time to start ideating and thinking about how you’ll solve the issue.

Here, you’ll want to encourage creative, free thinking and speed. Get as many ideas out as possible and explore different perspectives so you have the raw material for the next step.

Looking at a problem from a new angle can be one of the most effective ways of creating an effective solution. TRIZ is a problem-solving tool that asks the group to consider what they must not do in order to solve a challenge.

By reversing the discussion, new topics and taboo subjects often emerge, allowing the group to think more deeply and create ideas that confront the status quo in a safe and meaningful way. If you’re working on a problem that you’ve tried to solve before, TRIZ is a great problem-solving method to help your team get unblocked.

Making Space with TRIZ   #issue analysis   #liberating structures   #issue resolution   You can clear space for innovation by helping a group let go of what it knows (but rarely admits) limits its success and by inviting creative destruction. TRIZ makes it possible to challenge sacred cows safely and encourages heretical thinking. The question “What must we stop doing to make progress on our deepest purpose?” induces seriously fun yet very courageous conversations. Since laughter often erupts, issues that are otherwise taboo get a chance to be aired and confronted. With creative destruction come opportunities for renewal as local action and innovation rush in to fill the vacuum. Whoosh!

Mindspin  

Brainstorming is part of the bread and butter of the problem-solving process and all problem-solving strategies benefit from getting ideas out and challenging a team to generate solutions quickly. 

With Mindspin, participants are encouraged not only to generate ideas but to do so under time constraints and by slamming down cards and passing them on. By doing multiple rounds, your team can begin with a free generation of possible solutions before moving on to developing those solutions and encouraging further ideation. 

This is one of our favorite problem-solving activities and can be great for keeping the energy up throughout the workshop. Remember the importance of helping people become engaged in the process – energizing problem-solving techniques like Mindspin can help ensure your team stays engaged and happy, even when the problems they’re coming together to solve are complex. 

MindSpin   #teampedia   #idea generation   #problem solving   #action   A fast and loud method to enhance brainstorming within a team. Since this activity has more than round ideas that are repetitive can be ruled out leaving more creative and innovative answers to the challenge.

The Creativity Dice

One of the most useful problem solving skills you can teach your team is of approaching challenges with creativity, flexibility, and openness. Games like The Creativity Dice allow teams to overcome the potential hurdle of too much linear thinking and approach the process with a sense of fun and speed. 

In The Creativity Dice, participants are organized around a topic and roll a dice to determine what they will work on for a period of 3 minutes at a time. They might roll a 3 and work on investigating factual information on the chosen topic. They might roll a 1 and work on identifying the specific goals, standards, or criteria for the session.

Encouraging rapid work and iteration while asking participants to be flexible are great skills to cultivate. Having a stage for idea incubation in this game is also important. Moments of pause can help ensure the ideas that are put forward are the most suitable. 

The Creativity Dice   #creativity   #problem solving   #thiagi   #issue analysis   Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.

Idea and Concept Development

Brainstorming without structure can quickly become chaotic or frustrating. In a problem-solving context, having an ideation framework to follow can help ensure your team is both creative and disciplined.

In this method, you’ll find an idea generation process that encourages your group to brainstorm effectively before developing their ideas and begin clustering them together. By using concepts such as Yes and…, more is more and postponing judgement, you can create the ideal conditions for brainstorming with ease.

Idea & Concept Development   #hyperisland   #innovation   #idea generation   Ideation and Concept Development is a process for groups to work creatively and collaboratively to generate creative ideas. It’s a general approach that can be adapted and customized to suit many different scenarios. It includes basic principles for idea generation and several steps for groups to work with. It also includes steps for idea selection and development.

Problem-solving techniques for developing and refining solutions 

The success of any problem-solving process can be measured by the solutions it produces. After you’ve defined the issue, explored existing ideas, and ideated, it’s time to develop and refine your ideas in order to bring them closer to a solution that actually solves the problem.

Use these problem-solving techniques when you want to help your team think through their ideas and refine them as part of your problem solving process.

Improved Solutions

After a team has successfully identified a problem and come up with a few solutions, it can be tempting to call the work of the problem-solving process complete. That said, the first solution is not necessarily the best, and by including a further review and reflection activity into your problem-solving model, you can ensure your group reaches the best possible result. 

One of a number of problem-solving games from Thiagi Group, Improved Solutions helps you go the extra mile and develop suggested solutions with close consideration and peer review. By supporting the discussion of several problems at once and by shifting team roles throughout, this problem-solving technique is a dynamic way of finding the best solution. 

Improved Solutions   #creativity   #thiagi   #problem solving   #action   #team   You can improve any solution by objectively reviewing its strengths and weaknesses and making suitable adjustments. In this creativity framegame, you improve the solutions to several problems. To maintain objective detachment, you deal with a different problem during each of six rounds and assume different roles (problem owner, consultant, basher, booster, enhancer, and evaluator) during each round. At the conclusion of the activity, each player ends up with two solutions to her problem.

Four Step Sketch

Creative thinking and visual ideation does not need to be confined to the opening stages of your problem-solving strategies. Exercises that include sketching and prototyping on paper can be effective at the solution finding and development stage of the process, and can be great for keeping a team engaged. 

By going from simple notes to a crazy 8s round that involves rapidly sketching 8 variations on their ideas before then producing a final solution sketch, the group is able to iterate quickly and visually. Problem-solving techniques like Four-Step Sketch are great if you have a group of different thinkers and want to change things up from a more textual or discussion-based approach.

Four-Step Sketch   #design sprint   #innovation   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   The four-step sketch is an exercise that helps people to create well-formed concepts through a structured process that includes: Review key information Start design work on paper,  Consider multiple variations , Create a detailed solution . This exercise is preceded by a set of other activities allowing the group to clarify the challenge they want to solve. See how the Four Step Sketch exercise fits into a Design Sprint

Ensuring that everyone in a group is able to contribute to a discussion is vital during any problem solving process. Not only does this ensure all bases are covered, but its then easier to get buy-in and accountability when people have been able to contribute to the process.

1-2-4-All is a tried and tested facilitation technique where participants are asked to first brainstorm on a topic on their own. Next, they discuss and share ideas in a pair before moving into a small group. Those groups are then asked to present the best idea from their discussion to the rest of the team.

This method can be used in many different contexts effectively, though I find it particularly shines in the idea development stage of the process. Giving each participant time to concretize their ideas and develop them in progressively larger groups can create a great space for both innovation and psychological safety.

1-2-4-All   #idea generation   #liberating structures   #issue analysis   With this facilitation technique you can immediately include everyone regardless of how large the group is. You can generate better ideas and more of them faster than ever before. You can tap the know-how and imagination that is distributed widely in places not known in advance. Open, generative conversation unfolds. Ideas and solutions are sifted in rapid fashion. Most importantly, participants own the ideas, so follow-up and implementation is simplified. No buy-in strategies needed! Simple and elegant!

15% Solutions

Some problems are simpler than others and with the right problem-solving activities, you can empower people to take immediate actions that can help create organizational change. 

Part of the liberating structures toolkit, 15% solutions is a problem-solving technique that focuses on finding and implementing solutions quickly. A process of iterating and making small changes quickly can help generate momentum and an appetite for solving complex problems.

Problem-solving strategies can live and die on whether people are onboard. Getting some quick wins is a great way of getting people behind the process.   

It can be extremely empowering for a team to realize that problem-solving techniques can be deployed quickly and easily and delineate between things they can positively impact and those things they cannot change. 

15% Solutions   #action   #liberating structures   #remote-friendly   You can reveal the actions, however small, that everyone can do immediately. At a minimum, these will create momentum, and that may make a BIG difference.  15% Solutions show that there is no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their discretion instead of what they cannot change.  With a very simple question, you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance. Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole landscape.

Problem-solving techniques for making decisions and planning

After your group is happy with the possible solutions you’ve developed, now comes the time to choose which to implement. There’s more than one way to make a decision and the best option is often dependant on the needs and set-up of your group.

Sometimes, it’s the case that you’ll want to vote as a group on what is likely to be the most impactful solution. Other times, it might be down to a decision maker or major stakeholder to make the final decision. Whatever your process, here’s some techniques you can use to help you make a decision during your problem solving process.

How-Now-Wow Matrix

The problem-solving process is often creative, as complex problems usually require a change of thinking and creative response in order to find the best solutions. While it’s common for the first stages to encourage creative thinking, groups can often gravitate to familiar solutions when it comes to the end of the process. 

When selecting solutions, you don’t want to lose your creative energy! The How-Now-Wow Matrix from Gamestorming is a great problem-solving activity that enables a group to stay creative and think out of the box when it comes to selecting the right solution for a given problem.

Problem-solving techniques that encourage creative thinking and the ideation and selection of new solutions can be the most effective in organisational change. Give the How-Now-Wow Matrix a go, and not just for how pleasant it is to say out loud. 

How-Now-Wow Matrix   #gamestorming   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   When people want to develop new ideas, they most often think out of the box in the brainstorming or divergent phase. However, when it comes to convergence, people often end up picking ideas that are most familiar to them. This is called a ‘creative paradox’ or a ‘creadox’. The How-Now-Wow matrix is an idea selection tool that breaks the creadox by forcing people to weigh each idea on 2 parameters.

Impact and Effort Matrix

All problem-solving techniques hope to not only find solutions to a given problem or challenge but to find the best solution. When it comes to finding a solution, groups are invited to put on their decision-making hats and really think about how a proposed idea would work in practice. 

The Impact and Effort Matrix is one of the problem-solving techniques that fall into this camp, empowering participants to first generate ideas and then categorize them into a 2×2 matrix based on impact and effort.

Activities that invite critical thinking while remaining simple are invaluable. Use the Impact and Effort Matrix to move from ideation and towards evaluating potential solutions before then committing to them. 

Impact and Effort Matrix   #gamestorming   #decision making   #action   #remote-friendly   In this decision-making exercise, possible actions are mapped based on two factors: effort required to implement and potential impact. Categorizing ideas along these lines is a useful technique in decision making, as it obliges contributors to balance and evaluate suggested actions before committing to them.

If you’ve followed each of the problem-solving steps with your group successfully, you should move towards the end of your process with heaps of possible solutions developed with a specific problem in mind. But how do you help a group go from ideation to putting a solution into action? 

Dotmocracy – or Dot Voting -is a tried and tested method of helping a team in the problem-solving process make decisions and put actions in place with a degree of oversight and consensus. 

One of the problem-solving techniques that should be in every facilitator’s toolbox, Dot Voting is fast and effective and can help identify the most popular and best solutions and help bring a group to a decision effectively. 

Dotmocracy   #action   #decision making   #group prioritization   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Dotmocracy is a simple method for group prioritization or decision-making. It is not an activity on its own, but a method to use in processes where prioritization or decision-making is the aim. The method supports a group to quickly see which options are most popular or relevant. The options or ideas are written on post-its and stuck up on a wall for the whole group to see. Each person votes for the options they think are the strongest, and that information is used to inform a decision.

Straddling the gap between decision making and planning, MoSCoW is a simple and effective method that allows a group team to easily prioritize a set of possible options.

Use this method in a problem solving process by collecting and summarizing all your possible solutions and then categorize them into 4 sections: “Must have”, “Should have”, “Could have”, or “Would like but won‘t get”.

This method is particularly useful when its less about choosing one possible solution and more about prioritorizing which to do first and which may not fit in the scope of your project. In my experience, complex challenges often require multiple small fixes, and this method can be a great way to move from a pile of things you’d all like to do to a structured plan.

MoSCoW   #define intentions   #create   #design   #action   #remote-friendly   MoSCoW is a method that allows the team to prioritize the different features that they will work on. Features are then categorized into “Must have”, “Should have”, “Could have”, or “Would like but won‘t get”. To be used at the beginning of a timeslot (for example during Sprint planning) and when planning is needed.

When it comes to managing the rollout of a solution, clarity and accountability are key factors in ensuring the success of the project. The RAACI chart is a simple but effective model for setting roles and responsibilities as part of a planning session.

Start by listing each person involved in the project and put them into the following groups in order to make it clear who is responsible for what during the rollout of your solution.

• Responsibility  (Which person and/or team will be taking action?)
• Authority  (At what “point” must the responsible person check in before going further?)
• Accountability  (Who must the responsible person check in with?)
• Consultation  (Who must be consulted by the responsible person before decisions are made?)
• Information  (Who must be informed of decisions, once made?)

Ensure this information is easily accessible and use it to inform who does what and who is looped into discussions and kept up to date.

RAACI   #roles and responsibility   #teamwork   #project management   Clarifying roles and responsibilities, levels of autonomy/latitude in decision making, and levels of engagement among diverse stakeholders.

Problem-solving warm-up activities

All facilitators know that warm-ups and icebreakers are useful for any workshop or group process. Problem-solving workshops are no different.

Use these problem-solving techniques to warm up a group and prepare them for the rest of the process. Activating your group by tapping into some of the top problem-solving skills can be one of the best ways to see great outcomes from your session.

Check-in / Check-out

Solid processes are planned from beginning to end, and the best facilitators know that setting the tone and establishing a safe, open environment can be integral to a successful problem-solving process. Check-in / Check-out is a great way to begin and/or bookend a problem-solving workshop. Checking in to a session emphasizes that everyone will be seen, heard, and expected to contribute. 

If you are running a series of meetings, setting a consistent pattern of checking in and checking out can really help your team get into a groove. We recommend this opening-closing activity for small to medium-sized groups though it can work with large groups if they’re disciplined!

Check-in / Check-out   #team   #opening   #closing   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Either checking-in or checking-out is a simple way for a team to open or close a process, symbolically and in a collaborative way. Checking-in/out invites each member in a group to be present, seen and heard, and to express a reflection or a feeling. Checking-in emphasizes presence, focus and group commitment; checking-out emphasizes reflection and symbolic closure.

Doodling Together  

Thinking creatively and not being afraid to make suggestions are important problem-solving skills for any group or team, and warming up by encouraging these behaviors is a great way to start. 

Doodling Together is one of our favorite creative ice breaker games – it’s quick, effective, and fun and can make all following problem-solving steps easier by encouraging a group to collaborate visually. By passing cards and adding additional items as they go, the workshop group gets into a groove of co-creation and idea development that is crucial to finding solutions to problems. 

Doodling Together   #collaboration   #creativity   #teamwork   #fun   #team   #visual methods   #energiser   #icebreaker   #remote-friendly   Create wild, weird and often funny postcards together & establish a group’s creative confidence.

Show and Tell

You might remember some version of Show and Tell from being a kid in school and it’s a great problem-solving activity to kick off a session.

Asking participants to prepare a little something before a workshop by bringing an object for show and tell can help them warm up before the session has even begun! Games that include a physical object can also help encourage early engagement before moving onto more big-picture thinking.

By asking your participants to tell stories about why they chose to bring a particular item to the group, you can help teams see things from new perspectives and see both differences and similarities in the way they approach a topic. Great groundwork for approaching a problem-solving process as a team! 

Show and Tell   #gamestorming   #action   #opening   #meeting facilitation   Show and Tell taps into the power of metaphors to reveal players’ underlying assumptions and associations around a topic The aim of the game is to get a deeper understanding of stakeholders’ perspectives on anything—a new project, an organizational restructuring, a shift in the company’s vision or team dynamic.

Constellations

Who doesn’t love stars? Constellations is a great warm-up activity for any workshop as it gets people up off their feet, energized, and ready to engage in new ways with established topics. It’s also great for showing existing beliefs, biases, and patterns that can come into play as part of your session.

