Solving Organizational Problems: A Proven Method for Groups to Permanently Resolve Difficult, Complex, and Persistent Problems
- Description
- Product Details
- About the Author
- Read an Excerpt
- Table of Contents
Everyone knows how to solve problems. But persistent problems, such as low morale, reduced productivity, or a gradual reduction in business metrics, can often seem insurmountable. Chris Christensen, a recognized technical management authority, provides a proven, straightforward approach to permanently resolve the most difficult and complicated problems that plague organizations. Follow the seven-step process detailed in Solving Organizational Problems to ensure that those recurring and debilitating problems that plague your organization get—and stay— solved.
Solving Organizational Problems borrows proven tools, practices, and techniques from marketing and sales, industrial psychology, six sigma, lean operations, project management, strategic planning, new product development, creativity enhancement, and other business processes, and combines them into a simple, straightforward, powerful method for surfacing and permanently eliminating troublesome, persistent problems once and for all. This approach is being applied with remarkable results in dozens of businesses and government agencies all over the world.
ISBN-13: 9781949804546
Media Type: Paperback
Publisher: Toplink Publishing - LLC
Publication Date: 10-11-2018
Pages: 108
Product Dimensions: 6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 0.22(d)
Chris Christensen is a recognized management authority with over four decades of both managing and advising managers on how to solve organizational problems. He has a strong background in technology and business. He is founder and president of Christensen Associates, Inc., a consulting firm in Playa del Rey, California. He has helped organizations all over the world solve problems in technology, manufacturing, healthcare, government, software development, energy supply, and business forecasting.
Why another book on problem solving? There have been hundreds of books on this topic printed already. In fact, most adults already know how to solve problems—it is impossible to reach maturity without solving many problems. So what good can another book on this subject provide? First, based upon my observations as a business consultant, I believe some of the methods for solving problems used in my client's organizations are not as effective as they could be. The process shown in this book addresses the major shortcomings that I have seen in those organizations that fail to resolve persistent, organizational problems. Second, while everyone in an organization knows how to solve problems, they solve them in many different ways. When a technical or an executive team sets out to solve a problem, however, it needs to follow a single approach. Otherwise, the problem solvers waste time and undermine the collaboration necessary to resolve problems efficiently. In this book, I describe a single process from beginning to end. The process includes various tools such as creativity exercises or team voting methods that may be utilized at various parts of the process. In my opinion, this method represents the best approach that groups can use to permanently solve those problems that seem to never go away no matter how many times and how much money is spent trying to solve them. The problem-solving process I propose differs from others in many ways. Here are four salient distinctions: 1. Attention to identifying key problems. In this seven-step process, more time is spent determining which problem to solve before expending money, time, and effort to solve it. Accordingly, people trying to solve a problem have a better understanding of the importance of the problem they are solving and the feasibility of potential solutions, so they are better equipped to prioritize their work. 2. Defining problems in ways that expand choices for solutions. Problems are defined in a fashion that actually increases opportunities for solutions rather than reducing the number of them. 3. Attention to multiple causes of problems. This seven-step process does not seek and does not settle for identifying a single root cause of any problem—rather, the complete set of root causes is surfaced and eliminated. 4. Emphasis on implementation of solutions. Unlike nearly all of the other approaches documented in books and trade journals, this process includes a practical step that forces the problem-solving team to persuade management to incorporate those changes necessary to permanently solve the problem. The problem is not considered solved until the necessary changes are enacted to ensure that the problem is—and stays—solved. My hope is that managers will adopt this problem-solving process to resolve the most pressing and troublesome issues that the organization confronts. In addition to recommending a single, effective problem-solving process (chapter three), I discuss how an organization can change its culture so that problems can surface more efficiently and become permanently resolved (chapter four). Also provided are case studies to show some results that teams have achieved by using the process (chapter five). The process for solving problems described in this book developed over many years. As a manager in industry for three decades and then as a business consultant for two more decades, I have led or guided many groups through problem-solving activities. I learned to apply steps from many disciplines to actual situations in real organizations. Some of the techniques I tried from Total Quality Management, Six Sigma, Lean Operations, Operational Excellence, Design for Excellence, Business Process Improvement, and other management initiatives worked better than others. Accordingly, I experimented with improvements to the problem-solving process over time until it became what I share in this book. I have confidence that the problem-solving approach I describe is both effective and practical. I have watched it actually cause changes in many organizations that improved profits, increased customer satisfaction, lowered operating costs, improved employee satisfaction, and alleviated management stress. Primarily, for the past two decades I have observed these improvements to business operations as the result of workshops that I have conducted on-site at many organizations. The workshops typically take two days with a week or two in between them. I introduce the process to a problem-solving team that either selects a problem to address or is given one by its management. Together we develop a set of solutions, including recommendations for changes that need to be made in the organization in order to fully resolve the problem. During the last two hours of the last session, the problem-solving team presents their recommendations to the decision-makers and receives immediate feedback. A few times the recommendations were adopted during the workshop, but more often, the managers asked for more research and offered some considerations of which the problem-solving team was not aware during the workshop. In nearly all cases, the senior managers have ultimately adopted a revised version of the recommendations made by the problem-solving team and the organization has benefited. I have never experienced a situation in which management has rejected the recommendations out of hand. Why do organizations fail to solve their problems? I have isolated ten key reasons that cause organizations to be unable to remove problems and keep them resolved. I also indicate how to prevent each of these roadblocks. 