Today's session (22 August 2016)

Hi everyone

Today we started with an impromptu discussion around two recent news articles.

The first was an interview with a scientist about climate change (Too hot to host? Climate change hangs over future Olympics http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201812815/too-hot-to-host-climate-change-hangs-over-future-olympics). His basic premise was that climate change trends indicated that it will soon be too dangerous to hold the Summer Olympics in the northern hemisphere. Increasing summer temperatures would put athletes in danger of sun stroke, prickly heat and a range of other temperature induced maladies.

This interview was interesting for two reasons. Firstly, as a problem in its own right: What are some of the possible solutions which we could put in place to keep the Summer Olympics without endangering competitors?

Some of the possible off-the-cuff answers might include greater use of climate controlled indoor venues (such as enclosed stadia), holding events at cooler parts of the day (which might impact on TV viewing arrangements), greater use of temperature control clothing, holding the games in cooler northern cities (e.g. Helsinki) or holding the games in the southern hemisphere (e.g. the Sydney Olympics in 2000, held in the southern spring).

The interview was also interesting because the scientist let slip that because of the predominance of climate change stories in the media it was difficult to get his own research in front of the public. His solution to the problem was to link his findings about climate change to a current media event (i.e. the Olympics) and to present his research as an Olympics-related story. A very clever way to get media coverage on National Radio!

The second news items was a recent Stuff story about some impoverished Otago University students who decided to make some money by selling street food to passing students (Broke Dunedin scarfies sell bacon buttie, drink and ciggie combo http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/82828456/broke-dunedin-scarfies-sell-bacon-buttie-drink-and-ciggie-combo). There are a few legal issues that they need to attend to (including food licencing and the sale of cigarettes!) but this article is interesting as an example of an innovative solution to the problem of ‘how to make some money?’

We also looked at a few ‘housekeeping matters’.

Firstly, my feedback on Assignment 1 (after three weeks of instalments) is that the work is generally quite well done and some students took to this exercise like ducks to water. A couple of people had a few issues around working out what I needed but that seems to be sorted out now. The first three weeks are generally a ‘settling in’ phases, so now I will start pushing you forward a little bit more with suggestions to increase the number of sources used to five or six and to start using higher-level sources (including academic textbook, journals, etc.).

Please be careful to make sure that you use your own words when describing the material that you have read. Please DO NOT cut-and-paste (or change just the odd word in a sentence) as it can be quite obvious when you do this (and I will have to mark you down for this). New Zealand tertiary education looks for your ability to correctly interpret and discuss other people’s ideas (which you need to acknowledge using correct citation format).

Secondly, you should be well ahead in your planning for Assignment 2 by now. This assignment is due soon (Friday, 16 September 2016) so you now have less than 4 weeks in which to complete it. Remember that you have to do more than just research your topic … you have to formulate recommendations and justify why you have chosen your preferred option. This will take time to prepare and to think through so it can’t be a ‘last minute job’.

Thirdly, we took another look at the Great Jellybean Challenge. I have spoken about this task in some detail on other occasions so I won’t say too much here other than to remind you to have a look at this jar each week and to think about how you might calculate the correct number of jellybeans. Calculating volumes and quantities is a key part of problem solving in many specialist jobs such as quantity surveying.

From there, we moved on to the main focus of today’s session, which is about the ways that we organise problems and decisions. Quiet naturally, we started with a discussion about bananas.

We did a quick survey of the room to see how people opened their bananas. We saw that ‘peeling’ wasn’t the only option as some people cut their banana. However, most peeling was done from the stalk end of the banana.

Speaking for myself, peeling the banana from the stalk end is something which is so natural that I have to consciously force myself to use different ways. My mother would have shown me how to peel a banana and this would have been reinforced by other people who I grew up with. The ‘stalk peel’ method is so ingrained after nearly 50 years of reinforcement that I am effectively ‘programmed’ to automatically use this method. (This is despite the fact that it is easier to pinch the opposite end to open the banana cleanly!)

This example shows us how powerfully embedded some of our expectations and responses can be. In fact, if we take our own sets of experiences as our reference base, then it follows that our responses to problems may be heavily influenced by our existing biases, assumptions, preferences and perspectives.

With that in mind, we turned our attention to what a problem actually is. We used several working definitions as our starting point.

* Shows a desire to move from one state to another

* There is a barrier that needs to be overcome

* A matter or situation regarded as unwelcome or harmful and needing to be dealt with and overcome

* A perceived gap between the existing state and a desired state, or a deviation from a norm, standard, or status quo

* A situation, person, or thing that needs attention and needs to be dealt with or solved.

We then tried grouping the ideas within these definitions into three key themes.