Using warm-up games that help build trust and connection while also allowing for non-verbal responses can be great for easing people into the problem-solving process and encouraging engagement from everyone in the group. Constellations is great in large spaces that allow for movement and is definitely a practical exercise to allow the group to see patterns that are otherwise invisible. 

Constellations   #trust   #connection   #opening   #coaching   #patterns   #system   Individuals express their response to a statement or idea by standing closer or further from a central object. Used with teams to reveal system, hidden patterns, perspectives.

Draw a Tree

Problem-solving games that help raise group awareness through a central, unifying metaphor can be effective ways to warm-up a group in any problem-solving model.

Draw a Tree is a simple warm-up activity you can use in any group and which can provide a quick jolt of energy. Start by asking your participants to draw a tree in just 45 seconds – they can choose whether it will be abstract or realistic. 

Once the timer is up, ask the group how many people included the roots of the tree and use this as a means to discuss how we can ignore important parts of any system simply because they are not visible.

All problem-solving strategies are made more effective by thinking of problems critically and by exposing things that may not normally come to light. Warm-up games like Draw a Tree are great in that they quickly demonstrate some key problem-solving skills in an accessible and effective way.

Draw a Tree   #thiagi   #opening   #perspectives   #remote-friendly   With this game you can raise awarness about being more mindful, and aware of the environment we live in.

Closing activities for a problem-solving process

Each step of the problem-solving workshop benefits from an intelligent deployment of activities, games, and techniques. Bringing your session to an effective close helps ensure that solutions are followed through on and that you also celebrate what has been achieved.

Here are some problem-solving activities you can use to effectively close a workshop or meeting and ensure the great work you’ve done can continue afterward.

One Breath Feedback

Maintaining attention and focus during the closing stages of a problem-solving workshop can be tricky and so being concise when giving feedback can be important. It’s easy to incur “death by feedback” should some team members go on for too long sharing their perspectives in a quick feedback round. 

One Breath Feedback is a great closing activity for workshops. You give everyone an opportunity to provide feedback on what they’ve done but only in the space of a single breath. This keeps feedback short and to the point and means that everyone is encouraged to provide the most important piece of feedback to them. 

One breath feedback   #closing   #feedback   #action   This is a feedback round in just one breath that excels in maintaining attention: each participants is able to speak during just one breath … for most people that’s around 20 to 25 seconds … unless of course you’ve been a deep sea diver in which case you’ll be able to do it for longer.

Who What When Matrix 

Matrices feature as part of many effective problem-solving strategies and with good reason. They are easily recognizable, simple to use, and generate results.

The Who What When Matrix is a great tool to use when closing your problem-solving session by attributing a who, what and when to the actions and solutions you have decided upon. The resulting matrix is a simple, easy-to-follow way of ensuring your team can move forward. 

Great solutions can’t be enacted without action and ownership. Your problem-solving process should include a stage for allocating tasks to individuals or teams and creating a realistic timeframe for those solutions to be implemented or checked out. Use this method to keep the solution implementation process clear and simple for all involved. 

Who/What/When Matrix   #gamestorming   #action   #project planning   With Who/What/When matrix, you can connect people with clear actions they have defined and have committed to.

Response cards

Group discussion can comprise the bulk of most problem-solving activities and by the end of the process, you might find that your team is talked out! 

Providing a means for your team to give feedback with short written notes can ensure everyone is head and can contribute without the need to stand up and talk. Depending on the needs of the group, giving an alternative can help ensure everyone can contribute to your problem-solving model in the way that makes the most sense for them.

Response Cards is a great way to close a workshop if you are looking for a gentle warm-down and want to get some swift discussion around some of the feedback that is raised. 

Response Cards   #debriefing   #closing   #structured sharing   #questions and answers   #thiagi   #action   It can be hard to involve everyone during a closing of a session. Some might stay in the background or get unheard because of louder participants. However, with the use of Response Cards, everyone will be involved in providing feedback or clarify questions at the end of a session.

Tips for effective problem solving

Problem-solving activities are only one part of the puzzle. While a great method can help unlock your team’s ability to solve problems, without a thoughtful approach and strong facilitation the solutions may not be fit for purpose.

Let’s take a look at some problem-solving tips you can apply to any process to help it be a success!

Clearly define the problem

Jumping straight to solutions can be tempting, though without first clearly articulating a problem, the solution might not be the right one. Many of the problem-solving activities below include sections where the problem is explored and clearly defined before moving on.

This is a vital part of the problem-solving process and taking the time to fully define an issue can save time and effort later. A clear definition helps identify irrelevant information and it also ensures that your team sets off on the right track.

Don’t jump to conclusions

It’s easy for groups to exhibit cognitive bias or have preconceived ideas about both problems and potential solutions. Be sure to back up any problem statements or potential solutions with facts, research, and adequate forethought.

The best techniques ask participants to be methodical and challenge preconceived notions. Make sure you give the group enough time and space to collect relevant information and consider the problem in a new way. By approaching the process with a clear, rational mindset, you’ll often find that better solutions are more forthcoming.  

Try different approaches  

Problems come in all shapes and sizes and so too should the methods you use to solve them. If you find that one approach isn’t yielding results and your team isn’t finding different solutions, try mixing it up. You’ll be surprised at how using a new creative activity can unblock your team and generate great solutions.

Don’t take it personally 

Depending on the nature of your team or organizational problems, it’s easy for conversations to get heated. While it’s good for participants to be engaged in the discussions, ensure that emotions don’t run too high and that blame isn’t thrown around while finding solutions.

You’re all in it together, and even if your team or area is seeing problems, that isn’t necessarily a disparagement of you personally. Using facilitation skills to manage group dynamics is one effective method of helping conversations be more constructive.

Get the right people in the room

Your problem-solving method is often only as effective as the group using it. Getting the right people on the job and managing the number of people present is important too!

If the group is too small, you may not get enough different perspectives to effectively solve a problem. If the group is too large, you can go round and round during the ideation stages.

Creating the right group makeup is also important in ensuring you have the necessary expertise and skillset to both identify and follow up on potential solutions. Carefully consider who to include at each stage to help ensure your problem-solving method is followed and positioned for success.

Create psychologically safe spaces for discussion

Identifying a problem accurately also requires that all members of a group are able to contribute their views in an open and safe manner.

It can be tough for people to stand up and contribute if the problems or challenges are emotive or personal in nature. Try and create a psychologically safe space for these kinds of discussions and where possible, create regular opportunities for challenges to be brought up organically.

Document everything

The best solutions can take refinement, iteration, and reflection to come out. Get into a habit of documenting your process in order to keep all the learnings from the session and to allow ideas to mature and develop. Many of the methods below involve the creation of documents or shared resources. Be sure to keep and share these so everyone can benefit from the work done!

Bring a facilitator 

Facilitation is all about making group processes easier. With a subject as potentially emotive and important as problem-solving, having an impartial third party in the form of a facilitator can make all the difference in finding great solutions and keeping the process moving. Consider bringing a facilitator to your problem-solving session to get better results and generate meaningful solutions!

Develop your problem-solving skills

It takes time and practice to be an effective problem solver. While some roles or participants might more naturally gravitate towards problem-solving, it can take development and planning to help everyone create better solutions.

You might develop a training program, run a problem-solving workshop or simply ask your team to practice using the techniques below. Check out our post on problem-solving skills to see how you and your group can develop the right mental process and be more resilient to issues too!

Design a great agenda

Workshops are a great format for solving problems. With the right approach, you can focus a group and help them find the solutions to their own problems. But designing a process can be time-consuming and finding the right activities can be difficult.

Check out our workshop planning guide to level-up your agenda design and start running more effective workshops. Need inspiration? Check out templates designed by expert facilitators to help you kickstart your process!

Save time and effort creating an effective problem solving process

A structured problem solving process is a surefire way of solving tough problems, discovering creative solutions and driving organizational change. But how can you design for successful outcomes?

With SessionLab, it’s easy to design engaging workshops that deliver results. Drag, drop and reorder blocks  to build your agenda. When you make changes or update your agenda, your session  timing   adjusts automatically , saving you time on manual adjustments.

Collaborating with stakeholders or clients? Share your agenda with a single click and collaborate in real-time. No more sending documents back and forth over email.

Explore  how to use SessionLab  to design effective problem solving workshops or  watch this five minute video  to see the planner in action!

Over to you

The problem-solving process can often be as complicated and multifaceted as the problems they are set-up to solve. With the right problem-solving techniques and a mix of exercises designed to guide discussion and generate purposeful ideas, we hope we’ve given you the tools to find the best solutions as simply and easily as possible.

Is there a problem-solving technique that you are missing here? Do you have a favorite activity or method you use when facilitating? Let us know in the comments below, we’d love to hear from you! 

James Smart is Head of Content at SessionLab. He’s also a creative facilitator who has run workshops and designed courses for establishments like the National Centre for Writing, UK. He especially enjoys working with young people and empowering others in their creative practice.

thank you very much for these excellent techniques

Certainly wonderful article, very detailed. Shared!

Your list of techniques for problem solving can be helpfully extended by adding TRIZ to the list of techniques. TRIZ has 40 problem solving techniques derived from methods inventros and patent holders used to get new patents. About 10-12 are general approaches. many organization sponsor classes in TRIZ that are used to solve business problems or general organiztational problems. You can take a look at TRIZ and dwonload a free internet booklet to see if you feel it shound be included per your selection process.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Going from a mere idea to a workshop that delivers results for your clients can feel like a daunting task. In this piece, we will shine a light on all the work behind the scenes and help you learn how to plan a workshop from start to finish. On a good day, facilitation can feel like effortless magic, but that is mostly the result of backstage work, foresight, and a lot of careful planning. Read on to learn a step-by-step approach to breaking the process of planning a workshop into small, manageable chunks.  The flow starts with the first meeting with a client to define the purposes of a workshop.…

Effective online tools are a necessity for smooth and engaging virtual workshops and meetings. But how do you choose the right ones? Do you sometimes feel that the good old pen and paper or MS Office toolkit and email leaves you struggling to stay on top of managing and delivering your workshop? Fortunately, there are plenty of great workshop tools to make your life easier when you need to facilitate a meeting and lead workshops. In this post, we’ll share our favorite online tools you can use to make your life easier and run better workshops and meetings. In fact, there are plenty of free online workshop tools and meeting…

How does learning work? A clever 9-year-old once told me: “I know I am learning something new when I am surprised.” The science of adult learning tells us that, in order to learn new skills (which, unsurprisingly, is harder for adults to do than kids) grown-ups need to first get into a specific headspace.  In a business, this approach is often employed in a training session where employees learn new skills or work on professional development. But how do you ensure your training is effective? In this guide, we'll explore how to create an effective training session plan and run engaging training sessions. As team leader, project manager, or consultant,…

Design your next workshop with SessionLab

Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab

Sign up for free

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

• Business & Money
• Biography & History

Sorry, there was a problem.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the authors

The McKinsey Mind: Understanding and Implementing the Problem-Solving Tools and Management Techniques of the World's Top Strategic Consulting Firm Hardcover – October 17, 2001

The groundbreaking follow-up to the international bestseller­­a hands-on guide to putting McKinsey techniques to work in your organization

McKinsey & Company is the most respected and most secretive consulting firm in the world, and business readers just can't seem to get enough of all things McKinsey. Now, hot on the heels of his acclaimed international bestseller The McKinsey Way , Ethan Rasiel brings readers a powerful new guide to putting McKinsey concepts and skills into action­­ The McKinsey Mind . While the first book used case studies and anecdotes from former and current McKinseyites to describe how "the firm" solves the thorniest business problems of their A-list clients, The McKinsey Mind goes a giant step further. It explains, step-by-step, how to use McKinsey tools, techniques and strategies to solve an array of core business problems and to make any business venture more successful.

Designed to work as a stand-alone guide or together with The McKinsey Way , The McKinsey Mind follows the same critically acclaimed style and format as its predecessor. In this book authors Rasiel and Friga expand upon the lessons found in The McKinsey Way with real-world examples, parables, and easy-to-do exercises designed to get readers up and running.

• Print length 272 pages
• Language English
• Publisher McGraw Hill
• Publication date October 17, 2001
• Dimensions 6.3 x 1.1 x 9.3 inches
• ISBN-10 0071374299
• ISBN-13 978-0071374293
• See all details

Editorial Reviews

From the back cover.

The First Step-by-Step Manual for Achieving McKinsey-Style Solutions--and Success

International bestseller The McKinsey Way provided a through-the-keyhole look at McKinsey & Co., history's most prestigious consulting firm. Now, the follow-up implementation manual, The McKinsey Mind , reveals the hands-on secrets behind the powerhouse firm's success--and discusses how executives from any field or industry can use those tactics to be more proactive and successful in their day-to-day decision-making.

Structured around interviews and frontline anecdotes from former McKinsey consultants--as well as the authors, themselves McKinsey alumni-- The McKinsey Mind explores how McKinsey tools and techniques can be applied to virtually any business problem in any setting. Immensely valuable in today's crisis-a-minute workplace, it discusses:

• Techniques for framing problems and designing analyses
• Methods for interpreting results and presenting solutions

The ability to think in a rigorous, structured manner--a McKinsey manner--is not a birthright. It can, however, be a learned behavior. Let The McKinsey Mind show you how to approach and solve problems with the skill of a McKinsey consultant and obtain the positive results that have been delivered to McKinsey clients for over a century.

McKinsey & Co. is renowned throughout the world for its ability to arrive at sharp, insightful analyses of its clients' situations then provide solutions that are as ingenious as they are effective. McKinsey succeeds almost as well as shielding its revolutionary methods from competitors' scrutiny.

Now, The McKinsey Mind pulls back the curtain to reveal the ways in which McKinsey consultants consistently deliver their magic and how those methods can be used to achieve exceptional results in companies from 10 employees to 10,000. Packed with insights and brainstorming exercises for establishing the McKinsey mind-set, this book is an in-depth guidebook for applying McKinsey methods in any industry and organizational environment.

Taking a step-by-step approach, The McKinsey Mind looks at the McKinsey mystique from every angle. Owners, executives, consultants, and team leaders can look to this comprehensive treatment for ways to:

• Follow McKinsey's MECE (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive) line of attack
• Frame business problems to make them susceptible to rigorous fact-based analysis
• Use the same fact-based analysis--in conjunction with gut instinct--to make strategic decisions
• Conduct meaningful interviews and effectively summarize the content of those interviews
• Analyze the data to find out the "so what"
• Clearly communicate fact-based solutions to all pertinent decision makers

Because organizational problems rarely exist in a vacuum, The McKinsey Mind discusses these approaches and more to help you arrive at usable and sensible solutions. It goes straight to the source--former McKinsey consultants now in leadership positions in organizations throughout the world--to give you today's only implementation-based, solution-driven look at the celebrated McKinsey problem-solving method.