1. Everyone knows how to solve problems, but they do not solve them in the same way. The problem-solving process must standardize the steps that are taken to ensure not merely that they are effective, but also that everyone is doing the same necessary things. In this fashion there will be far better cooperation, more effective collaboration, and less wasted effort. The problem-solving process must be adopted by all stakeholders in order for it to be effective. 2. Individuals resist a single systematic problem-solving method because they think it inhibits creativity or is too complex to follow. The problem-solving process you adopt must be simple and fully understood by everyone involved, and the benefits of following the process must be appreciated. Otherwise, it will be avoided by some and resisted by others. 3. Some organizations solve the wrong problem. When they have solved a problem, often at considerable expense and after great difficulty, nobody cares. Or they discover that more important problems surface or that the problem they thought they solved wasn't solved at all. The problem-solving method should include a step that determines which problem the problem-solving team should tackle so that if and when they are successful, the organization benefits because the most important problem was solved. 4. Sometimes the problem selected is too difficult for the team to solve at that time using the available resources. It is critical to ensure that appropriate resources exist to address the problem and that the organization knows how to solve the problem. If these requirements cannot be met, the solution plan should not be accepted, since it will waste resources and is ultimately impossible. 5. Most organizations define problems in a way that limits the number of possible solutions. The problem should be defined (or redefined) in a fashion that permits a maximum number of possible solutions. 6. Nearly all problem-solving processes include a step to determine6. only one root cause of the problem rather than multiple root causes. But complex, recurring organizational problems rarely have a single, root cause, so removing just one will seldom resolves the issue. It is important to identify as many of a problem's causes as possible. 7. The problem-solving process permits old, ineffective solutions7. to be tried again. Creativity is essential to developing new and effective solutions to problems. Most problem-solving approaches emphasize the goal of generating innovative solutions, but they don't sufficiently stress the use of tools and practices to enhance creativity. The result is that new solutions still contain aspects of the old problem. The problem-solving process must include techniques that enhance the chances of developing a creative solution. 8. Sometimes the solution introduces new complications. The problem-solving process must include a step that forces the team to consider what impact the proposed solution will have on other processes and other business concerns. 9. The problem-solving team stops before achieving buy-in from the management for implementation of the solution. Nearly all problem-solving processes that organizations employ do not require the implementation of the solution. Those processes Solving Organizational Problems stop at making a recommendation for improvements to the organization; they do not demand that the appropriate managers who have the authority to implement the changes be persuaded to do so. The problem-solving process you adopt must include identifying who the decision makers are and presenting to them a persuasive argument to implement the solution. 10. The problem-solving team fails to carry out follow-up activities to determine whether the problem was and remains solved. To have an effective process, follow-up must be planned and practiced or this step (and to some extent, the entire process) is meaningless. Simply put, there are no immediate consequences of not solving problems in most organizations. While everyone understands the benefits of addressing problems, organizations do not typically hold individuals accountable for identifying and resolving persistent problems, and therefore addressing them is often given only partial priority. The problem-solving process you adopt should include steps to create personal responsibility for the resolution of persistent problems. In the seven-step problem-solving process that follows, I offer ways to avoid and overcome these challenges. Preliminary Activities—List Proposed Problems In this subchapter we will discover how to identify persistent problems that inhibit an organization's ability to achieve its business objectives and how to differentiate these long-standing issues from sudden problems which can be solved more easily. The goal of this preliminary stage is to develop a list of "candidate" problems from which the best one to be solved can be selected. The outcome of this stage will be a list provided to the problem-solving team for Step One activities. In many cases, the list of candidate problems may be short and choosing which one to address seems obvious. Examples of obvious problems that merit immediate attention are unexpected violations of regulatory rules or laws, sudden loss of a major customer or essential supplier, a startling accident causing death or injury, and sudden catastrophic failure of a product that is critical to the business. These problems are obvious and when one of them occurs it should be dealt with immediately. In these cases no selection is necessary. But these problems are not persistent. Persistent problems are ones that have existed for a long time and have proven to be unresponsive to previous attempts to solve them. Examples of persistent problems are low employee morale, reduced productivity, inability to hire