Solving the Problem Is Only One Option

When a problem lands in front of us, the instinct is to solve it.

That is what we are trained to do. Identify the problem, find the cause, fix it and move on. Anything less can feel like failure.

But solving is only one of the ways we deal with a problem. When I sat down and mapped out the others, the list was longer than I expected.

The ways we actually respond

We can solve the problem.

We can share the problem, so we are not carrying it alone.

We can make it someone else’s problem.

We can adapt to the problem and learn to work around it.

We can distract the problem, and turn its attention somewhere else.

We can distract ourselves from the problem.

We can focus on a bigger and more valuable problem, so the one in front of us starts to look irrelevant.

And we can confuse, manipulate or scare the root of the problem, so that it backs away on its own.

Some of these sound noble. Some do not. But all of them are real, and if we are honest, most of us have used nearly all of them at some point, often without noticing which one we chose.

The choice depends on what we have

There are multiple ways to deal with a problem. The choice we make depends on a few things:

• our resources
• our ability to reverse the decision
• what is at stake
• our priorities, values and goals

A problem that is cheap to get wrong and easy to undo can be handled one way. A problem where the stakes are high and the decision cannot be reversed needs another. Our values decide which options are even on the table.

Each response gives us something and costs us something. As I wrote recently, decisions are a trade-off business. Choosing how to respond to a problem is no different.

We don’t always have the luxury

Solving a problem is one of many responses. We don’t always have the luxury of resources, will and a cohesive response to solve problems.

Consider a council halfway through replacing its finance system. The data migration team finds that ten years of supplier records are inconsistent. Solving it properly means a full data cleanse: months of work, extra budget, and a delayed go-live that the elected members have already been told about.

The council has options. It can solve it, and accept the cost and the delay. It can share it, bringing the vendor and the finance team into a joint fix. It can adapt, migrating only active suppliers and cleaning the rest over time. Or it can focus on the bigger problem, a stable system that goes live, and accept that the supplier data will be imperfect for a while.

None of these is automatically right. A full fix with no budget, no executive will and a team pulling in different directions is not a solution. It is a second problem. The right response is the one that fits the resources, the stakes and the priorities the council actually has.

Sometimes the response is simpler than the problem suggests. Complex problems don’t always need complex solutions. But they do need a deliberate choice about how to respond.

Not giving up

This is not an argument for avoiding problems.

We must not give up either. Instead, we think of practical strategies to deal with our problems, and we are strategic about it. That means choosing the response deliberately, rather than defaulting to whatever is easiest, or insisting on a full solution we cannot deliver.

It is never easy, but it is worthwhile. We come out the other end, and many times we have transformed into a very different person.

Perhaps that is what a problem really gives us. Not always a solution, but a change in who we are while we deal with it.

The questions that remain

Here are some questions to ponder.

Which problem in front of you are you trying to solve, when another response would serve you better?

Which response do you reach for by default, and is it a choice or a habit?

And when you look back at the hardest problem you have dealt with, did you solve it, or did it change you?