" The McKinsey Mind provides a fascinating peek at the tools, practices, and philosophies that have helped this much-admired firm develop generations of bright young MBAs into trusted corporate advisors. But the book's practical, down-to-earth advice is not just for consultants. The disciplined way in which McKinsey consultants frame issues, analyze problems, and present solutions offers valuable lessons for any practicing or aspiring manager." --Christopher A. Bartlett, Daewoo Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School

"McKinsey and Co. rescues the biggest companies from disaster by addressing every problem with its own mixture of logic-driven, hypothesis-tested analysis. The McKinsey Mind helps everyone learn how to think with the same discipline and devotion to creating business success. According to the maxim, giving a man a fish may feed him for a day, but teaching him to fish will feed him for a lifetime. Paying McKinsey to solve your problem may help you for a day, but learning how they do it should help you for a lifetime." --Peter Wayner, Author of Free For All: How Linux and the Free Software Movement Undercut The High-Tech Titans

"The McKinsey Mind unlocks the techniques of the world's preeminent consulting firm and presents them in a format that is easy to understand and even easier to implement." --Dan Nagy, Associate Dean, The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University

About the Author

Ethan M. Rasiel was a consultant in McKinsey & Co.'s New York office. His clients included major companies in finance, telecommunications, computing, and consumer goods sectors. Prior to joining McKinsey, Rasiel, who earned an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, was an equity fund manager at Mercury Asset Management in London, as well as an investment banker.

Paul N. Friga worked for McKinsey & Co. in the Pittsburgh office after receiving his MBA from the Kenan-Flagler Business School at the University of North Carolina. He has conducted consulting projects relating to international expansion, acquisition and strategic planning, education, water, and other industries. He has also consulted for Price Waterhouse. He is currently pursuing his Ph.D. in Strategy at Kenan-Flagler and is Acting Director of the North Carolina Knowledge Management Center.

Product details

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ McGraw Hill; First Edition (October 17, 2001)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 272 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0071374299
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0071374293
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 2.31 pounds
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.3 x 1.1 x 9.3 inches
• #39 in Consulting
• #371 in Decision-Making & Problem Solving
• #1,113 in Business Management (Books)

Videos for this product

Click to play video

The Biggest Lesson from this Book

Omar M Khateeb

About the authors

Ethan m. rasiel.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more

Paul N. Friga

Customer reviews.

• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 5 star 56% 24% 15% 3% 3% 56%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 4 star 56% 24% 15% 3% 3% 24%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 3 star 56% 24% 15% 3% 3% 15%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 2 star 56% 24% 15% 3% 3% 3%
• 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 1 star 56% 24% 15% 3% 3% 3%

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

Customers say

Customers find the book's content very practical, easy to learn, and supportive illustrations. They also describe it as a great book with step-by-step instructions. Readers also appreciate the writing style as well-written, simple, and actionable.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

Customers find the book's content very practical for consultants, leaders, and managers. They also appreciate the good illustration of problem-solving tools and the complete guide for newbies in the consulting business. Readers also mention that the book is simple, actionable, and easy to follow.

"...not go into strategy consulting, but this book has helped me sharpen my consultative skills ." Read more

"...I believe it provides a pretty good overview of how business consultants (mostly strategy) approach problems analytically...." Read more

" Very useful " Read more

"...The good thing is these are essential field manuals , so you can read and use them over and over in your practice to become a real professional and..." Read more

Customers find the book useful.

" Awesome book !Must have for anyone planning on working in either internal/external consulting or strategy in any company...." Read more

"This is a good business book ...." Read more

"It is a nice book , however, I enjoy reading Victor Cheng's blog and emails much better...." Read more

"It is a good book but there are no updated versions. Nevertheless, it is worth reading it." Read more

Customers find the writing style well written, simple, and actionable. They also appreciate the quality and detail of the product.

"A very well written book with an easy to follow flow and good illustration of problem-solving tools and how to use them within one's business or for..." Read more

"very happy with the product and the quality and detail of it . was also lucket to find it such a good price!! very happy and recommend it highly!!" Read more

"It's a quick, easy to read , yet complete guide for newbies in the consulting business.Great book!! I strongly recommend buying it." Read more

" Well written , simple, actionable...." Read more

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. please try again later..

Top reviews from other countries

• About Amazon
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell products on Amazon
• Sell on Amazon Business
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Become an Affiliate
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Make Money with Us
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Amazon and COVID-19
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices

• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

Issue Tree in Consulting: A Complete Guide (With Examples)

What’s the secret to nailing every case interview ? Is it learning the so-called frameworks? Nuh-uh.

Actually, that secret lies in an under-appreciated, yet extremely powerful problem-solving tool behind every real consulting project . It’s called the “issue tree”, also known as “logic tree” or “hypothesis tree” – and this article will teach you how to master it.

Table of Contents

What is an issue tree?

An issue tree is a pyramidal breakdown of one problem into multiple levels of subsets, called “branches”. It can be presented vertically (top-to-bottom), or horizontally (left-to-right). An issue tree systematically isolates the root causes and ensures impactful solutions to the given problem.

The issue tree is most well-known in management consulting , where consultants use it within the “hypothesis-driven problem-solving approach” - repeatedly hypothesizing the location of the root causes within each branch and testing that hypothesis with data. Once all branches are covered and root causes are found, impactful solutions can be delivered.

The issue tree is only part of the process used in case interviews or consulting projects. As such, it must be learned within the larger context of consulting problem-solving, with six concepts: problem, root cause, issue tree, hypothesis, data & solution , that strictly follow the MECE principle .

Every problem-solving process starts with a well-defined PROBLEM...

A problem is “well-defined” when it is attached with an objective. Let’s get straight to a business problem so you can get a good perspective on how it is done. So here’s one:

Harley-Davidson, a motorcycle company, is suffering from negative profit. Find out why and present a solution.

Now we’ve got our first piece of the tree:

 ...then tries to find its ROOT CAUSES…

To ensure any solution to the problem is long-lasting, consultants always look for the root cause.

Problems are often the last, visible part in a long chain of causes and consequences. Consultants must identify the very start of that chain – the root cause – and promptly deal with it to ensure that the problem is gone for good.

The diagram is a simple representation. Real problems can have multiple root causes. That’s where the issue tree comes to the rescue.

Since Harley has been reporting losses, it tried to decrease cost (in the simplest sense, profit = revenue - cost) by shutting down ineffective stores. As you may have imagined, it wasn’t very effective, so Harley set out to find the real source of the problem.

...by breaking it down into different BRANCHES of an issue tree

An issue tree ensures that all root causes are identified in a structured manner by breaking the problem down to different “branches”; each branch is in turn broken down into contributing sub-factors or sub-branches. This process is repeated through many levels until the root causes are isolated and identified.

For this problem, Harley deducted that losses must be due to decreasing revenue or increasing cost. Each branch is in turn segmented based on the possible reasons

For a branch to be included in the issue tree, there must be a possibility that it leads to the problem (otherwise, your problem-solving efforts will be wasted on the irrelevant).

To ensure that all possibilities are covered in the issue tree in a neatly organized fashion, consultants use a principle called “ MECE ”. We’ll get into MECE a bit later.

A HYPOTHESIS is made with each branch…

After we’ve developed a few branches for our issue tree, it’s time to hypothesize, or make an educated guess on which branch is the most likely to contain a root cause. 

Hypotheses must adhere to 3 criteria:

It must follow the issue tree – you cannot hypothesize on anything outside the tree 

It must be top-down – you must always start with the first level of the issue tree

It must be based on existing information – if your information suggests that the root cause is in branch A, you cannot hypothesize that the root cause comes from branch B

Once a hypothesis is confirmed as true (the root cause is inside that branch), move down the branch with a lower-level hypothesis; otherwise, eliminate that branch and move sideways to another one on the same level. 

Repeat this process until the whole issue tree is covered and all root causes are identified.

Harley hypothesized lower revenue is either due to losing its customers because they came to competitors or they weren’t buying anymore, or it couldn’t attract new buyers

But wait! A little reminder: When solving an issue tree, many make the mistake of skipping levels, ASSUMING that the hypothesis is true instead of CONFIRMING  it is. 

So, in our example, that means from negative profit, we go straight into “losing old customers” or “can’t attract new customers” before confirming that “decreasing revenue” is true. So if you come back and reconfirm “decreasing revenue” is wrong, your case is completely off, and that’s not something consultants will appreciate, right?

Another common mistake is hopping between sub-branches before confirming or rejecting one branch , so that means you just jump around “losing old customers” and “can’t attract new customers” repeatedly, just to make haste of things. Take things very slowly, step-by-step. You have all the time in the world for your case interview.

But testing multiple sub-branches is possible, so long as they are all under the same branch and have the same assessment criteria.

So for our example, if you are assessing the sales of each motorcycle segment for Harley, you can test all of them at once.

The hypothesis is then tested with DATA... 

A hypothesis must always be tested with data.

Data usually yield more insights with benchmarks – reference points for comparison. The two most common benchmarks in consulting are historical (past figures from the same entity) and competitor (figures from similar entities, in the same timeframe).

Using “competitor benchmark” to test if competitors are drawing away customers, Harley found that its competitors are also reporting losses, so it must be from something else!

...to find an ACTIONABLE SOLUTION

After the analyzing process, it’s time to deliver actionable solutions. The solutions must attack all the root causes to ensure long-lasting impact – if even one root cause remains untouched, the problem will persist.

Remember to deliver your solutions in a structured fashion, by organizing them in neat and meaningful categories; most of the time, solutions are classified into short-term and long-term.

So Harley found that it is losing its traditional customer base - old people, as they were the most vulnerable groups in the pandemic, so they stopped buying motorcycles to save money for essentials, or simply didn’t survive. 

Harley also found that it can’t attract new, younger buyers, because of its “old-school” stigma, while also selling at premium price tags. So the short-term solution is setting more attractive prices to get more buyers; and the long-term solution is renewing itself to attract younger audiences.

Our case was a real problem for Harley-Davidson during the pandemic, whose sales plummeted because its target audience were either prioritizing essentials, or dead. So now, Harley has to change itself to attract younger people, or die with its former customer base. 

What Is MECE and How Is It Used in an Issue Tree?

A proper issue tree must be MECE, or “ Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive .” Mutually exclusive means there’s no overlap between the branches, and collectively exhaustive means all the branches cover every possibility. This is a standard all management consultants swear by, and together with the issue tree, a signature of the industry. 

To answer whether an issue tree is MECE or not, you need to know all the basic and “advanced” rules of the MECE principle, and we’ll talk about those here. If you want a more comprehensive guide on MECE, check out our dedicated article on MECE .

Basic rule #1: Mutually exclusive

Adherence to this rule ensures that there will be no duplicated efforts, leading to maximum efficiency in problem-solving. It also allows the consultant to isolate the root cause more easily; otherwise, one root cause may manifest in multiple branches, making it harder to pinpoint.

For example, an apparel distributor trying to find out the cause of its decreasing unit sales may use the cleanly-separated product segments: High-end, mid-range, and entry-level. A non-mutually exclusive segmentation here would be: high-end products and footwear.

Basic rule #2: Collectively exhaustive

A collectively exhaustive issue tree also covers only the relevant factors - if one factor is not related to the problem, it must not be included. 

If the aforementioned apparel distributor omits any of the product segments in its analysis, it may also ignore one or a few root causes, leading to ineffective problem-solving. But even if it produces runway-exclusive, not-for-sale pieces, those are not included in the issue tree because they don't contribute to unit sales.

Advanced rule #1: Parallel items

This rule requires that all items are on the same logical level.

High-end, mid-range, and entry-level are three parallel and MECE branches. But if we replace the first two with “high-and-mid-range”, the whole issue tree becomes non-parallel and non-MECE, because the new branch is one level higher than the remaining “entry-level” branch.

Advanced rule #2: Orderly List

This rule requires that all items are arranged in a logical order.

So for our apparel distributor, the branches can be arranged as high-mid-low or low-mid-high. Never go “high-low-mid” or “mid-low-high”, because this arrangement is illogical and counter-intuitive.

Advanced rule #3: The “Rule of Three”

The ideal number of branches on any level of the issue tree is three - the most intuitive number to the human mind.

Three items are often enough to yield significant insights, while still being easy to analyze and follow; segmentations into 2 or 4 are also common. 5 is acceptable, but anything more than that should be avoided.

Our apparel distributor may have dozens of product lines across the segments, but having that same number of branches in the issue tree is counter-intuitive and counter-productive, so we use the much more manageable 3 segments.

Advanced rule #4: No Interlinking Items

There should be minimal, and ideally no connections between the branches of the issue tree. 

If the branches are interlinked, one root-cause may manifest itself in multiple symptoms across the tree, creating unnecessary confusion in the problem-solving process.

Variants of an issue tree

Beside the “why tree” we used to solve why Harley was reporting losses, there are two other common trees, the “which tree” and the “how tree.” The which tree answers which you should do among the choices, and the how tree answers how you should do something.

Why tree helps locate and attack root causes of a problem

We’ve shown you how a why tree could be used to break down a problem into smaller pieces to find the root causes, which involves several important concepts, but in short there are 3 things you need to do:

Locate root causes by narrowing down your search area. To quickly locate root causes, use breakdown by math, process, steps or segment, or any combination of those. We’ll talk about that a bit later

Identify root causes from what you’ve hypothesized. Remember, all hypotheses must be tested with data before reaching a conclusion

Suggest solutions to attack the root causes to eliminate the problem for good. However, sometimes the root causes cannot be solved effectively and efficiently, so we might also try to mitigate their effects

Which tree helps make the most suitable decision

The which tree is a decision-making table combining two separate issue trees – the available options, and the criteria. The options and criteria included must be relevant to the decision-maker. When considering choosing X over something, consultants might take a look at several factors:

Direct benefits: Does X generate more key output on its own?

Indirect benefits: Does X interact with other processes in a way that generates more key output?

Costs: What are the additional costs that X incur?

Risks: Can we accept the risks of either losing some benefits or increasing cost beyond our control?

Feasibility: Do we have enough resources and capability to do X?

Alternative: Are there any other alternatives that are better-suited to our interests?

Additionally, the issue tree in “Should I Do A or B” cases only contains one level. This allows you to focus on the most suitable options (by filtering out the less relevant), ensuring a top-down, efficient decision-making process.

How tree helps realize an objective

The how tree breaks down possible courses of action to reach an objective. The branches of the tree represent ideas, steps, or aspects of the work. A basic framework for a how tree may look like this:

Identify steps necessary to realize the objective

Identify options for each steps

Choose the best options after evaluations

Again, like the two previous types of issue trees, the ideas/steps/work aspects included must be relevant to the task. 

A restaurant business looking to increase its profitability may look into the following ideas:

Consulting frameworks – templates for issue trees

Don’t believe in frameworks….

In management consulting, frameworks are convenient templates used to break down and solve business problems (i.e. drawing issue trees).

So you might have heard of some very specific frameworks such as the 4P/7P, or the 3C&P or whatever. But no 2 cases are the same, and the moment you get too reliant on a specific framework is when you realize that you’re stuck.

The truth is, there is no truly “good” framework you can use. Everyone knows how to recite frameworks, so really you aren’t impressing anyone.

The best frameworks are the simplest, easiest to use , but still help you dig out the root causes.

“Simplest, easiest to use” also means you can flexibly combine frameworks to solve any cases, instead of scrambling with the P’s and the C’s, whatever they mean.

“Simplest, easiest to use” frameworks for your case interviews

There are 5 ways you can break down a problem, either through math, segments, steps, opposing sides or stakeholders.

Math : This one is pretty straightforward, you break a problem down using equations and formulae. This breakdown easily ensures MECE and the causes are easily identified, but is shallow, and cannot guarantee the root causes are isolated. An example of this is breaking down profits = revenues - costs

Segments : You break a whole problem down to smaller segments (duh!). For example, one company may break down its US markets into the Northeast, Midwest, South and West regions and start looking at each region to find the problems 

Steps : You break a problem down to smaller steps on how to address it. For example, a furniture company finds that customers are reporting faulty products, it may look into the process (or steps) on how its products are made, and find the problems within each steps

Opposing sides : You break a problem down to opposing/parallel sides. An example of this is to break down the solution into short-term and long-term 

Stakeholders: You break a problem down into different interacting factors, such as the company itself, customers, competitors, products, etc. 

