THE STRUCTURE OF A PROBLEM

What is the actual structure of a problem? I recently discovered that I had assumed that I knew when actually I did not. That recent discovery occurred after I did the 5-Minute Manager training in Hong Kong. I took the days after the training to reflect on it, update the manual, and in the process I learned a lot of things that I did not know during the training. Amazing how that works!

Many decades ago Robert Martin wrote a fascinating book, Change Management Excellence (1999). It was there that he used the Well-Formed Outcome as his guide for creating a Well-Formed Problem. Later I expanded and develop it further in Creative Solutions (2017). After having studied the sequence of problems for decades in the context of therapy, I unwittingly assumed that the sequence itself was the structure. But I was wrong. It is not.

Working with that Martin’s model (and many others over the years) when I expanded the Well-Formed Problem, what resulted was an extensive process for problem-solving. At that time, I really thought that it was the structure of a problem. However I was confusing the sequence of factors that one could use in gathering information about the problem as the same thing as the actual structure of a problem. Only recently have I become aware of that confusion.

What I had was a model of the information processes about a problem so that we could clearly and precisely define it—create a well-defined problem. We do that so that we can then be clear on what it is to solve. Yet that is not the same as knowing the structure of a problem. To identify the difference, consider this question: Do you have a mental model in your mind of a problem which allows you to see it, to see the problem? What does it looks like? What are its component parts? Does that supply you with a strategy for how to quickly get to the heart of the problem?

While the well-formed problem certain provides a lot of clarity and focus, it does not give us a picture of a problem. That’s the difference. So I really did not have a model of the structure. Realizing that enabled me to begin to consider that.

Now one problem with the well-formed problem process is this: It is not quick. In fact, because the processes are thorough and extensive, the process is actually quite time-consuming. And inasmuch as the process does not include a problem’s structure, it only provides a step-by-step process for gathering high quality information and then generating a description of a well-formed problem. That was a glaring absence in the first edition of the 5-Minute Manager.

What I find amazing is that I only discovered that a week ago! In all of the preparation leading up to the 5-Minute Manager training, I did not consider that I did not know the structure of a problem. And as I contemplate the scores and scores of books and articles on problem-solving I’ve read over the years, I would say that I don’t think anyone else has ever specified a problem’s actual structure. Amazing, right?

The day after the training, The 5-Minute Manager in Hong Kong, I spent several hours reflecting on the

training and what I learned. That’s when I discovered the missing piece— the very structure of a problem. Realizing I only had a process for clarity of definition, I asked myself, “What is the actual structure of a problem?” I did not know. In the training I had generated a process of 7 problem-solving questions that would lead a person to clearly defining ‘the real problem’ so it could be solved. But that was the how-to not a description of the structure.

Now to identify the structure of any experience, we generally begin with all of the variables, ask about how they are sequenced, how they are put together, how they interact with each other, and how they show up in real life. This is what we have been doing in NLP since the beginning. It is what I began doing with resilience in my modeling of that from 1990 to 1994. So what is the structure of a problem?

First, a Trigger Overall, a problem has a trigger, something to which a person responds. That trigger tells the person when to have the problem; it tells the person the place (environment, area, domain, context) where he can be triggered to have a problem. The trigger then activates the person. It works as if it were a Stimulus— Response pattern (S-R). It is not, but it seems that way because things get connected. This is the power of association.

Tommy calls us ‘stupid,’ we feel insulted, rejected, or attacked. We associate a bodily feeling (shame and embarrassment) and respond to the trigger with yelling at Tommy or running away. It seems that the trigger (the words) sets off the emotional problem of the symptom (feeling criticized). But actually the emotions are but symptoms of the problem and not the actual problem.

Next, a Stimulus—Response Connection Once we have a S-R association, we easily anticipate that if something isn’t done, things are going to get worse. So we worry and fret as we imaginatively anticipate the consequences of the problem (e.g., more and more insults and rejection). Yet once again, the consequences are not the actual problem. They are additional results of the problem like the emotional symptoms. Yet the S-R association doesn’t work all the time or everywhere, only in certain contexts (when we think Tommy means it). In other contexts, it doesn’t generate the problem (when we are joking about the word ‘stupid’). So the context is not the problem.

After Four Variables, Then the Problem! What then is the problem if not these four variables? How is a problem actually structured? First, in the structure of a problem there is first a want (or a not-want). “I want to be respected by Tommy and called his friend.” And its opposite: “I don’t want to be called ‘stupid.’” There is what I don’t want—the name calling. The name calling blocks me from getting want I want. It is an obstacle that interferes with what I want.

Next, there are the meanings that I give to the name-calling (e.g., if he calls me stupid, I must be stupid; if he calls me that, he is hating and rejecting me which means the end of the friendship; if Tommy does this, everyone will do this all of my life forever; I’ll never be accepted; I’m flawed and worthless, etc.).

With this we now have identified the beginning of the structure of a problem. Problems typically involve the world you live in. You take something, set a desire for something other than that and now you have a gap between where you are today and where you want to be in the future. That mental gap is the beginning of a problem. It is not yet a problem. To that gap you may think, “This is great, I will apply one or more resources, bridge the gap and achieve what I want.” So what is that? You could call it excitement, passion, taking up a challenge, unleashing your potentials, etc.

To have a problem, to that mental gap, you need some negative thinking. “Why can’t I have want I ant when I want it?” “It’s going to take time and effort.” “I don’t know how to bridge this gap.” “No one could ever get over that gap; it’s too big.” Add whatever are your favorite lines of negative thinking and now you have a problem. You hare in your mind an obstacle that blocks you from getting what you want. You have “thrown” (blemo) in front of you (pro-) an obstacle— you have created a problem.

All problems are inside our minds. There are no problems “out there” beyond your cortex! Out there are only conditions that we find in the world. Out there is what exists. Inside your mind is how you think about what exists. As the meaning-maker, you are also the problem creator. The structure of the problem lies in how you think about something, what you think, and what you think about your thinking. That’s because problems are multi-level layers of thoughts.

Ah, now we are getting close to having a picture of the structure of a problem. Do you want a picture? You can now use the Meta Place diagram to sketch out its structure. And with that we can begin to understand what a problem is and how a problem works. We can specify our unique strategy for creating any one of our problems. [More in the next posts]