Page ihttp://www.net-working.com

November, 2002The Insider

The Insider

November, 2002

Wicked Problems

Some Problems Demand Different Methods

1 Horst Rittel & Melvin Webber: “Dilemmas in a General

Theory of Planning,” Policy Sciences, 4 (1973), pp 155-

164. Available on-line at

https://www.gatech.edu/resv/cp/6012/42cpr.htm

For all the research into and adoption of step-by-step problem-solving strategies, you might thinkthat all problems can be solved with the right se-quence of steps. It’s lulled a whole generation ofsystems analysts into the belief that every problemcan be broken down into constituent parts, sepa-rately understood, then reassembled with a com-posite comprehension. It’s apparent that mostpeople believe “the truth is out there” and if you can’tfind it, it’s because you haven’t yet used the rightprocedure.

But there are some problems that are so big, socritical and so pervasive they’re called “wicked.”They don’t lend themselves to the search for Ulti-mate Truth. Examples abound:

� Should you tear down that slum and build afreeway through it…or renovate the housingand reroute the traffic?

� Should the environment be protected at allcosts…or should economic activities that affectthe environment be allowed to flourish for thebenefits they bring?

� Should governments require National ID cardsfor security…or enact laws that guaranteepersonal rights to privacy?

� Should you spend more money on existingmarketing and sales…or on research for newproducts to offer?

� Should you spend the time and money onupgrading people’s skills…or limit the scope oftheir work so they can remain productive?

These are truly wicked problems, and not just be-cause there are so many divergent opinions aboutthe “best way” to solve them. In every case, thereare consequences…only some of which are knownin advance. There’s not only a high likelihood thatsomeone is not going to like the outcome, there’s

always someone who wants to propose a simplisticfix that ignores many of the important issues.

Every important socialissue and every signifi-cant strategic issue inbusiness will—upon in-spection—turn out to bea wicked problem. Theeasy problems are solvedwith the analytical tools taught in Business School.But, wicked problems are seldom considered, andare often dismissed as “political problems,” as if theydon’t deserve serious intellectual effort. How to com-pute the net-present value of a future stream of earn-ings for a new product is an analytical problem.Finding a good place to build the polluting factoryto produce that product is a wicked problem.

With wicked problems, the process of finding asolution will be intertwined with the process of un-derstanding the problem. Each time you try a solu-tion, it teaches you something new about the theproblem. You simply cannot perform a completeanalysis, then implement a solution. These are notproblems that can be solved with a spreadsheet.

Wicked Problems Characteristics

When Horst Rittel coined the term1 he identifiedten distinguishing properties. In our client work,we’ve found three sufficient to gain acknowledge-ment that some problems are truly “wicked:”

1. You cannot avoid addressing the problem,

2. You cannot compile a comprehensive list ofpossible solutions to consider,

(Corollary: You’ll never know if you’ve foundan optimum solution), and

3. Any solution implemented will spawn at leastone new wicked problem.

“All the easy problemshave been solved.

“From now on, theproblems will betougher.”

--Gerry Weinberg

Page ii http://www.net-working.com

November, 2002 The Insider

Can’t Evade or Avoid The Problem

Wicked problems, by their nature, are big, toughproblems that typically only grow larger with time.It’s the “800-pound gorilla in the corner;” every-body knows it’s there, and leaders will acknowledgeit as an important issue to be addressed.

You have a problem; part of what makes it wickedis that the situation will only get worse if you ignorethat gorilla.

No Comprehensive List of Solutions

Wicked problems have so many interlinked andinteracting components that you can’t create a listof all possible solutions. First of all, the problemmay not be well understood, and you can’t createany meaningful solution to a problem you don’tadequately understand. Secondly, the problem isprobably changing as you examine it: Peoplechange, priorities change, external factors like cri-ses, legislation or new science can suddenly inter-rupt your pursuit of what you think is the best solu-tion.

Because you can’t create a comprehensive list ofsolutions, you have no way to claim you’ve found“the best” solution. There is no “optimum,” becauseinvariably there will be some stakeholders whowon’t be satisfied with each potential solution.

These are problems with no “Ultimate Truth” attheir core. They often expose ethical dilemmas, andethical dilemmas are always about two (or more)desirable outcomes that are in mutual conflict.

Conventional, linear, analytic models are ineffec-tive, yet often inappropriately applied in a vain at-tempt to find a simplistic solution. Every “Environ-mental Impact Statement” document is an exampleof this phenomenon: We can only document thoseimpacts we can identify, and often there are factorsthat will only emerge when we actually begin tochange that environment.