To comprehend the issue tree in greater detail, check out our video and youtube channel :

Scoring in the McKinsey PSG/Digital Assessment

The scoring mechanism in the McKinsey Digital Assessment

Related product

Case Interview End-to-End Secrets Program

Elevate your case interview skills with a well-rounded preparation package

A case interview is where candidates is asked to solve a business problem. They are used by consulting firms to evaluate problem-solving skill & soft skills

Case interview frameworks are methods for addressing and solving business cases.  A framework can be extensively customized or off-the-shelf for specific cases.

MECE is a useful problem-solving principle for case interview frameworks with 2 parts: no overlap between pieces & all pieces combined form the original item

• What is Strategy?
• Business Models
• Developing a Strategy
• Strategic Planning
• Competitive Advantage
• Growth Strategy
• Market Strategy
• Customer Strategy
• Geographic Strategy
• Product Strategy
• Service Strategy
• Pricing Strategy
• Distribution Strategy
• Sales Strategy
• Marketing Strategy
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Organizational Strategy
• HR Strategy – Organizational Design
• HR Strategy – Employee Journey & Culture
• Process Strategy
• Procurement Strategy
• Cost and Capital Strategy
• Business Value
• Market Analysis
• Problem Solving Skills
• Strategic Options
• Business Analytics
• Strategic Decision Making
• Process Improvement
• Project Planning
• Team Leadership
• Personal Development
• Leadership Maturity Model
• Leadership Team Strategy
• The Leadership Team
• Leadership Mindset
• Communication & Collaboration
• Problem Solving
• Decision Making
• People Leadership
• Strategic Execution
• Executive Coaching
• Strategy Coaching
• Business Transformation
• Strategy Workshops
• Leadership Strategy Survey
• Leadership Training
• Who’s Joe?

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Learn everything you need to know to develop a Problem Statement by an Ex-McKinsey consultant . Includes best practices , examples, and a free problem statement template at the bottom.

“A problem well stated is a problem half solved.”

– Charles Kettering, Early 1900s American Inventor

I remember my first day on my first project at McKinsey, the partner got the team in a room for us to spend a few hours “defining the problem statement.” At first, I thought to myself, “man, what a dumb idea…this client is paying us millions of dollars, and we don’t even know what we are trying to solve?” But, as we started to debate the context of the client, the issues they faced, and the reasons why they brought us on, I started to appreciate defining the problem statement and the ability for the right problem statement to frame and focus problem solving .

What is a problem statement?

A problem statement is a clear description of the problem you are trying to solve and is typically most effectively stated as a question. Problem statements are subtly critical in effective problem solving. They have an uncanny ability in focusing the efforts of brainstorming , teamwork, and projects .

To understand this better, let’s go through some examples of how you can position a brainstorming session on various topics.

Beyond brainstorming, problem statements should be used at the beginning of any project to frame and focus on the problem. A good problem statement defines the “who” the problem involves, and defines the scope of the problem. Since problem statements guide much of the problem solving of a project, it is important not to be too narrow or broad with the problem statement.

How do you create an effective problem statement?

As stated before, every McKinsey project starts with the development of a problem statement. Once we landed on a strong problem statement, then we had to align the client with the problem statement. The easiest way for a project and team to get off track is if the team and the client are trying to solve different problems. A good problem statement aligns the expectations of the client with the team’s activities and output.

Here are the best practices when creating an effective problem statement:

Use the 5 Ws and one H

One of the most useful tools when developing a problem statement is the 5 Ws and one H, which is simply utilizing who, what, why, where, when, and how questions to frame the problem statement. Simply thinking through these questions as they relate to the problem can help you create a strong problem statement.

Ask the most crucial question, “What are we trying to solve?”

We’ve all been in those brainstorming sessions, meetings or on those projects, where you’re just scratching your head, as the conversation or directions are more like an Olympic ping-pong match going from one topic to the next. The most effective question that I’ve used in over a thousand meetings and conversations is simply “what are we trying to solve?” It cuts through the clutter, confusion, and misalignment, and quickly centers the focus and energy of everyone.

Frame the problem statement as a goal

Some of the best problem statements are simply goals formatted as questions. If you need to increase sales by 10%, a good problem statement is, “Within the next 12 months, what are the most effective options for the team to increase sales by 10%?”

Force the prioritization 

Often, the most effective problem statements force the prioritization of issues and opportunities. Using phrases such as “the most important for the customer” or “the best way” will force prioritization.

DOWNLOAD THE PROBLEM STATEMENT POWERPOINT WORKSHEET

To get you going on defining a strong problem statement, download the free and editable Problem Statement PowerPoint Worksheet.

Correctly defining a problem statement at the beginning of a project or initiative will dramatically improve the success of the project or initiative. Problem statements help guide problem solving, analysis , hypotheses , and solutions.

Developing a problem statement is an iterative brainstorming process. Get the major stakeholders in a room for a few hours and start the process by having everyone write down what they think the problem is on index cards. Collect the index cards and post them on a whiteboard. You can either discuss each one or have the group pick the top 3 and then discuss them. You can use the Problem Statement Worksheet to further define the problem by answering the 5 Ws and 1 H. The key is to find the right problem statement all stakeholders feel strongly about, in that, if the problem statement were solved, the problem would be solved.

NEXT SECTION: HYPOTHESES

DOWNLOAD STRATEGY PRESENTATION TEMPLATES

THE $150 VALUE PACK - 600 SLIDES 168-PAGE COMPENDIUM OF STRATEGY FRAMEWORKS & TEMPLATES 186-PAGE HR & ORG STRATEGY PRESENTATION 100-PAGE SALES PLAN PRESENTATION 121-PAGE STRATEGIC PLAN & COMPANY OVERVIEW PRESENTATION 114-PAGE MARKET & COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS PRESENTATION 18-PAGE BUSINESS MODEL TEMPLATE

JOE NEWSUM COACHING

EXECUTIVE COACHING STRATEGY COACHING ELEVATE360 BUSINESS TRANSFORMATION STRATEGY WORKSHOPS LEADERSHIP STRATEGY SURVEY & WORKSHOP STRATEGY & LEADERSHIP TRAINING

THE LEADERSHIP MATURITY MODEL

Explore other types of strategy.

BIG PICTURE WHAT IS STRATEGY? BUSINESS MODEL COMP. ADVANTAGE GROWTH

TARGETS MARKET CUSTOMER GEOGRAPHIC

VALUE PROPOSITION PRODUCT SERVICE PRICING

GO TO MARKET DISTRIBUTION SALES MARKETING

ORGANIZATIONAL ORG DESIGN HR & CULTURE PROCESS PARTNER

EXPLORE THE TOP 100 STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP COMPETENCIES

TYPES OF VALUE MARKET ANALYSIS PROBLEM SOLVING

OPTION CREATION ANALYTICS DECISION MAKING PROCESS TOOLS

PLANNING & PROJECTS PEOPLE LEADERSHIP PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

Resources >

Mckinsey approach to problem solving, a guide to the 7-step mckinsey problem solving process.

McKinsey and Company is recognized for its rigorous approach to problem solving. They train their consultants on their seven-step process that anyone can learn.

This resource guides you through that process, largely informed by the McKinsey Staff Paper 66. It also includes a PowerPoint Toolkit with slide templates of each step of the process that you can download and customize for your own use.

In this guide you'll learn:

Overview of the mckinsey approach to problem solving, problem solving process, problem definition.

• Problem Statement

Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet

Structure the problem, hypothesis trees, issue trees, analyses and workplan, synthesize findings, craft recommendations, communicate, distinctiveness practices, harness the power of collaboration, sources and additional reading, request the mckinsey approach to problem solving.

Problem solving — finding the optimal solution to a given business opportunity or challenge — is the very heart of how consultants create client impact, and considered the most important skill for success at McKinsey.

The characteristic “McKinsey method” of problem solving is a structured, inductive approach that can be used to solve any problem. Using this standardized process saves us from reinventing the problem-solving wheel, and allows for greater focus on distinctiveness in the solution. Every new McKinsey associate must learn this method on his or her first day with the firm.

There are four fundamental disciplines of the McKinsey method:

1. Problem definition

A thorough understanding and crisp definition of the problem.

2. The problem-solving process

Structuring the problem, prioritizing the issues, planning analyses, conducting analyses, synthesizing findings, and developing recommendations.

3. Distinctiveness practices

Constructing alternative perspectives; identifying relationships; distilling the essence of an issue, analysis, or recommendation; and staying ahead of others in the problem-solving process.

4. Collaboratio n

Actively seeking out client, customer, and supplier perspectives, as well as internal and external expert insight and knowledge.

Once the problem has been defined, the problem-solving process proceeds with a series of steps:

• Structure the problem
• Prioritize the issues
• Plan analyses
• Conduct analyses
• Synthesize findings
• Develop recommendations

Not all problems require strict adherence to the process. Some steps may be truncated, such as when specific knowledge or analogies from other industries make it possible to construct hypotheses and associated workplans earlier than their formal place in the process. Nonetheless, it remains important to be capable of executing every step in the basic process.

When confronted with a new and complex problem, this process establishes a path to defining and disaggregating the problem in a way that will allow the team to move to a solution. The process also ensures nothing is missed and concentrates efforts on the highest-impact areas. Adhering to the process gives the client clear steps to follow, building confidence, credibility, and long-term capability.

The most important step in your entire project is to first carefully define the problem. The problem definition will serve the guide all of the team’s work, so it is critical to ensure that all key stakeholders agree that it is the right problem to be solving.

The problem definition will serve the guide all of the team’s work, so it is critical to ensure that all key stakeholders agree that it is the right problem to be solving.

There are often dozens of issues that a team could focus on, and it is often not obvious how to define the problem.

In any real-life situation, there are many possible problem statements. Your choice of problem statement will serve to constrain the range of possible solutions.

Constraints can be a good thing (e.g., limit solutions to actions within the available budget.) And constraints can be a bad thing (e.g., eliminating the possibility of creative ideas.) So choose wisely.

The problem statement may ignore many issues to focus on the priority that should be addressed. The problem statement should be phrased as a question, such that the answer will be the solution.

Example scenario – A family on Friday evening :

A mother, a father, and their two teenage children have all arrived home on a Friday at 6 p.m. The family has not prepared dinner for Friday evening. The daughter has lacrosse practice on Saturday and an essay to write for English class due on Monday. The son has theatre rehearsal on both Saturday and Sunday and will need one parent to drive him to the high school both days, though he can get a ride home with a friend.

The family dog, a poodle, must be taken to the groomer on Saturday morning. The mother will need to spend time this weekend working on assignments for her finance class she is taking as part of her Executive MBA. The father plans to go on a 100-mile bike ride, which he can do either Saturday or Sunday. The family has two cars, but one is at the body shop. They are trying to save money to pay for an addition to their house.

Potential problem definitions – A family on Friday evening :

The problem definition should not be vague, without clear measures of success. Rather, it should be a SMART definition:

• Action-oriented

Given one set of facts, it is possible to come up with many possible problem statements. The choice of problem statement constrains the range of possible solutions.

Before starting to solve the problem, the family first needs to agree on what problem they want to solve.

• What should the family do for dinner on Friday night?
• How can the family schedule their activities this weekend to accomplish everything planned given that they only have one vehicle available?
• How can the family increase income or reduce expenses to allow them to save $75K over the next 12 months to pay for the planned addition to their house?

Problem Statement Worksheet

This is a helpful tool to use to clearly define the problem. There are often dozens of issues that a team could focus on, and it is often not obvious how to define the problem. In any real-life situation, there are many possible problem statements. Your choice of problem statement will serve to constrain the range of possible solutions.

• Use a question . The problem statement should be phrased as a question, such that the answer will be the solution. Make the question SMART: specific, measurable, action-oriented, relevant, and time-bound. Example: “How can XYZ Bank close the $100 million profitability gap in two years?”
• Context . What are the internal and external situations and complications facing the client, such as industry trends, relative position within the industry, capability gaps, financial flexibility, and so on?
• Success criteria . Understand how the client and the team define success and failure. In addition to any quantitative measures identified in the basic question, identify other important quantitative or qualitative measures of success, including timing of impact, visibility of improvement, client capability building required, necessary mindset shifts, and so on.
• Scope and constraints . Scope most commonly covers the markets or segments of interest, whereas constraints govern restrictions on the nature of solutions within those markets or segments.
• Stakeholders . Explore who really makes the decisions — who decides, who can help, and who can block.
• Key sources of insight . What best-practice expertise, knowledge, and engagement approaches already exist? What knowledge from the client, suppliers, and customers needs to be accessed? Be as specific as possible: who, what, when, how, and why.

In completing the Problem Statement Worksheet, you are prompted to define the key stakeholders.

As you become involved in the problem-solving process, you should expand the question of key stakeholders to include what the team wants from them and what they want from the team, their values and motivations (helpful and unhelpful), and the communications mechanisms that will be most effective for each of them.

Using the Stakeholder Analysis Worksheet allows you to comprehensively identify:

• Stakeholders
• What you need from them
• Where they are
• What they need from you

The two most helpful techniques for rigorously structuring any problem are hypothesis trees and issue trees. Each of these techniques disaggregates the primary question into a cascade of issues or hypotheses that, when addressed, will together answer the primary question.

A hypothesis tree might break down the same question into two or more hypotheses. 

The aim at this stage is to structure the problem into discrete, mutually exclusive pieces that are small enough to yield to analysis and that, taken together, are collectively exhaustive.

Articulating the problem as hypotheses, rather than issues, is the preferred approach because it leads to a more focused analysis of the problem. Questions to ask include:

• Is it testable – can you prove or disprove it?
• It is open to debate? If it cannot be wrong, it is simply a statement of fact and unlikely to produce keen insight.
• If you reversed your hypothesis – literally, hypothesized that the exact opposite were true – would you care about the difference it would make to your overall logic?
• If you shared your hypothesis with the CEO, would it sound naive or obvious?
• Does it point directly to an action or actions that the client might take?

Quickly developing a powerful hypothesis tree enables us to develop solutions more rapidly that will have real impact. This can sometimes seem premature to clients, who might find the “solution” reached too quickly and want to see the analysis behind it.

Take care to explain the approach (most important, that a hypothesis is not an answer) and its benefits (that a good hypothesis is the basis of a proven means of successful problem solving and avoids “boiling the ocean”).

Example: Alpha Manufacturing, Inc.

Problem Statement: How can Alpha increase EBITDA by $13M (to $50M) by 2025?

The hypotheses might be:

• Alpha can add $125M revenues by expanding to new customers, adding $8M of EBITDA
• Alpha can reduce costs to improve EBITDA by $5M

These hypotheses will be further disaggregated into subsidiary hypotheses at the next level of the tree.

Often, the team has insufficient knowledge to build a complete hypothesis tree at the start of an engagement. In these cases, it is best to begin by structuring the problem using an issue tree.

An issue tree is best set out as a series of open questions in sentence form. For example, “How can the client minimize its tax burden?” is more useful than “Tax.” Open questions – those that begin with what, how, or why– produce deeper insights than closed ones. In some cases, an issue tree can be sharpened by toggling between issue and hypothesis – working forward from an issue to identify the hypothesis, and back from the hypothesis to sharpen the relevant open question.

