Organizational Problems are Wicked Problems
It is a truth universally acknowledged that, if you ask 5 management consultants to define the main problem your organization faces, you’ll end up with a list of at least 25 problems … and there’s a good reason for this. Ask any experienced change analyst or management consultant and you’ll be told that there is no such thing as a “stand alone” business process or problem – despite the methods taught in business schools and advocated in best-selling management books. If there were, no-one would need all these methods and books, would they?
Wicked problems are subjective and complicated – each stakeholder has their own perspective – and each is only partly right! Nobody understands wicked problems in their entirety – the best we can do is delegate change in various areas to trustworthy colleagues
Wicked problems are interconnected and entangled – pulling the wrong “thread” can bring the whole organization down around your ears So wicked problems require an adaptive process of resolution, where various aspects of the problem are partitioned and remedied, while monitoring for interaction effects.
What are Wicked Problems?
Wicked problems are so-called because they are not “well-structured” – as in, amenable to analytical methods of problem-solving.
Typically, they present as “messes” or tangles of interrelated problems, which are defined by various stakeholders in multiple ways, depending on the bits they see (which in turn depends on their experience and their position in the organization). As a result, Wicked Problems have a number of characteristics not found in the sorts of problems for which professional analysts and change-agents are trained.
Horst Rittel, who originated the concept, described ten characteristics that make these problems particularly difficult to resolve (Rittel, 1973):
1. Every wicked problem is unique
Because wicked problems are so complex, interrelated, and novel, no-one has experience of how to solve this type of “messy” problem. Each group of problem-solvers possesses a “symmetry of ignorance” (Rittel, 1972). No-one can claim relevant expertise; instead, they need to pool information and partial understandings of the situation, to piece it together and make sense of it.
2. Problems are interrelated
Each wicked problem consists of a mess, or tangle of problems, each of which may have multiple causes. Problems are interrelated – each problem may be a symptom, or cause, of other problems, so solving one problem will not necessarily improve the situation. Every problem can be seen as a symptom or the cause of another problem.
3. There is no definitive formulation or boundary of a Wicked Problem.
Wicked problem definitions are subjective. The way in which the problem-situation is defined depends on the eye of the beholder. Sensitization to certain types of problem causes people to see them everywhere.
Wicked Problems defy efforts to delineate their boundaries and to identify their causes. They span organizational, functional, and management boundaries. Multiple stakeholders will define the problem differently, and bring competing agendas for change.
4. We cannot plan how to solve wicked problems
Wicked problems do not have a predictable set of potential solutions, as you can’t define them in advance. The nature of the problem(s) requires investigation and experimentation, rather than using typical problem-solving methods that are focused on designing a solution.
5. We have no criteria to judge whether we have solved a wicked problem
Because we cannot define a wicked problem, we also cannot define criteria to evaluate if we solved it. So any solutions we devise are not “right” or “wrong,” only better or worse (subjectively) in this particular situation, at this specific time.
6. Wicked problems can be described in multiple ways
The way the problem is defined determines (and constrains) potential solutions. But the problem definition depends on the situation boundary selected (what is chosen as inside or outside the scope of the problem) and the point(s)-of-view used to define the problem. As each stakeholder will have a different perspective, depending on where they are in the organization, their disciplinary or functional background, and their educational background, problem-solvers face a multiplicity of problem definitions.
7. Wicked problems have no logic to indicate when a solution has been reached
In computing terms, wicked problems have no “stopping point.” There are no criteria by which to evaluate if we have solved the problem, so judging when we have a good-enough solution is entirely subjective.
8. There is no way to test a solution in advance
We therefore have to wait and evaluate the impact of changes over time.
9. Every solution to a wicked problem is a ‘one-shot operation’
There is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error; every solution attempt changes the problem-situation. So every time we take action, we change the nature of the problem(s) that we face.
10. Change-agents are liable for the consequences of their actions
The effects of implementing a solution affect real people in the way that they work. This can matter a great deal to the people involved. Problem-solvers should attempt to assess the impact on actors in the problem-situation and to obtain impact from those people, before taking action.
Wicked Problems Need Systemic Analysis
Solving Wicked Problems requires appreciation of the problem-situation, accompanied by systemic analysis. Horst Rittel (1972), who originated the term, suggested that we use a process of argumentation to design solutions: “a counterplay of raising issues and dealing with them, which in turn raises new issues, and so on, and so on.” He saw the goal of argumentation as piecing together a big picture from the fragmented viewpoints and problem-definitions held by change-agents, stakeholders, and those people who work in the problem-situation.