Wicked problems demand we dive into the darkand grope our way along toward acceptable solu-tions. We can find solutions that are “better” or“worse,” but never solutions that are “right” or“wrong.” This flies in the face of everything we’vebeen taught about problem-solving, and it can behard to get some stakeholders (e.g., senior manage-ment) to sanction the unclear, murky ways of solv-ing these kinds of problems. Play your hand wrong,

and some senior manager with inadequate appre-ciation of the problems will step in and tell you whatto do…and that’s virtually guaranteed to fail.

Solutions Spawn New Wicked Problems

No matter what you do, once you solve the origi-nal wicked problem, you’re going to be left with theresidue of some unsolved problem(s) you had to ig-nore and/or an unanticipated consequence of yoursolution that raises new issues.

If your team was responsible for deciding to re-furbish the housing in an economically depressedarea (instead of razing it for a new freeway), you’vestill got to decide how to solve the trafficproblem…and people who live there today might notbe able to afford the new housing. On the otherhand, if you drive a freeway through the area, howwill you solve the housing problem for the thou-sands of people displaced?

Wicked problems are tempting to ignore, becausethere’s no way to assure everyone will be satisfiedwith the results. These are, by their very nature,insatiable in their demand for attention: Create apartial solution, then turn to the next problem. It’sa thicket with no path out. What’s a leader to do?

Addressing Wicked Problems

Since, as we’ve said, there’s no Ultimate Truth thatwill solve a wicked problem, pursuit of that goal isfutile. Every time you look at the problem a littledeeper, you find a new problem that also needs tobe solved. Every time you consider a solution, youdiscover undesirable consequences.

It’s tempting to assign a high-powered team thejob of solving the problem on a schedule. Ideally,they’d go off and understand the problem, reportback on optimum solutions that are then imple-mented. The subsequent failure is attributed to a“poor solution;” seldom to the “wrong problem.”

It’s popular to assign a teamof independent, objective ex-perts to find a solution. They’llproduce a logical, reasoned document recommend-ing changes, and then present it to affected peoplefor their feedback and consent. The process of gain-ing “buy-in” has begun.

What’s most often surprising is the vehemence

Seek Trust,Not Truth

Page iiihttp://www.net-working.com

November, 2002The Insider

with which stakeholders reject such solutions. Theirpreconceptions, unfettered by the learning experi-ence gained by the experts during their investiga-tions, leads them to believe simpler solutions wouldbe better. So begins the long process of educationand dialog that will transform the original documentinto something no longer resembles the original. Asa result, the design team feels unappreciated, andstakeholders feel their ideas have been systemati-cally ignored.

Getting Buy-in Is A Losing Strategy

Seeking “buy-in” from affected people is flawed atthe outset: It is built on the premise that the de-signers have developed some “best” solution and oth-ers merely need to be brought around to that wayof thinking. Experience shows that stakeholders re-sent being considered as mere rubber stamps, and itbrings out all their anger and frustration. “Buy-in”smacks of a paternalistic sales approach.

Rather than pursuing some elusive Truth, it’s al-ways better to find ways to build Trust among thosewho will be affected. Engage them in the process,and you can deal with objections early.

Pay Now, or Pay Later

The traditional analysis / design / implement se-quence doesn’t work for wicked problems. If yougo for “buy-in,” there will be a lengthy process ofreview, seeking consent and approval of the solu-tion by those who’ll be affected. Most often, how-ever, they’ll attack the very assumptions and pre-mises on which the design is predicated. It adds amessy ending to a pristine design.

Rather, it’s important to take a different tack alto-gether. Put the messy part of the process up frontand engage people in the search for solutions. Youcan both leverage more minds while helping peopleunderstand why their favorite early ideas might notwork for other stakeholders.

The old approach: Design it, then get “buy-in.”The new approach: Engage the stakeholders, andget them to help design it. It’s going to take as longeither way. But the result of building trust will ex-pose more people to the complexities, and they’ll helpeducate others. As a consequence, they more readilyunderstand why some ideas prove to unworkable,and why their preferences can’t be met.

The extra benefit is that occasionally you’ll findsomeone outside the core design team who has thenugget of an idea that loosens the logjam and leadsto a truly “breakthrough” idea.

By accepting the idea that there will be a messy,unclear and chaotic part of the process, you havethe choice to decide whether you want that at thefront- or back-end of the process. Experience dem-onstrates that if—contrary to traditional wisdom—you do it on the front end you’ll generate a betterresult, and the stakeholders will already be “boughtin” when it finally emerges as a solution.

Success Strategies

� Identify the stakeholders (and articulaterepresentatives of stakeholder groups), andexpand that list over time as appropriate,

� Engage the stakeholders in refining thedefinition of the problem and potentialsolutions,

� Facilitate respectful dialogue between thestakeholders sho hold diametrically opposedviews, and help them find common ground,

� Keep a public record of interactions, issues andresolutions as they evolve.