* States / things (e.g. Gaps, barriers, obstacles, challenges which need to be addressed). This is the obstacle or hurdle metaphor where we need to move from somewhere or over / around something else.

* Perceptions / feelings (e.g. Undesirability, dissatisfaction, imperfection). This is the broken ladder metaphor where something needs to be fixed.

* Actions (e.g. Transition, change, solution). This is the ‘change ahead’ sign metaphor.

We then looked at how problems can be categorised depending on how difficult they are to solve. Under this schema, we have problems which range from tame (simple and easy to address) through to wicked (difficult, complex and resistive to being solved). We also looked at super-wicked problems which may be inherently insoluble because of complexity or because they are beyond our ability to understand properly.

These discussions lead us to programmed and non-programmed decision making.

Programmed decisions are routine and almost automatic. Examples include:

* Managers making decisions which they have made many times before

* Situations where there are rules or guidelines to follow

* Examples such as deciding to reorder office supplies.

Non-programmed decisions relate to unusual situations that are not addressed very often. With non-programmed decisions

* There are no rules to follow since the decision is new

* These decisions are made based on information, and a manger’s intuition, and judgment

* Example: Should the firm invest in a new technology?

We looked at some simple maths problems (e.g. what is 4x4?) to illustrate programmed problems and decisions which we have been trained to solve through repetition and practice.

As an example of a non-programmed problem / decision we tried counting matchstick squares in a 3x3 design. This is a simple exercise once we ‘programme in’ how it works and what we are looking for. However, the first time that we do this it is non-programmed and we can make errors through omission and misdetection.

We also spent a bit of time thinking about how problems can be dealt with. Generally, we think of problems being solved, but it is also possible to resolve or even dissolve them.

* Solve – optimum solution

* Resolve – ‘good enough’ solution

* Dissolve – remove the problem.

A good example of this is when we get hungry. We can solve the problem of hunger by feeding ourselves (which is the optimum or perfect solution). Alternatively, we can resolve it with a ‘good enough’ solution such as a handful of sweets to keep us going. Another solution is to dissolve the problem through a distraction such as kicking a football around.

Then we moved on to heuristics.

Heuristics are ‘rules of thumb’ which we use to get us through problem situations. We use these when we don’t have time or opportunity to make a more detailed analysis of a situation. Often, our heuristics are so natural to us that they act as programmed responses. So, heuristics are:

* A resolution method

* Mental shortcuts

* Rules and strategies that are ‘mostly right’

We then tried to find various heuristics that we use for simple tasks such as:

* Crossing a road

* Forecasting the weather

* Going to the supermarket.

More specifically, we looked at particular examples of various types of heuristics:

* Special: Limit of 3 per customer! (anchoring heuristic)

* We generally buy what we are use to (familiarity heuristic)

* If it is rare / expensive then it must be valuable / good (scarcity heuristic)

* If others buy it then I should buy it too (acceptance / endorsement heuristic)

* If someone I trust recommends it then I will try it (authority / trust heuristic)

Having finished our discussion around heuristics we moved on to look at various types of problems that we might encounter in the business world. Here are some examples of problems that you might find in a business / workplace:

* HR / People problems (staff, customers, public)

* Production problems (quality, workflows)

* Logistical (distribution, storage, etc.)

* Management (decisions, strategy, governance, etc.)

* Market intelligence (predictions, foresight, trends).

We then did a group exercise in which I gave each team a search term (such as ‘problem solving’ or ‘decision making’) and a job site to search. Our tasks were as follows:

* Find jobs with ‘problem solving’ or ‘decision making’ in their title or job description. Record 10 jobs and write the line mentioning your keywords.

* What sort of jobs and industries are mentioned?

* What are the most unusual / surprising jobs or industries that require these skills?

We found some quite interesting jobs across a wide range of industries, covering both trades and professions. This raised some interesting questions such as:

* If PSDM is so highly prized by employers, then why isn’t it taught as a subject before tertiary level?

* If employers are looking for people skilled in PSDM, then should we specifically include PSDM skills in our CVs?

* If employers want employees with PSDM skills, then how can we show them real examples ofour skills in these areas?

To highlight these points, I then showed you a quote from business guru Jay Abraham (my emphasis added):

“Realize this hard fact: the people above you (bosses, management and organization leaders) want one thing most of all – they want solutions to problems. Solutions that make them look good and help them achieve their goals. They want the people who report to them to be problem solvers. These strategies will give you those solutions and turn you into a problem solver. Employers will kill for problem solvers.”

I then left you with the final thought that in order to be effective and skilled problem solvers we may need to start looking at things in different ways so that we can be more creative, disruptive and innovative. For instance, do we need a drill or a hole (or something else)? Do we need a lawnmower or a nicely cut lawn? Do we need cars or transport?

Cheers

Phil