Once the problem has been structured, the next step is to prioritize the issues or hypotheses on which the team will focus its work. When prioritizing, it is common to use a two-by-two matrix – e.g., a matrix featuring “impact” and “ease of impact” as the two axes.

Applying some of these prioritization criteria will knock out portions of the issue tree altogether. Consider testing the issues against them all, albeit quickly, to help drive the prioritization process.

Once the criteria are defined, prioritizing should be straightforward: Simply map the issues to the framework and focus on those that score highest against the criteria.

As the team conducts analysis and learns more about the problem and the potential solution, make sure to revisit the prioritization matrix so as to remain focused on the highest-priority issues.

The issues might be:

• How can Alpha increase revenue?
• How can Alpha reduce cost?

Each of these issues is then further broken down into deeper insights to solutions.

If the prioritization has been carried out effectively, the team will have clarified the key issues or hypotheses that must be subjected to analysis. The aim of these analyses is to prove the hypotheses true or false, or to develop useful perspectives on each key issue. Now the task is to design an effective and efficient workplan for conducting the analyses.

Transforming the prioritized problem structure into a workplan involves two main tasks:

• Define the blocks of work that need to be undertaken. Articulate as clearly as possible the desired end products and the analysis necessary to produce them, and estimate the resources and time required.
• Sequence the work blocks in a way that matches the available resources to the need to deliver against key engagement milestones (e.g., important meetings, progress reviews), as well as to the overall pacing of the engagement (i.e., weekly or twice-weekly meetings, and so on).

A good workplan will detail the following for each issue or hypothesis: analyses, end products, sources, and timing and responsibility. Developing the workplan takes time; doing it well requires working through the definition of each element of the workplan in a rigorous and methodical fashion.

It’s useful to match the workplan to three horizons:

• What is expected at the end of the engagement
• What is expected at key progress reviews
• What is due at daily and/or weekly team meetings

The detail in the workplan will typically be greater for the near term (the next week) than for the long term (the study horizon), especially early in a new engagement when considerable ambiguity about the end state remains.

Here are three different templates for a workplan:

This is the most difficult element of the problem-solving process. After a period of being immersed in the details, it is crucial to step back and distinguish the important from the merely interesting. Distinctive problem solvers seek the essence of the story that will underpin a crisp recommendation for action.

Although synthesis appears, formally speaking, as the penultimate step in the process, it should happen throughout. Ideally, after you have made almost any analytical progress, you should attempt to articulate the “Day 1” or “Week 1” answer. Continue to synthesize as you go along. This will remind the team of the question you are trying to answer, assist prioritization, highlight the logical links of the emerging solution, and ensure that you have a story ready to articulate at all times during the study.

McKinsey’s primary tool for synthesizing is the pyramid principle. Essentially, this principle asserts that every synthesis should explain a single concept, per the “governing thought.” The supporting ideas in the synthesis form a thought hierarchy proceeding in a logical structure from the most detailed facts to the governing thought, ruthlessly excluding the interesting but irrelevant.

While this hierarchy can be laid out as a tree (like with issue and hypothesis trees), the best problem solvers capture it by creating dot-dash storylines — the Pyramid Structure for Grouping Arguments.

Pyramid Structure for Grouping Arguments

• Focus on action. Articulate the thoughts at each level of the pyramid as declarative sentences, not as topics. For example, “expansion” is a topic; “We need to expand into the European market” is a declarative sentence.
• Use storylines. PowerPoint is poor at highlighting logical connections, therefore is not a good tool for synthesis. A storyline will clarify elements that may be ambiguous in the PowerPoint presentation.
• Keep the emerging storyline visible. Many teams find that posting the storyline or story- board on the team-room wall helps keep the thinking focused. It also helps in bringing the client along.
• Use the situation-complication-resolution structure. The situation is the reason there is action to be taken. The com- plication is why the situation needs thinking through – typically an industry or client challenge. The resolution is the answer.
• Down the pyramid: does each governing thought pose a single question that is answered completely by the group of boxes below it?
• Across: is each level within the pyramid MECE?
• Up: does each group of boxes, taken together, provide one answer – one “so what?” – that is essentially the governing thought above it?
• Test the solution. What would it mean if your hypotheses all came true?

It is at this point that we address the client’s questions: “What do I do, and how do I do it?” This means not offering actionable recommendations, along with a plan and client commitment for implementation.

The essence of this step is to translate the overall solution into the actions required to deliver sustained impact. A pragmatic action plan should include:

• Relevant initiatives, along with a clear sequence, timing, and mapping of activities required
• Clear owners for each initiative
• Key success factors and the challenges involved in delivering on the initiatives

Crucial questions to ask as you build recommendations for organizational change are:

• Does each person who needs to change (from the CEO to the front line) understand what he or she needs to change and why, and is he or she committed to it?
• Are key leaders and role models throughout the organization personally committed to behaving differently?
• Has the client set in place the necessary formal mechanisms to reinforce the desired change?
• Does the client have the skills and confidence to behave in the desired new way?

Once the recommendations have been crafted in the problem-solving process, it’s vital to effectively communicate those findings and recommendations.

An executive summary is a great slide to use for this. See more on executive summary slides, including 30 templates, at our Ultimate Guide to Executive Summary Slides .

Great problem solvers identify unique disruptions and discontinuities, novel insights, and step-out opportunities that lead to truly distinctive impact. This is done by applying a number of practices throughout the problem-solving process to help develop these insights.

Expand: Construct multiple perspectives

Identifying alternative ways of looking at the problem expands the range of possibilities, opens you up to innovative ideas, and allows you to formulate more powerful hypotheses. Questions that help here include:

• What changes if I think from the perspective of a customer, or a supplier, or a frontline employee, or a competitor?
• How have other industries viewed and addressed this same problem?
• What would it mean if the client sought to run the company like a low-cost airline or a cosmetics manufacturer?

Link: Identify relationships

Strong problem solvers discern connections and recognize patterns in two different ways:

• They seek out the ways in which different problem elements – issues, hypotheses, analyses, work elements, findings, answers, and recommendations – relate to one another.
• They use these relationships throughout the basic problem-solving process to identify efficient problem-solving approaches, novel solutions, and more powerful syntheses.

Distill: Find the essence

Cutting through complexity to identify the heart of the problem and its solution is a critical skill.

• Identify the critical problem elements. Are there some issues, approaches, or options that can be eliminated completely because they won’t make a significant difference to the solution?
• Consider how complex the different elements are and how long it will take to complete them. Wherever possible, quickly advance simpler parts of the problem that can inform more complex or time-consuming elements.

Lead: Stay ahead/step back

Without getting ahead of the client, you cannot be distinctive. Paradoxically, to get ahead – and stay ahead – it is often necessary to step back from the problem to validate or revalidate the approach and the solution.

• Spend time thinking one or more steps ahead of the client and team.
• Constantly check and challenge the rigor of the underlying data and analysis.
• Stress-test the whole emerging recommendation
• Challenge the solution against a set of hurdles. Does it satisfy the criteria for success as set out on the Problem Statement Worksheet?

No matter how skilled, knowledgeable, or experienced you are, you will never create the most distinctive solution on your own. The best problem solvers know how to leverage the power of their team, clients, the Firm, and outside parties. Seeking the right expertise at the right time, and leveraging it in the right way, are ultimately how we bring distinctiveness to our work, how we maximize efficiency, and how we learn.

When solving a problem, it is important to ask, “Have I accessed all the sources of insight that are available?” Here are the sources you should consider:

• Your core team
• The client’s suppliers and customers
• Internal experts and knowledge
• External sources of knowledge
• Communications specialists

The key here is to think open, not closed. Opening up to varied sources of data and perspectives furthers our mission to develop truly innovative and distinctive solutions for our clients.

• McKinsey Staff Paper 66 — not published by McKinsey but possibly found through an internet search
• The McKinsey Way , 1999, by Ethan M. Rasiel

For consultants

© Copyright 2024 by Umbrex

Designed by our friends at Filez

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Additional menu

Nine essential problem solving tools: The ultimate guide to finding a solution

October 26, 2023 by MindManager Blog

Problem solving may unfold differently depending on the industry, or even the department you work in. However, most agree that before you can fix any issue, you need to be clear on what it is, why it’s happening, and what your ideal long-term solution will achieve.

Understanding both the nature and the cause of a problem is the only way to figure out which actions will help you resolve it.

Given that most problem-solving processes are part inspiration and part perspiration, you’ll be more successful if you can reach for a problem solving tool that facilitates collaboration, encourages creative thinking, and makes it easier to implement the fix you devise.

The problem solving tools include three unique categories: problem solving diagrams, problem solving mind maps, and problem solving software solutions.

They include:

• Fishbone diagrams
• Strategy maps
• Mental maps
• Concept maps
• Layered process audit software
• Charting software
• MindManager

In this article, we’ve put together a roundup of versatile problem solving tools and software to help you and your team map out and repair workplace issues as efficiently as possible.

Let’s get started!

Problem solving diagrams

Mapping your way out of a problem is the simplest way to see where you are, and where you need to end up.

Not only do visual problem maps let you plot the most efficient route from Point A (dysfunctional situation) to Point B (flawless process), problem mapping diagrams make it easier to see:

• The root cause of a dilemma.
• The steps, resources, and personnel associated with each possible solution.
• The least time-consuming, most cost-effective options.

A visual problem solving process help to solidify understanding. Furthermore, it’s a great way for you and your team to transform abstract ideas into a practical, reconstructive plan.

Here are three examples of common problem mapping diagrams you can try with your team:

1. Fishbone diagrams

Fishbone diagrams are a common problem solving tool so-named because, once complete, they resemble the skeleton of a fish.

With the possible root causes of an issue (the ribs) branching off from either side of a spine line attached to the head (the problem), dynamic fishbone diagrams let you:

• Lay out a related set of possible reasons for an existing problem
• Investigate each possibility by breaking it out into sub-causes
• See how contributing factors relate to one another

Fishbone diagrams are also known as cause and effect or Ishikawa diagrams.

2. Flowcharts

A flowchart is an easy-to-understand diagram with a variety of applications. But you can use it to outline and examine how the steps of a flawed process connect.

Made up of a few simple symbols linked with arrows indicating workflow direction, flowcharts clearly illustrate what happens at each stage of a process – and how each event impacts other events and decisions.

3. Strategy maps

Frequently used as a strategic planning tool, strategy maps also work well as problem mapping diagrams. Based on a hierarchal system, thoughts and ideas can be arranged on a single page to flesh out a potential resolution.

Once you’ve got a few tactics you feel are worth exploring as possible ways to overcome a challenge, a strategy map will help you establish the best route to your problem-solving goal.

Problem solving mind maps

Problem solving mind maps are especially valuable in visualization. Because they facilitate the brainstorming process that plays a key role in both root cause analysis and the identification of potential solutions, they help make problems more solvable.

Mind maps are diagrams that represent your thinking. Since many people struggle taking or working with hand-written or typed notes, mind maps were designed to let you lay out and structure your thoughts visually so you can play with ideas, concepts, and solutions the same way your brain does.

By starting with a single notion that branches out into greater detail, problem solving mind maps make it easy to:

• Explain unfamiliar problems or processes in less time
• Share and elaborate on novel ideas
• Achieve better group comprehension that can lead to more effective solutions

Mind maps are a valuable problem solving tool because they’re geared toward bringing out the flexible thinking that creative solutions require. Here are three types of problem solving mind maps you can use to facilitate the brainstorming process.

4. Mental maps

A mental map helps you get your thoughts about what might be causing a workplace issue out of your head and onto a shared digital space.

Because mental maps mirror the way our brains take in and analyze new information, using them to describe your theories visually will help you and your team work through and test those thought models.

5. Idea maps

Idea maps let you take advantage of a wide assortment of colors and images to lay down and organize your scattered thought process. Idea maps are ideal brainstorming tools because they allow you to present and explore ideas about the best way to solve a problem collaboratively, and with a shared sense of enthusiasm for outside-the-box thinking.

6. Concept maps

Concept maps are one of the best ways to shape your thoughts around a potential solution because they let you create interlinked, visual representations of intricate concepts.

By laying out your suggested problem-solving process digitally – and using lines to form and define relationship connections – your group will be able to see how each piece of the solution puzzle connects with another.

Problem solving software solutions

Problem solving software is the best way to take advantage of multiple problem solving tools in one platform. While some software programs are geared toward specific industries or processes – like manufacturing or customer relationship management, for example – others, like MindManager , are purpose-built to work across multiple trades, departments, and teams.

Here are three problem-solving software examples.

7. Layered process audit software

Layered process audits (LPAs) help companies oversee production processes and keep an eye on the cost and quality of the goods they create. Dedicated LPA software makes problem solving easier for manufacturers because it helps them see where costly leaks are occurring and allows all levels of management to get involved in repairing those leaks.

8. Charting software

Charting software comes in all shapes and sizes to fit a variety of business sectors. Pareto charts, for example, combine bar charts with line graphs so companies can compare different problems or contributing factors to determine their frequency, cost, and significance. Charting software is often used in marketing, where a variety of bar charts and X-Y axis diagrams make it possible to display and examine competitor profiles, customer segmentation, and sales trends.

9. MindManager

No matter where you work, or what your problem-solving role looks like, MindManager is a problem solving software that will make your team more productive in figuring out why a process, plan, or project isn’t working the way it should.

Once you know why an obstruction, shortfall, or difficulty exists, you can use MindManager’s wide range of brainstorming and problem mapping diagrams to:

• Find the most promising way to correct the situation
• Activate your chosen solution, and
• Conduct regular checks to make sure your repair work is sustainable

MindManager is the ultimate problem solving software.

Not only is it versatile enough to use as your go-to system for puzzling out all types of workplace problems, MindManager’s built-in forecasting tools, timeline charts, and warning indicators let you plan, implement, and monitor your solutions.

By allowing your group to work together more effectively to break down problems, uncover solutions, and rebuild processes and workflows, MindManager’s versatile collection of problem solving tools will help make everyone on your team a more efficient problem solver.

Download a free trial today to get started!

Ready to take the next step?

MindManager helps boost collaboration and productivity among remote and hybrid teams to achieve better results, faster.

Why choose MindManager?

MindManager® helps individuals, teams, and enterprises bring greater clarity and structure to plans, projects, and processes. It provides visual productivity tools and mind mapping software to help take you and your organization to where you want to be.

Explore MindManager

Content Quicklinks:

✔ What Are Consulting Frameworks? ✔ Why Should You Use Business Consulting Frameworks? ✔ 7 Consulting Frameworks For Case Interviews & Client Sessions ✔ Final Words

Share This Article:

7 consulting frameworks that win big clients.

Consulting frameworks are the keys that open doors to successfully solved business cases. Whether you’re preparing for your first case interview or you need a refresher before a big client meeting, these tried and tested formulas will help you make every session effective.

In this comprehensive guide, we’ll cover what the most fundamental consulting frameworks are, what they can be used for, and how to apply them. Save this page for future reference and use it as your cheat sheet to impress your consulting clients.

What Are Consulting Frameworks?

Consulting frameworks are tools designed to solve a business problem. They can be used as ready-made cheat sheets to work with various businesses across industries, or customized to more specific cases. Once you learn how to apply them confidently, you can mix and match these frameworks for maximum impact or even create your own versions of them. These can range from simple tasks, like whether or not you need a business phone system, to more complex tasks, like training customer service staff to communicate effectively with clients and communicate using a customer service software solution .

The aim of these frameworks is to break down the problems and challenges your clients are facing into what we call an issue tree. This way, you can get the full picture of where the business you’re consulting stands and look further into the branches of this issue tree to find the root cause of the problem. It’s not uncommon for consultants to uncover multiple issues in their first consulting session with a client, which may be disjointed or all connected to the same theme.