Above all, in solving wicked problems, the coredesign team should act as facilitators to the processand engage as many stakeholders as possible. Whilethey may have excellent design skills, it’s alwaysbetter if ideas come from the very stakeholderswho’re most likely to affected by the outcome.

Identify Stakeholders

Stakeholders are people who will be affected bythe outcome, or representatives of groups of suchpeople. Sometimes the issue is so compelling thatpeople who actually have no apparent stake in theoutcome will volunteer to participate.

Exclude no one. When new stakeholders are iden-tified or ask to be included, include them. If theydiscover they’re not really affected, they’ll removethemselves from the process.

No matter how hard to try, your initial list of stake-holders will always be inadequate. As the problemdescription changes and evolves, and as trial solu-tions emerge, more stakeholders will emerge.

Page iv http://www.net-working.com

November, 2002 The Insider

The goal is to not to control the process, stake-holders, or their contributions, but to build trustamong them all.

Engage Stakeholders

Have large meetings, hold small meetings, con-duct private meetings with crucial stakeholders.Have lots of meetings with volunteers.

Draw stakeholders out, find out what’s importantto them. Above all, listen, and acknowledge thevalue of what they say. Again, it might not affectthe ultimate result, but people who have been heardare the least likely to object in the end.

Facilitate Dialogue

Meetings that involve stakeholders need to be con-ducted in a collegial atmosphere. In some cases,that’s very, very hard to do, especially when pas-sions run high...and sometimes the core design teamcan become defensive of their own pet positions.

There are new and important ways to engagestakeholders that have emerged over the past de-cade, the most powerful of which is called “Dia-logue.” It encourages people to reveal their deepestconcerns in an atmosphere of total trust and accep-tance of each speakers’ understanding of the truth.But, it takes experience to properly manage the pro-cess. Just reading books is inadequate preparation.

Unless your team has been formally trained inthe art of managing group dialogue and dynamics,seek out a professional to lead these meetings. Theart of drawing out hostile people and helping themfind common ground is a sophisticated skill that re-quires lots of experience and a gentle touch.

Keep A Record

Each interaction, each idea must be documentedand made available to other stakeholders so theycan assess the quality of the process as it evolves.This is a good time to use a web site or secure intra-net (depending on the nature of the problem), so

stakeholders can track progress, review work to-date, and determine whether they should them-selves become more active to ensure their interestsare seriously considered.

You might even supplement those records withan on-line discussion in which peripheral stakehold-ers can offer their thoughts and ideas without hav-ing to spend time in face-to-face meetings. It ex-pands the pool of potential contributors and therange of innovative ideas you can add to the mix.And, it extends the sphere of trust to more people.

Producing Results

With wicked problems, designs and implementa-tions are intertwined. So, the design effort is—andwill always be—a work in progress. At stage six (say)of that iterative process, you may start to imple-ment ideas that have emerged…and discover thesolution is incomplete and/or creates new problems.

Solving wicked problems is always an experiment.There’s too much to be known, too many interac-tions that may be hidden at the outset, too manyconflicting demands to be satisfied. Engage the verypeople who’ll be affected, build trust with and amongthem, and together, you can move the entire pro-cess toward progressively better solutions.

Wicked problems aren’t solved with ready-madesolutions. No matter what you do to improve thesystem you’re changing, you will discover new prob-lems, new information and new opportunities. Youwill also make new mistakes, which are usually op-portunities for learning in disguise.

Success in addressing wicked problems utterlydepends on a change in attitudes about stakehold-ers. Invite stakeholders to actively participate inforging the agreements of what consititutes success,in identification of the real problems, and in the de-velopment and refinement of potential solutions.When stakeholders are part of the process, you’llcapture the best ideas, and they’ll understand whychoices have been made. That way, they becomeactive partners in achieving success.

Net-working ( ISSN 1539-9214) is a newslet ter publ ished 12 t imes a year by Deep Woods Technology, Inc . , 2775 HawksLanding Ct . , P lacervi l le , CA 95667 (530/295-3657) . $195/yr , $20/issue (US funds) . Copyright © 2002, Deep WoodsTechnology, Inc. Material may not be reproduced in whole or in part without written or eMail permission from thepublisher; however, you may freely copy and distr ibute the four pages labeled “The Insider,” without our permission,provided this notice appears on every copy, and you add no promotional information for any other f irm, product orservice. We occasional ly make our subscribers ’ names avai lable to companies with products or services in which youmay be interested. You may opt out of those mai l ings when you subscribe. Our website domain name http://www.net-working.com was provided to us by the kind folks at http://www.ezinfocenter.com/757535/nl; please vis i t them formore information about their services.