replacements for retiring employees, and gradual reduction in business metrics such as stock prices, profits, and cash flow. When the organization has unsuccessfully tried to solve stubborn problems that have not been resolved with simpler techniques, a more systematic approach is required, and this includes making a more subtle differentiation of the candidate problems. A systematic approach means creating a comprehensive list of candidate recurring organizational problems and determining which one is the best candidate for the problem-solving team to solve first. These preliminary activities may be performed by management or by a problem-solving team selected by management. Problem-solving teams are often created to solve a specific recurring organizational problem that management feels prevents the organization from achieving its objectives. In that case, the team need not develop a large list of candidate problems to be solved—management effectively performs this preparatory activity before the problem-solving team is assigned its task. Whether management or the problem-solving team identifies those candidate problems that should be considered, developing the list ought to follow a systematic process like the one I have described in this subchapter. In listing candidate problems, the team—or managers—can use any format they find useful to describe the problems. Since the problems will be redefined in Step Two, the list of candidate problems need not be precise in the preliminary stage. Examples of complaints such as "Employees feel they are not treated fairly," "We don't have the tools we need to do our jobs," and "We have a lack of training" are sufficient at this stage. Any phrasing that captures the importance of the concept is fine. Whining Session In my consulting practice, when I am asked to assist an organization in solving problems, I have the organization assemble a team of problem solvers and I begin by holding a "whining session." I encourage the team to list any and all of the problems that annoy or worry them about their current jobs, the places that they physically work, and the organization. I find that they have many issues on their minds but they often need some assistance in creating a comprehensive list of problems. In this fashion I have been successful in many organizations in developing a list of candidate problems quickly and with a minimum amount of effort. There are many other approaches to surfacing those problems that prevent an organization from meeting its objectives effectively. These other methods usually require more time to apply than the "whining session" I ordinarily employ, but they actually provide greater confidence that the list of candidate problems is comprehensive. The problem-solving team or managers may wish to experiment with other methods for creating a preliminary list and determine which one works best for their particular environment. These are a few of the more popular techniques: • Brainstorming • Third-Party Audits • Voice of the Customer • Benchmarking • Checklists • Identify Project Risk • Identify Potential Product and Process Failures • Operational Excellence Brainstorming The most common approach to determining what is wrong with an organization is to assemble a group of people who are experiencing difficulties in performing their jobs and ask them to develop a list of problems. The technique often used for this task is "brainstorming." There are three considerations that must be incorporated into brainstorming if it is to be effective. (Brainstorming is useful for the wide identification of problems as in the preparatory stage discussed here, and it also is useful in identifying which problem should be resolved first, discussed in the next subchapter on Step One). First of all, the experts assembled to perform the brainstorming must in fact be experts—that is, people with experience, not merely observers. Newly minted MBAs are not as useful in identifying what's wrong with an organization as blue-collar workers who are actually experiencing the problems! The brainstorming team must include people representing all levels of the management. While senior executives have a clearer vision of what's wrong with the business situation of the organization, the shop floor workers have the best perspective of what's wrong with the daily operational processes. Also, the team should include people representing a large cross section of the organization's functions so the candidate problems will represent diverse perspectives. Manufacturing will identify different problems than procurement, and marketing will experience still different issues. Second, in problem identification, the brainstorming activity includes an additional step that most brainstorming sessions do not include. We use the term "brainstorming" to refer to having a group of people think up a lot of ideas. The term was popularized by Alex Faickney Osborn in the 1953 book Applied Imagination. Osborn proposed that there be two parts to any group brainstorming session. The participants start by generating all the ideas they can on the topic at hand, before evaluating each idea independently to determine which ideas are the best. Accordingly, in determining what's wrong with an organization, the team should develop (Continues...) Read an Excerpt
Solving Organizational Problems
A Proven Method for Groups to Permanently Resolve Difficult, Complex, and Persistent Problems
By Chris Christensen
AuthorHouse
Copyright © 2012 Christensen Associates, Inc.
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4772-8528-2
Chapter One
Introduction Chapter Two
Why Problem-Solving Processes Often Fail Chapter Three
The Seven-Step Problem-Solving Process
Excerpted from Solving Organizational Problems by Chris Christensen Copyright © 2012 by Christensen Associates, Inc.. Excerpted by permission of AuthorHouse. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
<
Table of Contents
Contents
1. Introduction....................1
2. Why Problem-Solving Processes Often Fail....................5
3. The Seven-Step Problem-Solving Process....................9
Step One—Prioritize and Select a Problem....................15
Step Two—Redefine the Problem....................24
Step Three—Find the Root Causes....................28
Step Four—Produce Many Solutions....................37
Step Five—Select the Best Solution Set....................47
Step Six—Persuade Management to Implement the Solutions....................58
Step Seven—Follow-Up—Ensure the Problem Stays Solved....................68
4. Create a Problem-Solving Culture....................71
5. Some Examples—Case Studies....................79
6. Index of Problem-Solving Tools....................91
Show More