The overarching principle that these frameworks are based on is the MECE (pronounced as mee see), in other words, mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive . It means that while segmenting an issue, you need to separate all influencing factors without any overlap and make sure you cover all areas without exception.

Consulting processes build upon this fundamental logic so that consultants don’t miss any important details while also striving to get to solutions as efficiently as possible. Despite the common misinterpretation of MECE that you might come across in some sources, it’s not a framework by itself but the driving principle that all frameworks are based on.

[ Read: 34 Different Types of Consulting Services (And How to Pick Your Specialty) ]

Why Should You Use Business Consulting Frameworks?

Consulting frameworks provide templates and suggestions as a starting point for your consulting sessions. They give you a roadmap to find clarity about any aspect of a business, no matter the size. They can immediately simplify the complexity of the problem and draw attention to what may be overlooked in client interviews. You should never underestimate the simplicity of a modeling strategy or framework, even if you feel like you’ve already covered the areas that they involve.

On the other hand, you can’t solely rely on these frameworks when solving business issues. Analytical thinking and asking the right clarifying questions are much more important for a successful case than simply leading your client through a framework. These tools provide a great starting point, but they often need to be customized or combined with other frameworks for them to be efficient.

[ Read: The 17 Life Coaching Skills That Every Top Coach Has Mastered ]

To make the most out of these templates, repeat them in as many practice situations as you can, so that you can learn what context they fit and how their impact can be maximized. The more confident you become using them, the sooner you can develop your own frameworks on the spot for an individual business case.

7 Consulting Frameworks For Case Interviews & Client Sessions

Profitability framework.

The profitability framework is one of the most common frameworks to use in cases related to finances. It’s designed to mathematically break down the problem around the profitability of a business and then look further into the qualitative aspects of it.

Here’s how it goes:

• Break down the profits of the business into revenues minus costs
• Break down the revenues into price per unit times number of units sold
• Break down costs into variable costs and fixed costs
• Break variable costs further down into cost per unit times units produced

Once you have your numbers straight, you can start looking into the cause and effect of these digits with other qualitative frameworks or further questions.

3Cs Framework

The 3Cs framework was developed by Japanese organizational theorist Kenichi Ohmae. It focuses on the three key drivers of success in business. The three Cs stand for customers, competition, and company, and can be broken down into the following elements:

• Customers: customer demographics, customer needs, size and growth rate of customer segments, price sensitivity
• Competition: the value proposition and brand of competitors, their market share and growth, and their financial health
• Company: product offering, profitability, core competencies, unique selling points, financial performance and resources

This framework provides a broad overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the business and gives a great starting point for your analysis. It helps you gain perspective on the business at an overall level to uncover more potential issues than what’s initially visible.

After you mapped up these key areas, you need to dig deeper into the ones which might carry the root cause of the central problem. You can use further frameworks that fit these individual functions to solve issues within the four components.

Mergers And Acquisitions Framework

There are various factors to consider before acquiring another business. The mergers and acquisitions framework helps break these components down into a clear thought process. There are two versions of this framework. The first one considers:

• The organizational values of the two businesses and their compatibility
• Their synergy in terms of operation
• Other variable factors that might influence the decision, such as feasibility, legal issues, or other cultural attributes

The other way to apply this framework is to look at the market characteristics, target business, buyer business, and the synergies and risks surrounding the merger. Within each of these components, we can further break down the case into the following subcomponents.

• Market: market size and growth, market profitability, threats imposed by the competition, market regulations
• Target business: financial position, assets and advantages, quality of the management team, target-buyer culture fit
• Buyer: the reason for the acquisition, financing, buyer’s acquisition experience, acquisition timing
• Synergies and risks: the value of individual and combined entities, cost synergies, revenue synergies, biggest risks of failure

As with any other consulting framework, you are of course encouraged to add more components to these clusters as you see fit.

4P/7P Marketing Mix

The 4P Marketing Mix is a classic marketing consulting framework first proposed in the 1960s by E. Jerome McCarthy. The four components it stands for are:

• Product: The product or service marketed
• Price: All pricing plans defined for the product being sold
• Place: Geographical location of the product sold and channels of distribution
• Promotion: The strategies used for promoting the product

Later, this model was expanded into the 7P Marketing Mix with three added components in order to analyze service-based products. These three other components are:

• People: The customers or clients as well as all other stakeholders involved
• Process: The flow of activities or the mechanism between customers and the business
• Physical evidence: Everything visible from the packaging to the service environment

The Marketing Mix is a great framework for planning and implementing marketing strategies, especially for market entry campaigns or product launches in competitive markets.

Porter’s 5 Forces Model

The Porter’s 5 Forces Model is a framework developed by Harvard Business School professor, Michael E. Porter. It’s designed to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the industry surrounding the business. The five components of this model are:

• Competitors: The rivalry surrounding the business
• Suppliers: The bargaining power of suppliers
• Customers: The bargaining power of customers
• New Entrants: The threat of new players entering the market
• Substitute Products: The threat of new products being launched on the market

By mapping out these five forces, we can understand the level of competition present in the industry and project the company’s long-term profitability. 

Market Entry Framework

The market entry framework analyses the characteristics of a new market the business is planning to potentially enter. Taking a closer look at the capabilities of the business and the financial impact of this decision, adequate strategies can be developed for success. This framework can be broken down into four components, namely:

• Market: Market size, profitability, products present on the market, level of competition, regulations
• Client capabilities: Differences between the current market and the new one, the client’s experience in market entry strategies
• Financials: Current financial position, cost to enter the new market, ongoing costs after market entry, expected revenues and return on investments
• Entry strategy: Timing, speed, entering a single region versus the entire market, merger opportunities, management approach

There might be more than one potential solution to a market entry case. Prepare with as much prior research for your consulting session as you can, so that you can propose multiple market entry strategies and draw a comparison between them for your client.

Pricing Case Framework

The pricing case framework is used to take all important factors into account while determining the pricing plan of products. A data-driven decision on pricing can be made by looking at the product costs, the value the product provides, and the pricing strategies used by competitors. In order to break these quantitative and qualitative data points down, we can look at the following components:

• Cost-Based Pricing: fixed costs of all products, variable costs and number of units produced, profitability targets
• Value-Based Pricing: product features, financial, emotional, and other value these features bring to customers
• Competitor-Based Pricing: pricing plans of competitors, available substitute products, value comparison

These elements can be combined into an overall pricing strategy for all product variations, including upsells and special offers. The core business strategy of profitability or market share can also influence the final decision.

Final Words

Each consulting case can be broken down into an issue tree from the broad overview of the case to the nuances. Even if it seems like you’ve reached the end of the road, there are always other ways for segmentation that can help continue your analysis all the way to the tip of those branches. You can consider internal and external factors, qualitative and quantitative data points, or financial and non-financial attributes in virtually every consulting framework.

Further Reading

Are You Undercharging?

Find out in this free report.

Ever wondered exactly what other coaches are offering, and ​for how much? Find out if you’re charging too much or too ​little by benchmarking your own rates with this free report.

Subscribe to our updates for instant access:

• INTERPERSONAL SKILLS
• Problem Solving and Decision Making

Solve Problems Like a Consultant

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Interpersonal Skills:

• A - Z List of Interpersonal Skills
• Interpersonal Skills Self-Assessment
• Communication Skills
• Emotional Intelligence
• Conflict Resolution and Mediation Skills
• Customer Service Skills
• Team-Working, Groups and Meetings
• Decision-Making and Problem-Solving
• Effective Decision Making
• Decision-Making Framework
• Introduction to Problem Solving
• Identifying and Structuring Problems
• Investigating Ideas and Solutions
• Implementing a Solution and Feedback
• Creative Problem-Solving
• Social Problem-Solving
• Negotiation and Persuasion Skills
• Personal and Romantic Relationship Skills

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Learning how to break down and solve complex problems is a core skill you need in today’s business world.

The more complex and multi-faceted your problems are, the more your problem solving skills and techniques will be put to the test.

No one understands this better than some of the world's most highly paid and highly regarded problem solving professionals, the strategy consultants whose fame and fortune is dependent on their ability to quickly break down complex problems and develop effective solutions.

This page details two powerful problem solving techniques you can take from the consulting world to begin breaking down your problems and tackling them like a pro.

Problem Solving Technique #1: Focus On The Key Drivers

When analyzing a complex problem, focus your time and energy on the key drivers and big wins; don't get bogged down in the problem solving minutia. And although this sounds obvious, it is easy to inadvertently end up doing the exact opposite when first applying your problem solving techniques.

Consultants recognize that complex problems can have hundreds, if not thousands, of issues surrounding them and that can it be tempting to dig into and analyze them all for potential solutions. To fight this temptation, one problem solving technique that consultants use is to focus their time and energy on the ' key drivers ' of their problem; in other words, they focus on the largest and most salient aspects of the problem that, if solved, would have the biggest immediate impact.

When problem solving, ask yourself this:

"What are two or three 'key drivers,' or main issues, affecting the problem I am trying to solve?"

For example, if you are hired by an organization to cut costs, think of all the different ways you could potentially help them cut costs. Instead of spinning your wheels analyzing all of the potential cost saving areas, you’re better off focusing on the two or three costs that, if reduced, would have the largest overall impact on the organization.

If you're having trouble finding the key drivers of your problem, use the 80-20 rule to find your problem’s highest value components.

The 80-20 Rule: The Secret to Achieving More with Less

The 80-20 rule, or the Pareto principle, was first adopted as a problem solving technique by a management consultant who coined the phrase after Vilfredo Pareto’s 1906 research in which he observed that 20% of the pea pods in his garden produced 80% of the peas.

This principle has since become known as the 80-20 rule, and simply states that 80% of the effects, come from 20% of the causes. When applied to business, the rule can be used as follows:

• 80% of a company's profits come from 20% of its clients.
• 80% of a company's costs come from 20% of its operations.
• 20% of a company's clients produce 80% of its complaints.

Although this is not a universal principle, the distribution often holds true in many aspects of business and life and, as such, is one of the first problem solving techniques used by consultants to get to the heart of an issue.

For example, using the 80-20 problem solving technique for cutting costs, you could start by asking yourself questions like:

• Which 20% of the company’s divisions are generating 80% of its costs? – Reduce or reorganize the company’s divisions.
• Which 20% of the company’s production costs represent 80% of its cost of goods sold? – Streamline manufacturing processes.
• Which 20% of the company’s marketing costs are generating 80% of its new clients? – Cut the marketing fat.

If this problem solving technique produces too many key drivers, you can narrow them down by asking yourself which of them you can build a strong case for with hard data (see #2).

#2: Build Your Case with Hard Data

When problem solving, gathering and analyzing hard data is critical to effectively building a case for, and eventually selling, a solution.

As such, consultants focus their energy on the key drivers that they can prove or disprove, by gathering and analyzing hard factual data.

Executives are not going to give you the time of day unless you can prove your point with convincing facts and figures. As such, assume that no one will listen to you, or your message, unless you have strong factual evidence to back it up.

Arguably the most famous consulting firm in the world, McKinsey, is notorious for its rigorous data gathering methodologies and problem solving analysis. Why such a focus on hard data? As Ethan Rasiel notes in his book, " The McKinsey Way ", hard data allows McKinsey consultants to quickly achieve two things:

Make Up For Lack Of Gut Instinct

Consultants are typically generalists, which means they lack the 30 or 40 years of in-depth industry experience that their clients often have. Whereas a client might have a “gut” instinct for how to solve a specific problem based on their experience, McKinsey consultants will dig for hard data to prove or disprove their clients' “gut” instinct before moving forward.

Bridge The Credibility Gap

Hard data is objective and tends to be less prone to argument. As such, hard data allows McKinsey consultants, who are typically much younger and greener than their clients, to quickly establish credibility and authority when presenting their problem’s solutions.

Recognizing that hard data will be critical to the success of your problem solving, focus on key drivers that you can back up with hard data given your time constraints.

For example, if your solution to the problem of needing to cut an organization's costs was to reorganize all of its divisions into one location, ask yourself whether or not you can get access to enough hard data to thoroughly prove or disprove your solution. If not, ask for a project extension, break your key driver down into smaller pieces, or pick another key driver to focus on.

Two Data Analysis Tips From McKinsey

A common challenge when problem solving complex issues is knowing where to start and when to stop.

Here are two problem solving tips straight from McKinsey:

Problem Solving Tip #1 – Start With The Outliers:

A great problem solving technique when analyzing large sets of data is to calculate a performance metric around your key drivers and focus on the outliers.

For example, costs per unit per region:

• Positive outliers (low cost per unit) will surface potential best practices you can mimic.
• Negative outliers (high cost per unit) will give you something to immediately figure out and fix.

Problem Solving Tip #2 - Don’t Boil The Ocean:

It’s important to realize that when figuring out how to solve a problem, there is always an enormous amount of research and data analysis you could potentially do.

Instead of trying to perform all of it, which is the equivalent of trying to boil the ocean, McKinsey consultants focus on doing enough research and analysis to thoroughly prove or disprove their key drivers and ignore everything else.

Further Reading from Skills You Need

The Skills You Need Guide to Interpersonal Skills eBooks.

Develop your interpersonal skills with our series of eBooks. Learn about and improve your communication skills, tackle conflict resolution, mediate in difficult situations, and develop your emotional intelligence.

Although there are many other problem solving skills and techniques you can apply to your problems, these two strategies from the consulting world will help you quickly break down your problems into their core components and more effectively come up with a credible and fact-based solution.

About the Author

Taylor Croonquist is the co-founder of Nuts & Bolts Speed Training which delivers actionable PowerPoint training courses for working professionals who spend hundreds, if not thousands, of hours a year using the program.

Continue to: Problem Solving Decision Making

See also: Action Planning Harnessing Creativity in Problem-Solving: Innovations for Overcoming Challenges 5 Reasons Why Business Advisors Are So Important

6 Tools Every Business Consultant Should Know

Frameworks that you might consider adding to your own set of tools.

Harvard DCE Professional & Executive Development

Business experts have a number of tools at hand to analyze company performance. Here are six frameworks that consultants and business analysts use, and that you might consider adding to your own set of tools.

1. Benchmarking

Benchmarking is the process of comparing your company metrics to the metrics of your industry competitors or to those of innovative companies outside the industry.

Common metrics for benchmarking include:

• Production costs
• Employee turnover
• Process cycle time

Read more about benchmarking at Bain & Company Business Insights: Benchmarking and Harvard Business Review blog: Beyond Benchmarking: Why Copy the Competition?

2. Balanced Scorecard

The balanced scorecard is a framework for tracking important aspects of company strategy and for facilitating organizational improvement or change. It measures metrics beyond typical financial metrics to help companies keep long-term strategic goals in focus and spot trouble before it appears in the financial statements.

The scorecard is a comprehensive and quantitative set of objectives that can be measured over time. Common components include:

• Market share
• Employee morale
• Customer satisfaction metrics

Learning how to assess and measure these components is best done in a hands-on setting. Our program Advanced Business Strategies: Gaining a Competitive Edge takes a deep dive into the frameworks for launching successful initiatives in your organization.

You can also read more about the balanced scorecard at  Bain & Company Business Insights: Balanced Scorecard .

Advanced Business Strategy: Gaining a Competitive Edge

Search all Business Strategy programs.

3. Porter’s Five Forces

Developed by Michael E. Porter, Bishop William Lawrence University Professor at Harvard Business School, Porter’s five forces is a framework for industry analysis that is used as an input to a strategic plan.

The five competitive forces that influence profitability in any industry are outlined in Porter’s model:

• Competitor rivalry
• The bargaining power of buyers
• The bargaining power of suppliers
• The threat of new entrants
• The threat of substitute offerings

Learn more at the  Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy: A video interview with Michael E. Porter .

4. The GE-McKinsey Nine-Box Matrix

This matrix was developed by McKinsey & Company in the 1970s to help General Electric prioritize its investments in its numerous business units. It’s widely used to help companies assess the relative merits of various opportunities.

Business units or opportunities are categorized as “high,” “medium,” or “low” within the two axes of the matrix, which are “industry attractiveness” and “competitive strength of the business unit.”

For more information, read  McKinsey Quarterly ’s Enduring Ideas: The GE-McKinsey nine-box matrix .

5. The BCG Growth-Share Matrix

This quadrant matrix, developed by Boston Consulting Group (BCG), is a tool companies use to assess the relative strength of product lines within their portfolios.

Product lines are assigned to one of four quadrants:

• Question marks

Read  BCG: The growth share matrix or the product portfolio.

6. Core Competencies

The process of identifying your company’s core competencies helps you define your company’s positioning and competitive advantage. A core competency is a proficiency in an area that is not easily replicated by competitors. It allows your company to deliver unique value to customers, thus giving the company a “leg up” on the competition. One example is how the employees and unique culture of Southwest Airlines allows them to provide better customer service and faster turnaround times for planes.

Read more about this framework at  Bain & Company Business Insights: Core Competencies .

Find related Business Strategy programs.

Browse all Professional & Executive Development programs.

About the Author

A strategic approach to managing yourself and others.

Managing others may not be complex, but it is certainly not easy.

Harvard Division of Continuing Education

The Division of Continuing Education (DCE) at Harvard University is dedicated to bringing rigorous academics and innovative teaching capabilities to those seeking to improve their lives through education. We make Harvard education accessible to lifelong learners from high school to retirement.

Hypothesis-Driven Approach: Crack Your Case Like a Consultant

• Last Updated June, 2023

A hypothesis-driven approach in consulting is a structured method of problem-solving. Consultants formulate a hypothesis for the solution to a business problem, then gather data to support or disprove it. 

Cracking a case interview can be a daunting task, with a wide range of potential solutions and approaches to consider. However, using a hypothesis-driven approach is a systematic and effective problem-solving method. It will impress your interviewer and demonstrate your readiness for a career in consulting.

In this article, we will talk about:

• The definitions of a hypothesis and a hypothesis-driven approach
• The differences between a hypothesis-driven approach and a non-hypothesis-driven approach
• An example of how to solve a case using both approaches
• Our 5-step process for using a hypothesis-driven approach to solve consulting cases

Let’s get started!

What Is a Hypothesis & a Hypothesis-Driven Approach?

Differences between a hypothesis-driven approach vs. non-hypothesis-driven approach, our 5-step process for using the hypothesis-driven mindset to solve cases, other consulting tools that will strengthen your problem-solving.

In the realm of science, the term “hypothesis” is used to describe a proposed explanation for a question or phenomenon, based on limited evidence, as a starting point for further investigation. Similarly, consultants act as scientists or as doctors solving their clients’ business problems, constantly forming and testing hypotheses to identify the best solutions. 

The key phrase here is “starting point,” as a hypothesis is an educated guess at the solution, formed from currently available information. As more data is gathered, the hypothesis may be adjusted or even discarded entirely.

Nail the case & fit interview with strategies from former MBB Interviewers that have helped 89.6% of our clients pass the case interview.

Hypothesis-Driven Approach

Consultants are engaged to efficiently and effectively solve their clients’ problems and assist in making critical business decisions. With the vast amount of data available and an array of options to consider, it can be overwhelming to examine everything. Time constraints on projects make it imperative that consultants avoid getting bogged down in excessive analysis and questioning, without making meaningful progress toward a recommendation.

Instead, consultants begin by forming a hypothesis after gaining an understanding of the client’s problem and high-level range of possibilities. Then, they gather data to test the initial hypothesis. If the data disproves the hypothesis, the consultants repeat the process with the next best hypothesis. This method of problem-solving is commonly used by top consulting firms, such as McKinsey.

A non-hypothesis-driven approach is the opposite of a hypothesis-driven approach. Instead of forming a hypothesis, the individual makes a recommendation only after thoroughly evaluating all data and possibilities. This approach may rely on intuition, trial and error, or exhaustively exploring all options to solve the problem. This is not an efficient method for a case interview, where time is limited.

An analogy that illustrates the distinction between the two methods is to look at problem-solving as trying to find a needle in a haystack. A non-hypothesis-driven approach would involve randomly searching through the entire stack without any clear strategy. 

On the other hand, a hypothesis-driven approach would involve dividing the haystack into smaller piles, and systematically searching through one section at a time. The searcher would gather information from the person who lost the needle, such as their location when it was lost, to identify the most likely pile to search first. This not only saves time but also increases the likelihood of finding the needle. If the needle is not found in the initial pile, the search can then move on to the next most probable pile.

Solving a Case Interview Using the Hypothesis-Driven Approach vs. the Non-Hypothesis-Driven Approach

To further illustrate the advantages of a hypothesis-driven approach, let’s examine two different approaches to the same case interview example. We’ll compare and contrast these approaches, highlighting the key distinctions between them. By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of the benefits of using a hypothesis-driven approach in problem-solving. 

The client is SnackCo, a consumer goods company that manufactures and sells trail mixes in the United States. Over the past decade, SnackCo has seen significant growth following the launch of premium trail mix products, capitalizing on the trend toward healthier snacking options. Despite this success, the company’s operations have remained unchanged for the past decade. SnackCo is asking for your help to improve its bottom line.

Let’s look at how two candidates, Alex and Julie, solve the same case.

The Non-Hypothesis-Driven Approach

After hearing this prompt, Alex jumps right into listing possible questions related to how to improve the bottom line.

Alex: I understand SnackCo wants to improve profitability. Here are some questions I want to look into. Has SnackCo’s retail prices remained the same in recent years?

Interviewer: No, SnackCo has adjusted prices quite closely to what competitive products are selling at.

Alex: Oh interesting. Are consumers willing to pay more for premium trail mix? Do we know if we are underpricing?

Interviewer: SnackCo’s Director of Sales strongly believes that they should not change product prices. He believes the consumers love the product and it is priced fairly. 

Alex: Got it. Has the client’s market share decreased?

Interviewer: No, the market share has increased over the years.

Alex: In that case, it seems like our growth is fine. Have the costs increased?

Interviewer: SnackCo has not made many changes to its costs and operations in the last decade. What are some ways we can help them look at their cost savings opportunities?

Although Alex is making progress and may eventually solve the case, his communication style gives the impression that he is randomly guessing at the sources of the problem, rather than using logical reasoning and structure to pinpoint the solution.

The Hypothesis-Driven Approach

Julie has prepared for her case interviews with My Consulting Offer’s coaches so she is well-versed in the hypothesis-driven approach. 

After hearing the same prompt, she takes a moment to write down the key issues she wants to dig into to solve this case and organizes her thoughts. 

Julie: For the goal of improving profitability, we could look at how to improve revenue or decrease costs. For revenue, we could look at if prices or volumes have changed. Since the client said they haven’t made any changes to the business operations in the last decade, I would like to start with a better understanding of their costs. However, before we begin, I want to confirm if there have been any changes to prices or volumes recently.

Interviewer: SnackCo’s Director of Sales strongly believes that they should not change product prices. They also believe the volumes have grown well as SnackCo is one of the market leaders now. 

Julie: Great. That confirms what I was thinking. It’s likely a cost problem. We could look at their variable costs, such as ingredients, or fixed costs, such as manufacturing facilities. Given that this is an established business, I would assume their fixed costs are likely consistent. Therefore, let’s start with their variable costs.

Interviewer: How should we think about variable costs?

Julie: Variable costs for SnackCo likely include ingredients, packaging, and freight. The levers they could pull to reduce these costs would be through supplier relationships or changing the product composition. 

Julie quickly identifies that variable costs are likely the problem and has a structured approach to understanding which opportunities to explore. 

Key Differences

The interviewer is looking for candidates with strong problem-solving and communication skills, which are the qualities of a good consultant. Let’s look at how the two candidates performed.

Problem-Solving

Alex’s approach to solving the client’s problem was haphazard, as he posed a series of seemingly unrelated questions in no particular order. This method felt more like a rapid-fire Q&A session rather than a structured problem-solving approach. 

On the other hand, Julie takes a structured and analytical approach to address profitability concerns. She quickly realizes that while revenue is one factor of profitability, it is likely costs that are the main concern, as they haven’t changed much in the last decade. She then breaks down the major cost categories and concludes that variable costs are the most likely opportunity for cost reduction. Julie is laser-focused on the client’s goal and efficiently gets to a solution.

Communication

Alex is not making a positive initial impression. If this were an actual client interaction, his questioning would appear disorganized and unprofessional. 

On the other hand, Julie appears more organized through her clear communication style. She only considers the most pertinent issues at hand (i.e., the client’s business operations and costs) and avoids going down irrelevant rabbit holes.

• Understand the client’s problem; ask clarifying questions if needed.
• Formulate an issue tree to break down the problem into smaller parts.
• State the initial hypothesis and key assumptions to be tested.
• Gather and analyze information to prove or disprove the hypothesis; do not panic if the hypothesis is disproven.
• Pivot the hypothesis if necessary and repeat step 4. Otherwise, make your recommendation on what the client can do to solve their problem. 

Other helpful tips to remember when using the hypothesis-driven approach:

• Stay focused on the client’s problem and remember what the end goal is.
• Think outside the box and consider new perspectives beyond traditional frameworks. The basic case interview frameworks are useful to understand but interviewers expect candidates to tailor to the specific client situation.
• Clearly communicate assumptions and implications throughout the interview; don’t assume the interviewer can read your mind.

A hypothesis-driven approach is closely tied to other key consulting concepts, such as issue trees, MECE, and 80/20. Let’s take a closer look at these topics and how they relate.

• Issue Trees

Issue trees, also known as decision trees, are visual tools that break down complex business problems into smaller, more manageable parts. In a consulting interview, candidates use the issue tree to outline key issues and potential factors in the client’s problem, demonstrating their understanding of the situation. This structure is then used to guide the case discussion, starting with the candidate’s best hypothesis, represented as one branch of the issue tree. For more information and examples of issue trees, check out our i ssue tree post. 

During the interview process, consulting firms look for candidates who can demonstrate a MECE (mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive) approach to problem-solving, which involves breaking down complex issues into distinct, non-overlapping components. 

A MECE approach in case interviews involves identifying all potential paths to solving a client’s problem at a high level. This allows the candidate to form an initial hypothesis with confidence that no potential solutions have been overlooked. To gain a deeper understanding, read our comprehensive guide on the MECE case structure .

Consultants use the 80/20 rule, also known as the Pareto principle, to prioritize their efforts and focus on the most important things. This principle states that 80% of effects come from 20% of causes, which means a small number of issues often drive a large portion of the problem. By identifying and focusing on the key issues, consultants can achieve significant results with relatively minimal resources.

By following these tips and developing a solid understanding of the hypothesis-driven approach to case-solving, you will have the necessary tools to excel in your case interview. For more interview resources, check out Our Ultimate Guide to Case Interview Prep . 

– – – – –

In this article, we’ve covered:

• Explanations of a hypothesis and hypothesis-driven approach
• Comparison between a hypothesis-driven approach and a non-hypothesis-driven approach
• Examples of the same case using both approaches and the key differences
• Practical tips on how to develop a hypothesis-driven mindset to ace the case

Still have questions?

If you have more questions about the best degrees for a career in consulting, leave them in the comments below. One of My Consulting Offer’s recruiters will answer them.

Other people preparing to apply to consulting firms found the following pages helpful:

• Our Ultimate Guide to Case Interview Prep
• Types of Case Interviews
• Case Frameworks
• Hypothesis Trees

Help with Your Consulting Application

Thanks for turning to My Consulting Offer for advice on the best majors for consulting. My Consulting Offer has helped almost 89.6% of the people we’ve worked with to get a job in management consulting. We want you to be successful in your consulting interviews too. For example, here is how Misha was able to get his offer from BCG.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

© My CONSULTING Offer

3 Top Strategies to Master the Case Interview in Under a Week

We are sharing our powerful strategies to pass the case interview even if you have no business background, zero casing experience, or only have a week to prepare.

No thanks, I don't want free strategies to get into consulting.

We are excited to invite you to the online event., where should we send you the calendar invite and login information.

We’re fighting to restore access to 500,000+ books in court this week. Join us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

The McKinsey mind : understanding and implementing the problem-solving tools and management techniques of the world's top strategic consulting firm

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

1,127 Previews

13 Favorites

Better World Books

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

EPUB and PDF access not available for this item.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by AaronC on June 3, 2015

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Hey! You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Consultants as Problem Solvers or Capacity Builders?

A s we seek ways to cope with the increasing rate and complexity of change affecting our businesses, many of us have begun to recognize the need for ongoing transformation of our organizations through experimentation and learning. Yet we’re finding that making the changes necessary to support this process can be difficult. Adopting new ways of working together can prove extremely challenging. And lessons we’ve learned from past experiences may not directly apply to those we are facing now. To overcome these obstacles, many of us turn to consultants with expertise in the area of change management.

But how do we go about finding a consultant who can give us the help we need? Managers—particularly those seeking to build “learning organizations” — can find themselves frustrated by the quality of advice and services they receive from outside experts. Recent research into the experience of consultants who specialize in organizational learning disciplines suggests that this frustration can stem from the conflicting, unspoken assumptions managers and consultants hold as they embark on an initiative together.

This finding raises important questions for managers: What mental models do you hold about the change process? What role should consultants play? How do your preconceptions shape the relationships you form with consultants? And, finally, what outcomes do you expect — quick fixes or lasting shifts in corporate culture?

To begin to explore these questions, let’s first consider why tackling today’s complex challenges requires a shift in understanding about learning and work. We then examine the role of the consultant in building capacity for ongoing organizational learning.

Building Social Bonds

Thought leaders such as Peter Senge and William Isaacs suggest that many managers fail to bring about needed organizational change because of their assumptions about learning and work. For example, many executives assume that work is best done by finding a technically competent person in the area of concern, having this person determine the most appropriate course of action, and then implementing that action. From this perspective, learning is a process through which individuals gain technical knowledge.

These executives also assume that the best way to determine technical ability is through competition — that is, generating a debate between technical experts to determine who best understands how to help. Feeling the need to be proactive, these specialists may hastily label something as a “problem” and look for the most direct solution: the “quickest fix.” This approach often improves the situation in the short run but actually worsens it over the long term.

Learning experts suggest that this emphasis on technical competence and competition may be useful for relatively simple issues, but not for more complex challenges. The difficulties facing most managers today are generally too intricate for one or two people to determine the right course of action based on previous experience. Each situation is likely to be different from previous ones, requiring solutions tailored to the particular circumstances.

Therefore, rather than focusing on individual expertise, Senge and others recommend a view of work that emphasizes building social bonds — through practicing collaborative tools, such as dialogue, partnership coaching, and visioning — while getting things done. As people develop new skills for conversing and new ways of behaving, they build strong relationships and increase their capacity for anticipating and handling novel situations together. From this perspective, learning means building the capacity to learn together how to meet future challenges.

From Problem Solving to Capacity Building

Thus, to be successful in this rapidly changing marketplace, we need to cultivate groups of people with diverse perspectives who can learn how to come to a shared understanding of the often hidden forces that shape their organizations both internally and externally. In addition, these teams should include those charged with implementing decisions. As a result, they can take more effective action at a fundamental rather than symptomatic level.

In this context, according to Senge and Daniel H. Kim, consultants are ideally capacity builders who develop links between research and practice rather than problem solvers. They provide methods and tools to help others expand their capabilities and skills on an ongoing basis, thereby transforming concepts into practical know-how and results. These consultants may have knowledge in a variety of areas, but the contribution they make is framed as building capacity for learning and interpersonal connections rather than providing expertise.

What are the main differences between a problem-solving versus a capacity-building approach to consulting? (See “Alternative Models of Consulting.”)

Linear vs. Cyclical Processes. Consultants who take a problem-solving orientation typically use a linear process in their work. They first identify problems, then diagnose them, and finally find and implement solutions. At this point, the project or consulting assignment often ends. In contrast, consultants who view their purpose as enabling organizations to continually adjust to change typically implement a cyclical process. With each project or assignment, they generate new information about the organization’s culture and what is required for it to move toward its vision.

Single vs. Double-Loop Learning. Chris Argyris and Donald Schön were the first to describe single-loop and double-loop learning. When we engage in single-loop learning, as is typical of a problem-solving approach, we take action to solve a problem, assess the consequences of our intervention, and use what we learn in taking new actions; we continue this process until we think we have solved the problem. Single-loop learning might involve asking, “Did the action solve the problem? Did we meet the standards we had set?”

In double-loop learning, which is a key element of building capacity to handle change, we assess not only the effect of our actions on the problem, but also the variables that shape thinking within the organization more broadly. We do this by asking questions such as, “What made us think this was a problem? Why did we set the standards in such a way?”

Finite Commitment vs. “Communities of Practice.” Consultants who employ a linear process that has definite starting and finishing points usually view the client relationship as temporary, ending when the contract is fulfilled. Those focused on building capacity using a cyclical approach may utilize contracts to define work they do, but they view their purpose, process, and commitment as long term.

Etienne Wenger has referred to the long-term relationship that can form between a consultant and client organization as a “community of practice” (see “Communities of Practice: Learning As a Social System,” V9N5). While not formally part of the organization, consultants learn together with organization members through their regular interactions. As a result, they create social bonds and a shared repertoire of resources (common language, sensibilities, and so forth) that enable them to collaborate effectively.

ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF CONSULTING

These communities of practice do not expire when a contract ends or a project is completed. Rather, the nature of the community shifts from active engagement to “dispersed,” where members keep in touch though they no longer engage with the same intensity. In this situation, consultants feel committed to organizations beyond the life of particular contracts, because they feel they belong to a community. They might, without charging a fee, provide advice outside of a given project.

Experts vs. Capacity Builders. Finally, the role the consultant plays differs according to his or her orientation and the client’s expectations. In a problem-solving approach, a client would expect a consultant to act as an expert in the managers’ area of need. This role might include helping managers determine what they need to do or helping managers who already know what they want to do to implement their plans. On the other hand, clients who understand the power of building capacity for learning may require a consultant to facilitate the process by which members of the organization solve their own problems.

The problem-solving and capacity-building approaches appear to be quite separate models of how consultants can act. We might expect that consultants would consistently adopt one or the other of the approaches. Our research suggests, however, that consultants’ choices are more complex and have a lot to do with their clients’ assumptions about how to tackle the organizational challenges they face.

Handling the Tension

Although many consultants may agree with the philosophy of organizational learning, because they practice predominantly among clients oriented toward solving problems, they feel pulled between the two models. To begin to explore the impact of this tension on client-consultant relationships, we interviewed seven New Zealand consultants who had worked, cumulatively, with organizations in four of the five disciplines that Senge says are essential to organizational learning: team learning, shared vision, systems thinking, and personal mastery. All worked independently or in firms with 10 or fewer associates. Four were founders and managers of their own consulting companies. Only one consultant from any given company was represented in the study. All were either known to the researchers or recommended by one of the other consultants being interviewed.

We chose these consultants because we knew they preferred taking a capacity-building approach in their work and wanted to analyze how they dealt with the tension between the short-term results that some clients wanted them to produce and their personal desire to help the client support the creation of infrastructures for learning. We kept the sample small so we could conduct semi-structured interviews to generate rich descriptions of consulting practices. Such descriptions allowed us to explore the particular issues relevant to consultants as they dealt with the tension between problem solving and capacity building.

We asked the consultants to discuss how they had carried out critical phases of the consulting process with what they considered a particularly important client. They described how they had gained access to the organization, established a contract, collected data, diagnosed needs, implemented solutions, reviewed work, and terminated the consultancy. We also asked them how the relationship with the chosen client differed from relationships with other clients.

THEMES FROM INTERVIEWS

Consulting practice based on capacity building.

• Use of reflection
• Use of conversation as a strategic practice
• Emphasis on attitudinal change and “knowledge transfer” as benefits to clients

Factors Limiting Capacity Building

• Clients’ fear of an “overly theoretical” approach
• Lack of trust in the relationship

Consulting for Capacity Building. After we analyzed transcripts of the interviews, we saw clear evidence that the consultants viewed their work in terms of building capacity. The consultants’ descriptions of actions they took revealed their deliberate efforts to conduct themselves in ways that aligned with organizational learning philosophies (see “Themes from Interviews”). For instance, they sought to understand their clients’ work at a deep level and confront clients with double-loop challenges that went beyond contractual obligations.

In addition, the consultants described the kinds of benefits their clients received in behavioral terms, that is, they didn’t discuss how they solved particular problems, but rather described their clients’ attitudinal changes with phrases such as “greater self-awareness,” “commitment to people issues,” “improved communications,” and “a shift from a managing or controlling orientation to a learning orientation.” One consultant described the benefits in this way:

“I am helping them to work as a team rather than as individuals. So they are benefiting . . . partly from my intellectual input and partly from my facilitation skills, and also from my ability to challenge them. They end up better organized, more focused, thinking slightly differently — sometimes a lot differently — which in the beginning they couldn’t. Generally speaking, they believe they have done it themselves, which is about right because they have developed themselves. The thinking is theirs. The decision is theirs.”

Three participants also mentioned “knowledge transfer to the client” as an important outcome; they didn’t just teach their clients technical “know-how.” One participant described his goal as passing his “cast of mind” or way of thinking about the work to his client. Another said, “One of the requirements of the design is that [clients] are able to perform some of the skills we perform for them and then [the skills] become embedded. So we demonstrate over and over again. . . . Otherwise there is no change in behavior. They have to unlearn 30 years of belief and practice, and I know how difficult that is. But as the project draws down, we will appear less frequently.”

Along with framing benefits to clients in capacity-building terms, participants spoke about adopting organizational learning principles directly into their own practice. For example, three consultants described how they incorporated reflection into their process of review, both with the client and with themselves. One respondent felt that personal reflection was often a more intense form of review than client feedback because “My experience is we tend to be harder on ourselves than clients [are].”

Four participants considered ongoing conversations with their clients — what Juanita Brown and David Isaacs describe as a core business process that contributes to learning — an essential part of their consulting work. Talk in organizations is often focused on making decisions, which in turn creates adversarial relationships that do not encourage reflection or shared understanding. Conversation needs to allow for a full range of contributions — offering new ideas, yielding to the direction of others, and reflecting in silence — to create the conditions for learning.

Some described using conversation not only to establish issues to address but to build commitment to the change processes being considered. One participant said that conversation often replaced the traditional attempts by managers to “sell” change programs to the rest of the organization. Engaging people throughout the organization in conversation about issues of significant concern allowed shared understanding of needed action to emerge.

Limits to Capacity Building. As this study indicates, consultants endeavored to incorporate capacity building into their work with key clients with whom they had longstanding relationships. However, two outcomes from the interviews showed that this approach was not possible in all their projects.

Six participants mentioned clients’ apprehension about taking an overly theoretical orientation, a fear intensified by the fact that some areas of organizational learning — such as systems thinking and reflective conversation — may feel “unnatural” and involve concepts that do not appear to have immediate practical value to the client. One participant described clients struggling to “find the connection between what we are talking about and the bottom line.” To respond to such concerns, these consultants deliberately developed strategies that both delivered practical outcomes and challenged clients to “widen their mindsets.” Often this involved starting the relationship with intermittent contacts and small projects, which built into long-term relationships over time.

Six participants also mentioned the importance of developing trust with the clients before the capacity building work could take hold. Because practicing organizational learning concepts requires the involvement of both minds and hearts, along with deeper levels of communication, consultants reported feeling bolder in confronting clients about issues that needed to be addressed only as trust grew. As one participant put it: “With a stronger relationship with the client . . . I became bolder . . . not letting them ‘wimp out,’ and I would say, ‘Give it a go.’” Another expressed the tendency for consultants to demonstrate personal commitment as they tried to build trust and capacity: “We can’t retreat in the end and say, ‘You paid us to do this thing.’ So we tend to enter into quite deep relationships with clients because of this. The communication modes and the levels of trust are high and we are working with minds and hearts. When we are doing learning, there is no other way.”

Implications for Consultants and Managers

Although this research was exploratory, involving interviews with a small sample of consultants, the results were enlightening to both the interviewers and participants. We had suspected that consultants would have an “either/or” approach to resolving the tension inherent in their position. Either they would operate according to traditional models of consulting, with an emphasis on technical rationality, or they would adapt their practice to reflect organizational learning principles.

We were surprised and encouraged to find that the consultants interviewed had more sophisticated ways of dealing with the paradox. They were able to hold building capacity for learning as an ideal, yet work with clients who did not allow them to put this philosophy into practice. They typically started their relationships with projects aimed at deliverable outcomes that allowed them to establish credibility. Consultants were willing to establish expertise by finding practical solutions to the client’s immediate business problems. At the same time, the participants in this study consciously built relationships with clients that would make capacity-building consulting possible in the future.

Consultants reported being able to do their best work within trusting relationships with clients. Such relationships enabled them:

• To more effectively understand clients’ real needs through deeper insights into the organization.
• To be bolder in confronting clients with fundamental changes that needed to be made.
• To review and improve their own practice openly and collaboratively with clients.

Participants also generally talked about their own responsibility in building trusting relationships. They described strategies such as using small, intermittent projects with clear, practical outcomes and deliberately avoiding language and work that appeared too theoretical or conceptual.

Although the focus of the research was on consultants, this finding has important implications for managers seeking to use consulting services. Because the responsibility for the development and maintenance of any relationship lies with both parties, managers need to understand how to enable consultants to be most effective. In situations where managers do not accept this responsibility, a Catch-22 situation seems likely to occur. For example, managers may hire consultants to build the organization’s capacity for learning, but reward only those who provide short-term, expert solutions to organizational problems. In doing so, they force consultants to compete with each other and offer them little freedom to experiment, act openly, or confront real issues.

While all the consultants in the study reported being able to form successful long-term relationships with some managers, they also cited many examples where executives’ assumptions made it difficult to do so (see “Mike’s Story”). For these consultants, the majority of their clients were primarily interested in having their problems solved.

MIKE'S STORY

I now start a relationship by asking clients, “What legacy do you want to leave behind? How can I help you create that legacy? How do we sustain this legacy?” I don’t work without the commitment of the CEO. And I ask CEOs about their commitment. I ask, “What role are you going to play?” and “Tell me about your track record in sponsoring long-term change.”

What challenge does this research hold for you? If you want to lead change in your organization with the help of consultants, you must build trusting partnerships that will allow the consultants to act in a truly capacity-building role. While doing so is based on a set of assumptions that may feel unfamiliar and unnatural to many managers, those who can make this shift in perspective will have an advantage in their efforts to build organizations equipped to adapt to the challenges of the future.

Phil Ramsey (P. L. [email protected]) is a lecturer in human resource development at Massey University in New Zealand.

Paresha Sinha has consulted and taught in India. Her master’s degree included research on consulting for learning organizations. Paresha currently works for the Centre for the Study of Leadership at Victoria University, New Zealand.

For Further Reading

Brown, Juanita, and David Isaacs. “Conversation As a Core Business Process,” The Systems Thinker, V7N10, December 1996/January 1997

Organizational Learning at Work: Embracing the Challenges of the New Workplace (Pegasus Communications, 1999)

Tannen, Deborah. The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue (Random House, 1998)

• Build your sensitivity to capacity-building and problem-solving orientations;
• Identify where developing a longterm relationship would be appropriate.
• Review your processes for concluding consulting projects. How can you incorporate double-loop inquiry based around consultants’ insights?
• Talk with preferred consultants about what it would take for them to feel free to do their best work.

Related Articles

Accountability leadership.

What comes to mind when you hear the word “accountability”? If it is something along the lines of…

Using Stories to Spark Organizational Change

Much has been written about how stories have been used to celebrate and strengthen an existing culture. Stories…

Strategic Questions: Engaging People’s Best Thinking

Stop asking so many questions,” many children hear at home. “Don’t give me the question, give me the…

Leading Ethically Through Foresight

Rereading Robert Greenleaf ’s renowned 1970 essay “The Servant As Leader” is always an exercise in humility for…

Sign up to stay in the loop

Receive updates of new articles and save your favorites..

• First Name *
• Last Name *
• Password * Enter Password Confirm Password

Business Problem Solving

• Fact-Based Analysis Tools
• Teamwork skills
• Methodologies

Management consulting companies have to be the best business problem solvers in the world – it is their core competence! They all use the same set of tools – you can now use them too!

Stage I: Setting up the problem solving

The highest leverage point in the whole problem solving process is setting up the problem. It is worth investing a few days up-front to save you weeks later!

• Understanding the situation
• Defining the question
• Structuring the problem
• Creating a workplan

Stage II: Fact-finding and Analysis

This is the bulk of the work! Every project will need different analysis, but you may find some of these tools helpful.

Stage III: Narrowing to a recommendation

In order to make a recommendation, your thinking needs to be robust. Use these tools to check that your solution is the right one and will withstand scrutiny.

• Evaluating Alternatives
• Proving your recommendation
• Planning implementation
• Calculating financial impact

Stage IV: Communicating your recommendation

There is no point finding the best recommendation if you cannot persuade others. Since powerpoint is the most common business presentations, this Stage focuses on how to create and deliver a persuasive powerpoint pack.

• Crafting a storyline
• Saying it with charts
• Preparing a dummy pack
• Handling Q&A
• Delivering the presentation

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

• Search for:

Recent Comments

• No categories
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.com

• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• Manage subscriptions

Grab your spot at the free arXiv Accessibility Forum

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

Title: problem solving through human-ai preference-based cooperation.

Abstract: While there is a widespread belief that artificial general intelligence (AGI) -- or even superhuman AI -- is imminent, complex problems in expert domains are far from being solved. We argue that such problems require human-AI cooperation and that the current state of the art in generative AI is unable to play the role of a reliable partner due to a multitude of shortcomings, including inability to keep track of a complex solution artifact (e.g., a software program), limited support for versatile human preference expression and lack of adapting to human preference in an interactive setting. To address these challenges, we propose HAI-Co2, a novel human-AI co-construction framework. We formalize HAI-Co2 and discuss the difficult open research problems that it faces. Finally, we present a case study of HAI-Co2 and demonstrate its efficacy compared to monolithic generative AI models.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• HTML (experimental)
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .