4 step process problem solving

An Overview of 4-Step Problem Solving

• Resource Topics
• Professional Learning Modules
• Program Evaluation
• Fact Sheets
• Presentations LiveBinder

This online course is intended to provide users with an understanding of the broad concepts of the 4-step problem solving process. The course includes the critical elements and guiding questions within each step, features sample data sources, and provides checks for understanding throughout.

• Sign into your account.
• Select All Courses at the top of the page, find An Overview of 4-Step Problem Solving , and click “Start Course” to begin.
• From FL PS/RtI Thinkific site, click “Sign In” in the upper right-hand corner.
• Click “Create a new account” below sign-in fields.
• Fill in your name, email, and create a password. Click “Sign Up.”

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Overview of the Problem-Solving Mental Process

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

• Identify the Problem
• Define the Problem
• Form a Strategy
• Organize Information
• Allocate Resources
• Monitor Progress
• Evaluate the Results

Frequently Asked Questions

Problem-solving is a mental process that involves discovering, analyzing, and solving problems. The ultimate goal of problem-solving is to overcome obstacles and find a solution that best resolves the issue.

The best strategy for solving a problem depends largely on the unique situation. In some cases, people are better off learning everything they can about the issue and then using factual knowledge to come up with a solution. In other instances, creativity and insight are the best options.

It is not necessary to follow problem-solving steps sequentially, It is common to skip steps or even go back through steps multiple times until the desired solution is reached.

In order to correctly solve a problem, it is often important to follow a series of steps. Researchers sometimes refer to this as the problem-solving cycle. While this cycle is portrayed sequentially, people rarely follow a rigid series of steps to find a solution.

The following steps include developing strategies and organizing knowledge.

1. Identifying the Problem

While it may seem like an obvious step, identifying the problem is not always as simple as it sounds. In some cases, people might mistakenly identify the wrong source of a problem, which will make attempts to solve it inefficient or even useless.

Some strategies that you might use to figure out the source of a problem include :

• Asking questions about the problem
• Breaking the problem down into smaller pieces
• Looking at the problem from different perspectives
• Conducting research to figure out what relationships exist between different variables

2. Defining the Problem

After the problem has been identified, it is important to fully define the problem so that it can be solved. You can define a problem by operationally defining each aspect of the problem and setting goals for what aspects of the problem you will address

At this point, you should focus on figuring out which aspects of the problems are facts and which are opinions. State the problem clearly and identify the scope of the solution.

3. Forming a Strategy

After the problem has been identified, it is time to start brainstorming potential solutions. This step usually involves generating as many ideas as possible without judging their quality. Once several possibilities have been generated, they can be evaluated and narrowed down.

The next step is to develop a strategy to solve the problem. The approach used will vary depending upon the situation and the individual's unique preferences. Common problem-solving strategies include heuristics and algorithms.

• Heuristics are mental shortcuts that are often based on solutions that have worked in the past. They can work well if the problem is similar to something you have encountered before and are often the best choice if you need a fast solution.
• Algorithms are step-by-step strategies that are guaranteed to produce a correct result. While this approach is great for accuracy, it can also consume time and resources.

Heuristics are often best used when time is of the essence, while algorithms are a better choice when a decision needs to be as accurate as possible.

4. Organizing Information

Before coming up with a solution, you need to first organize the available information. What do you know about the problem? What do you not know? The more information that is available the better prepared you will be to come up with an accurate solution.

When approaching a problem, it is important to make sure that you have all the data you need. Making a decision without adequate information can lead to biased or inaccurate results.

5. Allocating Resources

Of course, we don't always have unlimited money, time, and other resources to solve a problem. Before you begin to solve a problem, you need to determine how high priority it is.

If it is an important problem, it is probably worth allocating more resources to solving it. If, however, it is a fairly unimportant problem, then you do not want to spend too much of your available resources on coming up with a solution.

At this stage, it is important to consider all of the factors that might affect the problem at hand. This includes looking at the available resources, deadlines that need to be met, and any possible risks involved in each solution. After careful evaluation, a decision can be made about which solution to pursue.

6. Monitoring Progress

After selecting a problem-solving strategy, it is time to put the plan into action and see if it works. This step might involve trying out different solutions to see which one is the most effective.

It is also important to monitor the situation after implementing a solution to ensure that the problem has been solved and that no new problems have arisen as a result of the proposed solution.

Effective problem-solvers tend to monitor their progress as they work towards a solution. If they are not making good progress toward reaching their goal, they will reevaluate their approach or look for new strategies .

7. Evaluating the Results

After a solution has been reached, it is important to evaluate the results to determine if it is the best possible solution to the problem. This evaluation might be immediate, such as checking the results of a math problem to ensure the answer is correct, or it can be delayed, such as evaluating the success of a therapy program after several months of treatment.

Once a problem has been solved, it is important to take some time to reflect on the process that was used and evaluate the results. This will help you to improve your problem-solving skills and become more efficient at solving future problems.

A Word From Verywell​

It is important to remember that there are many different problem-solving processes with different steps, and this is just one example. Problem-solving in real-world situations requires a great deal of resourcefulness, flexibility, resilience, and continuous interaction with the environment.

Get Advice From The Verywell Mind Podcast

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares how you can stop dwelling in a negative mindset.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

You can become a better problem solving by:

• Practicing brainstorming and coming up with multiple potential solutions to problems
• Being open-minded and considering all possible options before making a decision
• Breaking down problems into smaller, more manageable pieces
• Asking for help when needed
• Researching different problem-solving techniques and trying out new ones
• Learning from mistakes and using them as opportunities to grow

It's important to communicate openly and honestly with your partner about what's going on. Try to see things from their perspective as well as your own. Work together to find a resolution that works for both of you. Be willing to compromise and accept that there may not be a perfect solution.

Take breaks if things are getting too heated, and come back to the problem when you feel calm and collected. Don't try to fix every problem on your own—consider asking a therapist or counselor for help and insight.

If you've tried everything and there doesn't seem to be a way to fix the problem, you may have to learn to accept it. This can be difficult, but try to focus on the positive aspects of your life and remember that every situation is temporary. Don't dwell on what's going wrong—instead, think about what's going right. Find support by talking to friends or family. Seek professional help if you're having trouble coping.

Davidson JE, Sternberg RJ, editors.  The Psychology of Problem Solving .  Cambridge University Press; 2003. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511615771

Sarathy V. Real world problem-solving .  Front Hum Neurosci . 2018;12:261. Published 2018 Jun 26. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 11 min read

The Four-Step Innovation Process

Generating innovative solutions to complex problems.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

Imagine that you need to solve a complex problem. You ask everyone on your team to come up with solutions, and they provide a number of ideas. The problem is that the solutions don't have the impact you'd hoped for – they're wild ideas or quick, obvious fixes, and they won't add much value to what you do.

To solve problems effectively, it's essential that you and your team think in a creative and innovative way. You also need to ensure that your solutions address defined business needs, otherwise your ideas won't add much value.

Weiss and Legrand's Four-Step Innovation Process helps you come up with innovative and creative solutions to complex problems, which are securely grounded in a thorough understanding of the business context.

In this article, we'll look at the benefits of using this process, and we'll discuss how you can apply it to find innovative solutions to the problems you face.

What Are the Four Steps to Problem Solving Innovation?

David Weiss and Claude Legrand developed the Four-Step Innovation Process, and published it in their 2011 book, "Innovative Intelligence: The Art and Practice of Leading Sustainable Innovation in Your Organization."

The four steps are:

• Framework development.
• Define issue.
• Generate ideas.
• Implement best solution.

The model's main, unique advantage is that it encourages you to define your business needs early in the innovation process. This means that you generate solutions that add real value to what you do, so that you can deliver better and more sustainable results.

The Four-Step Innovation Process is a relatively simple model. But it's by no means a "quick fix." It's best to work through the process slowly, and to give yourself plenty of time to think about each step.

How to Solve Your Problem in Four Steps

Let's look at each step in greater detail, and discuss how you can apply the Four-Step Innovation model.

Step 1: Framework Development

This initial step encourages you to think about how you'll solve the problem. It also helps you ensure that the solution you develop robustly meets business needs.

Work through the following sub-steps:

• Identify the problem's history – What is the history of this problem? Has anyone tried to solve it before? What worked, and what didn't?
• Understand context – What's the higher strategy , or project, that the problem fits into? What other projects, problems, rules, or regulations could affect how you solve this problem? How much support will the organization and key stakeholders give to this project?
• Ask "How" – Phrase the problem as a question, starting with "How to..." or "How will we…?" For instance, "How will we cut customer complaints by five percent?" or "How will we speed up the process by one hour?" This helps to set the objective and define how you'll measure success.

Use very specific, quantified words, and avoid vague words like "faster," "improve," "better," "higher," "expensive," or "more," unless you can quantify them.

If you're working with a team, get each person to write a "How will...?" question – one that he or she feels best describes the problem that you're all trying to solve. Then, discuss everyone's ideas, and decide which one is most suitable.

• Define boundaries – What is your budget and timeline, and what resources do you have? What must the solution do, or not do? And what boundaries are outside your control?
• Define outcome – Loosely define the type of solution, or outcome, that you think will solve the problem. Will you need to improve a process or product? Or do you need to rethink the way that you do marketing or sales, for example? This step helps focus your thinking in the later steps.
• Identify the decision maker – Who really "owns" this issue, and who can make the final decision? If you're solving the problem as part of a project, this may be the project sponsor.

Take time to work through these six areas. Although you might feel ready to start coming up with solutions, wait. The work you put in now will help you in later steps.

If you're working on a complex project, it may be useful to put this information into a more formal Project Charter .

Step 2: Define Issue

The goal of this second step is to find the root cause of the problem, and to identify any sub-problems or issues that you haven't yet uncovered. This will help you ensure that you're looking at the right issue.

First, clarify your assumptions about the problem using a tool such as the Ladder of Inference .

Then, explore the problem using tools such as the 5 Whys technique, Cause and Effect Analysis , Root Cause Analysis , and Interrelationship Diagrams , so that you can identify the main issue that you need to deal with.

It can also help to identify how the problem fits into a larger system or process. Flow Charts and Swim Lane Diagrams can help you do this.

Once you feel that you've understood the problem clearly, make sure that you validate this understanding with the problem owner, or decision maker.

Step 3: Generate Ideas

Now that you've identified a framework for solving your problem, and you have a good understanding of what your problem is, you can focus on the fun, creative part of problem solving: idea generation!

There are four substeps in the idea generation process. Following these substeps ensures that you and your team generate ideas that fit within the boundaries and limits that you've already identified.

• Prepare – Arrive at the brainstorming session with the right problem in mind, with an agenda, with a facilitator, and with plenty of creative brainstorming techniques to use.
• Define a framework – Let everyone know what the final "How will...?" question is, and go over the boundaries, rules, and goals that you identified in previous steps. This helps you ensure that everyone is on the same page.
• Start generating ideas – Put your creative brainstorming techniques to use, and start generating ideas. Try not to judge the quality of ideas; just concentrate on speed and quantity during this stage!
• Identify best solutions – Look at all of the solutions that you and your team have generated. You may be able to combine some to create other meaningful solutions. Pick the solution (or combination of solutions) that best answers your "How will…?" question, but don't disregard the other solutions yet.

One of the most damaging things that can happen in stage c is that ideas are censored or judged. Make it clear to your team members that you should not disregard any ideas until you get to step d. There is a time and place for weeding out the weaker ideas, and this should not take place until the end of this step!

Come to the idea generation process prepared with brainstorming techniques that work well with a group. Conventional Brainstorming can work very well, but, if it gets bogged down, be prepared to use tools like Round Robin Brainstorming and Crawford's Slip Writing Method .

If any of you get stuck in the brainstorming process, use lateral thinking techniques such as Provocation to come up with fresh ideas.

Step 4: Implement Best Solution

Now, you need to choose the best solution from Step 3, and develop a plan to implement it successfully. This includes thinking through the solution in detail, assessing risks, and creating detailed plans.

Read our article on organizing team decision-making for more on how you can make great decisions as a group.

If you have several possible solutions to consider, use decision-making tools like Decision Tree Analysis and Decision Matrix Analysis to evaluate your options. Use the criteria you identified in Step 1 to choose between them.

For small projects, an Action Plan will be useful for implementing your solution. However, if you're implementing a large-scale project, you'll need to use a more formal project management approach.

Where your implementation affects several people, or groups of people, it's also worth thinking about how you'll manage change effectively. Remember, if you create a positive vision and communicate a compelling reason for the change, it'll be easier to build excitement and get buy-in from your team or organization.

Terms reprinted from Weiss, D.S., and Legrand, C "Innovative Intelligence: The Art and Practice of Leading Sustainable Innovation in Your Organization" by permission of J. Wiley & Sons Canada, Mississauga, Ontario. Copyright © 2011.

The Four-Step Innovation Process is one of several useful problem-solving processes, and its strength lies in the way that it anchors innovation in the right organizational context.

Other approaches include Hurson's Productive Thinking Model , which is great for encouraging creativity and critical thinking at each stage of the problem-solving process; the Simplex Process , which embeds innovation in a process of continual improvement; and Soft Systems Methodology , which adopts a fluid and iterative approach to problem definition and problem solving.

The best problem-solving approach for your situation may involve a combination of all of these approaches.

David Weiss and Claude Legrand published their Four-Step Innovation Process in their 2011 book, "Innovative Intelligence: The Art and Practice of Leading Sustainable Innovation in Your Organization."

The benefit of using the Four-Step Innovation Process is that it provides a framework that you, along with your team, can use to work through the innovation process in a thorough and methodical way.

This leads to better, more innovative ideas because you've prepared the ground thoroughly, defined issues clearly, generated ideas in the right context, and planned implementation and change carefully.

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Animated Video

Investigating Problems With CATWOE Video

Video Transcript

Create Your Own Personal Brand

Shaping the way others perceive you

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Get 30% off your first year of Mind Tools

Great teams begin with empowered leaders. Our tools and resources offer the support to let you flourish into leadership. Join today!

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Latest Updates

Tips for Dealing with Customers Effectively

Pain Points Podcast - Procrastination

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

Pain points podcast - starting a new job.

How to Hit the Ground Running!

Ten Dos and Don'ts of Career Conversations

How to talk to team members about their career aspirations.

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Servant leadership.

Putting Your Team First, and Yourself Second

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Team Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

What is Problem Solving? (Steps, Techniques, Examples)

By Status.net Editorial Team on May 7, 2023 — 5 minutes to read

What Is Problem Solving?

Definition and importance.

Problem solving is the process of finding solutions to obstacles or challenges you encounter in your life or work. It is a crucial skill that allows you to tackle complex situations, adapt to changes, and overcome difficulties with ease. Mastering this ability will contribute to both your personal and professional growth, leading to more successful outcomes and better decision-making.

Problem-Solving Steps

The problem-solving process typically includes the following steps:

• Identify the issue : Recognize the problem that needs to be solved.
• Analyze the situation : Examine the issue in depth, gather all relevant information, and consider any limitations or constraints that may be present.
• Generate potential solutions : Brainstorm a list of possible solutions to the issue, without immediately judging or evaluating them.
• Evaluate options : Weigh the pros and cons of each potential solution, considering factors such as feasibility, effectiveness, and potential risks.
• Select the best solution : Choose the option that best addresses the problem and aligns with your objectives.
• Implement the solution : Put the selected solution into action and monitor the results to ensure it resolves the issue.
• Review and learn : Reflect on the problem-solving process, identify any improvements or adjustments that can be made, and apply these learnings to future situations.

Defining the Problem

To start tackling a problem, first, identify and understand it. Analyzing the issue thoroughly helps to clarify its scope and nature. Ask questions to gather information and consider the problem from various angles. Some strategies to define the problem include:

• Brainstorming with others
• Asking the 5 Ws and 1 H (Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How)
• Analyzing cause and effect
• Creating a problem statement

Generating Solutions

Once the problem is clearly understood, brainstorm possible solutions. Think creatively and keep an open mind, as well as considering lessons from past experiences. Consider:

• Creating a list of potential ideas to solve the problem
• Grouping and categorizing similar solutions
• Prioritizing potential solutions based on feasibility, cost, and resources required
• Involving others to share diverse opinions and inputs

Evaluating and Selecting Solutions

Evaluate each potential solution, weighing its pros and cons. To facilitate decision-making, use techniques such as:

• SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats)
• Decision-making matrices
• Pros and cons lists
• Risk assessments

After evaluating, choose the most suitable solution based on effectiveness, cost, and time constraints.

Implementing and Monitoring the Solution

Implement the chosen solution and monitor its progress. Key actions include:

• Communicating the solution to relevant parties
• Setting timelines and milestones
• Assigning tasks and responsibilities
• Monitoring the solution and making adjustments as necessary
• Evaluating the effectiveness of the solution after implementation

Utilize feedback from stakeholders and consider potential improvements. Remember that problem-solving is an ongoing process that can always be refined and enhanced.

Problem-Solving Techniques

During each step, you may find it helpful to utilize various problem-solving techniques, such as:

• Brainstorming : A free-flowing, open-minded session where ideas are generated and listed without judgment, to encourage creativity and innovative thinking.
• Root cause analysis : A method that explores the underlying causes of a problem to find the most effective solution rather than addressing superficial symptoms.
• SWOT analysis : A tool used to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to a problem or decision, providing a comprehensive view of the situation.
• Mind mapping : A visual technique that uses diagrams to organize and connect ideas, helping to identify patterns, relationships, and possible solutions.

Brainstorming

When facing a problem, start by conducting a brainstorming session. Gather your team and encourage an open discussion where everyone contributes ideas, no matter how outlandish they may seem. This helps you:

• Generate a diverse range of solutions
• Encourage all team members to participate
• Foster creative thinking

When brainstorming, remember to:

• Reserve judgment until the session is over
• Encourage wild ideas
• Combine and improve upon ideas

Root Cause Analysis

For effective problem-solving, identifying the root cause of the issue at hand is crucial. Try these methods:

• 5 Whys : Ask “why” five times to get to the underlying cause.
• Fishbone Diagram : Create a diagram representing the problem and break it down into categories of potential causes.
• Pareto Analysis : Determine the few most significant causes underlying the majority of problems.

SWOT Analysis

SWOT analysis helps you examine the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats related to your problem. To perform a SWOT analysis:

• List your problem’s strengths, such as relevant resources or strong partnerships.
• Identify its weaknesses, such as knowledge gaps or limited resources.
• Explore opportunities, like trends or new technologies, that could help solve the problem.
• Recognize potential threats, like competition or regulatory barriers.

SWOT analysis aids in understanding the internal and external factors affecting the problem, which can help guide your solution.

Mind Mapping

A mind map is a visual representation of your problem and potential solutions. It enables you to organize information in a structured and intuitive manner. To create a mind map:

• Write the problem in the center of a blank page.
• Draw branches from the central problem to related sub-problems or contributing factors.
• Add more branches to represent potential solutions or further ideas.

Mind mapping allows you to visually see connections between ideas and promotes creativity in problem-solving.

Examples of Problem Solving in Various Contexts

In the business world, you might encounter problems related to finances, operations, or communication. Applying problem-solving skills in these situations could look like:

• Identifying areas of improvement in your company’s financial performance and implementing cost-saving measures
• Resolving internal conflicts among team members by listening and understanding different perspectives, then proposing and negotiating solutions
• Streamlining a process for better productivity by removing redundancies, automating tasks, or re-allocating resources

In educational contexts, problem-solving can be seen in various aspects, such as:

• Addressing a gap in students’ understanding by employing diverse teaching methods to cater to different learning styles
• Developing a strategy for successful time management to balance academic responsibilities and extracurricular activities
• Seeking resources and support to provide equal opportunities for learners with special needs or disabilities

Everyday life is full of challenges that require problem-solving skills. Some examples include:

• Overcoming a personal obstacle, such as improving your fitness level, by establishing achievable goals, measuring progress, and adjusting your approach accordingly
• Navigating a new environment or city by researching your surroundings, asking for directions, or using technology like GPS to guide you
• Dealing with a sudden change, like a change in your work schedule, by assessing the situation, identifying potential impacts, and adapting your plans to accommodate the change.
• How to Resolve Employee Conflict at Work [Steps, Tips, Examples]
• How to Write Inspiring Core Values? 5 Steps with Examples
• 30 Employee Feedback Examples (Positive & Negative)

• Resources library

Polya’s Problem-Solving Process

Emma Moore, Teaching Excellence Program Master Teacher 

Problem-solving skills are crucial for students to navigate challenges, think critically, and find innovative solutions. In PISA, problem-solving competence is defined as “an individual’s capacity to engage in cognitive processing to understand and resolve problem situations where a method of solution is not immediately obvious” (OECD, 2014, p. 30). Returning to the classroom post-COVID, I found that students had lost their ‘grit’ for these deep-thinking tasks. They either struggled to start, gave up easily, or stopped at their first ‘answer’ without considering if it answered the problem or was the only possible solution.

To re-invigorate these skills, I investigated the impact of explicitly teaching Polya's problem-solving process in my Year Six class. This framework developed student agency and supported them to manage their feelings if they felt challenged by the work.

Here, I will share the impact of this initiative and how it empowered students to become effective and resilient problem solvers.  

Understanding Polya's Problem-Solving Process

Polya's problem-solving process, developed by mathematician George Polya, provides a structured approach to problem-solving that can be applied across various domains. This four-step process consists of understanding the problem, devising a plan, trying the plan, and revisiting the solution. (Polya, 1947)

In order to focus on the skills and knowledge of the problem-solving process, I began by using tasks where the mathematical processes were obvious. This allowed me to focus on the problem-solving process explicitly.

The question shown in Figure 2 is taken from Peter Sullivan and Pat Lilburn's Open-Ended Maths Activities book. This task was used to establish a baseline assessment for each stage of the process. I planned the prompts in dot points and revealed them one by one through the PowerPoint. After launching the task and giving the students time to think, they recorded all their possible answers in their workbook.

The student sample shown in Figure 3 demonstrates that the student followed a pattern and stuck to it but did not revisit their work. On line two, their response (1 half and 1 half is 2 quarters) is unreasonable.

Figure 3 is a sample gathered from a small group of students. This group required support to start. They used paper folding and paper strips to model their thinking.

Over half of the class could give at least one correct answer, but only four students showed signs of checking to see if their plans addressed the problem and yielded correct answers. Understanding the problem and revisiting the solutions became the focus of my inquiry.

The following series of lessons covering operations with fractions and decimals focused on the stages of Polya’s process.  

Step 1: Understanding the Problem

The first step of Polya's problem-solving process emphasises the importance of ensuring you thoroughly comprehend the problem. In this step, students learn to read and analyse the problem statement, identify the key information, and clarify any uncertainties. This process encourages critical thinking (Bicer et al., 2020) as students develop the ability to break down complex problems into manageable parts. I facilitated this process by engaging students in discussions and guiding them to identify the essential components of the problem. By fostering a collaborative learning environment, students shared their perspectives and learned to refine their questions when they were unsure. Figure 6 shares an example of a prompt I use for Step 1.

Figure 4: Example prompt for Step 1.

Initially, students who were stuck provided the classic ‘white flag’ responses.

Student: I just don’t get it.

Teacher: What part don’t you get?

Student: All of it!

As a starting point, the students and I co-created a classroom display of helpful questions the students could use to develop their understanding.

These questions supported me to develop a deeper understanding of what students didn’t understand when they expressed uncertainty. This could range from not understanding specific terminology (often easy to explain) to where numbers came from and why their classmates interpreted the problem differently. I found engaging in this step made triaging their misunderstandings easier.  

Step 2: Devising a Plan

Once students had grasped the problem, the next step was to formulate a plan of action. In this step, students explored different strategies and selected the most appropriate approach. I prompted students to brainstorm possible solutions, draw diagrams, make tables, and create algorithms, all the time fostering creativity and diverse thinking.

This step had been a strength during the baseline assessment data, and a wide range of strategies were explored. Polya’s strategies were displayed in the classroom as the mathematician’s strategy tool kit, so students were comfortable acknowledging the many ways to solve the problem.

Students developed critical thinking and decision-making skills by keeping this step in problem-solving. They become adept at evaluating multiple approaches and selecting the most effective strategy to solve a problem, thus promoting the development of mathematical reasoning abilities (Barnes, 2021). Figure 7 shows a slide used in Step 2.

Figure 5: Example prompt for Step 2.

Step 3: Try

The students implemented their selected strategy, performed calculations, made models, drew diagrams, created tables, and found patterns. This stage encouraged students to persevere and take ownership of their problem-solving process.

At Cowes Primary School, we have developed whole-school expectations around providing opportunities for hands-on learning, allowing students to engage in practical activities that support the development of ideas, expecting students to represent their work visually (pictures, materials and manipulatives), using language and numbers/symbols. This approach enhances students' problem-solving skills and fosters a sense of autonomy and confidence in their capabilities and ability to talk about their work (Roche et al., 2023). Figure 9 shows the slide used for Step 3.

Figure 6: Example prompt for Step 3.

Step 4. Re-visiting the solution

The last step in Polya's problem-solving process is re-visit. After finding a solution, students critically analyse and evaluate their approach after finding a solution. They consider the effectiveness of their chosen strategy, identify strengths and weaknesses, and reflect on how they could improve their problem-solving techniques. This step was missing from most students’ work during the baseline assessment.

As a class, we added to the display questions to facilitate better reflective practice and developed a more critical approach to looking at our work. This process encouraged students to refine their answers, not go too far down the wrong path, fostered resilience, embrace challenge and normalise uncertainty (Buckley & Sullivan, 2023).

Figure 7: Class display showing our questions.

  Figure 8: Student samples from the task.

Impact and Benefits:

Figure 9 shows four tasks, including the initial baseline assessment. The blue series shows the percentage of students who arrived at least one correct solution. The green series shows evidence that students were revisiting their initial solutions using other strategies to check they were correct or checking in with other groups and adjusting. There was a steady increase in both skills over the course of these four tasks.

By explicitly teaching Polya's problem-solving process, the students cultivated valuable skills that extend beyond maths problems. Some of the key benefits observed were:

Mathematical Reasoning: Polya's process promotes the development of mathematical reasoning skills. Students analysed problems, explored different strategies, and apply logical thinking to arrive at solutions. These skills can enhance their overall mathematical proficiency.

Self-efficacy: Through problem-solving, students gained confidence in their ability to tackle problems. They become more self-reliant, taking ownership of their learning, and seeking solutions proactively.

Collaboration and Communication: The process encouraged collaboration and communication among students. They discussed problems, shared ideas, and considered multiple perspectives, students developed effective teamwork and interpersonal skills.

Metacognition: The reflective aspect of Polya's process fostered metacognitive skills, enabling students to monitor and regulate their thinking processes. They learned to identify their strengths and weaknesses, supporting continuous improvement and growth.  

Overall using the 4 steps was a really effective and an explicit way to focus on developing the problem-solving skills of my Year 6 students.

This article was originally published for the Mathematical Association of Victoria's Prime Number.    

References:

Barnes, A. (2021). Enjoyment in learning mathematics: Its role as a potential barrier to children’s perseverance in mathematical reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics , 106(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09992-x

Bicer, Ali, Yujin Lee, Celal Perihan, Mary M. Capraro, and Robert M. Capraro. ‘Considering Mathematical Creative Self-Efficacy with Problem Posing as a Measure of Mathematical Creativity’. Educational Studies in Mathematics 105, no. 3 (November 2020): 457–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09995-8

Buckley, S., & Sullivan, P. (2023). Reframing anxiety and uncertainty in the mathematics classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal , 35(S1), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00393-8

OECD (Ed.). (2014). Creative problem solving: Students’ skills in tackling real-life problems. OECD.

Pólya, G. (1988). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method (2nd ed). Princeton university press.

Roche, A., Gervasoni, A., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2023). Factors that promote interest and engagement in learning mathematics for low-achieving primary students across three learning settings. Mathematics Education Research Journal , 35(3), 525–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00402-w

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

• Rosters & E-Bidding

Have a Research Question?

• Research Tools
• Explore Topics
• Stay Informed
• Publications

Easy Problem Solving Using the 4-step Method

June 7, 2017  by  Jennifer Haury Category:  Guest Author ,  Management

At a recent hospital town forum, hospital leaders are outlining the changes coming when a lone, brave nurse raises her hand and says, “We just can’t take any more changes. They are layered on top of each other and each one is rolled out in a different way. We are exhausted and it’s overloading us all.”  

 “Flavor of the Month” Fatigue

Change fatigue. You hear about it in every industry, from government sectors to software design to manufacturing to healthcare and more. When policy and leadership changes and process improvement overlap it’s no surprise when people complain about “flavor of the month,” and resist it just so they can keep some routine to their days.

In a time where change is required just to keep up with the shifting environment, one way to ease fatigue is to standardize HOW we change. If we use a best practice for solving problems, we can ensure that the right people are involved and problems are solved permanently, not temporarily. Better yet, HOW we change can become the habit and routine we long for.

The 4-step Problem Solving Method

The model we’ve used with clients is based on the A3 problem-solving methodology used by many “lean” production-based companies. In addition to being simpler, our 4-step method is visual, which helps remind the user what goes into each box.

The steps are as follows

• Develop a Problem Statement
• Determine Root Causes
• Rank Root Causes in Order of Importance
• Create an Action Plan

Step 1: Develop a Problem Statement

Developing a good problem statement always seems a lot easier than it generally turns out to be.  For example, this statement: “We don’t have enough staff,” frequently shows up as a problem statement. However, it suggests the solution—“GET MORE STAFF” — and fails to address the real problem that more staff might solve, such as answering phones in a timely manner.

The trick is to develop a problem statement that does not suggest a solution.  Avoiding the following words/phrases: “lack of,” “no,” “not enough,” or “too much” is key. When I start to fall into the trap of suggesting a solution, I ask: “So what problem does that cause?” This usually helps to get to a more effective problem statement.

Once you’ve developed a problem statement, you’ll need to define your target goal, measure your actual condition, then determine the gap. If we ran a restaurant and our problem was: “Customers complaining about burnt toast during morning shift,” the target goal might be: “Toast golden brown 100% of morning shift.”

Focus on a tangible, achievable target goal then measure how often that target is occurring. If our actual condition is: “Toast golden brown 50% of the time,” then our gap is: “Burnt toast 50% of the time.” That gap is now a refined problem to take to Step 2.

Step 2:  Determine Root Causes

In Step 2, we want to understand the root causes. For example, if the gap is burnt toast 50% of the time, what are all the possible reasons why?

This is when you brainstorm. It could be an inattentive cook or a broken pop-up mechanism. Cooks could be using different methods to time the toasting process or some breads toast more quickly.  During brainstorming, you’ll want to include everyone in the process since observing these interactions might also shed light on why the problem is occurring.

Once we have an idea of why, we then use the 5-why process to arrive at a root cause.  Ask “Why?” five times or until it no longer makes sense to ask. Root causes can be tricky.  For example, if the pop up mechanism is broken you could just buy a new toaster, right? But if you asked WHY it broke, you may learn cooks are pressing down too hard on the pop up mechanism, causing it to break. In this case, the problem would just reoccur if you bought a new toaster.

When you find you are fixing reoccurring problems that indicates you haven’t solved for the root cause. Through the 5-why process, you can get to the root cause and fix the problem permanently.

Step 3: Rank Root Causes

Once you know what’s causing the problem (and there may be multiple root causes), it’s time to move to Step 3 to understand which causes, if solved for, would close your gap. Here you rank the root causes in order of importance by looking at which causes would have the greatest impact in closing the gap.

There may be times when you don’t want to go after your largest root cause (perhaps because it requires others to change what they are doing, will take longer, or is dependent on other things getting fixed, etc). Sometimes you’ll find it’s better to start with a solution that has a smaller impact but can be done quickly.

Step 4: Create an Action Plan

In Step 4 you create your action plan — who is going to do what and by when. Documenting all of this and making it visible helps to communicate the plan to others and helps hold them accountable during implementation.

This is where your countermeasures or experiments to fix the problem are detailed. Will we train our chefs on how to use a new “pop-up mechanism” free toaster? Will we dedicate one toaster for white bread and one for wheat?  

Make sure to measure your results after you’ve implemented your plan to see if your target is met. If not, that’s okay; just go through the steps again until the problem is resolved.

Final Thoughts

Using the 4-step method has been an easy way for teams to change how they solve problems. One team I was working with started challenging their “solution jumps” and found this method was a better way to avoid assumptions which led to never really solving their problems.  It was easy to use in a conference room and helped them make their thinking visual so everyone could be involved and engaged in solving the problems their team faced. 

Do you have a problem-solving method that you use at your worksite?  Let us know in the comments below. 

MRSC is a private nonprofit organization serving local governments in Washington State. Eligible government agencies in Washington State may use our free, one-on-one Ask MRSC service to get answers to legal, policy, or financial questions.

About Jennifer Haury

Jennifer Haury is the CEO of All Angles Consulting, LLC and guest authored this post for MRSC.

Jennifer has over 28 years learning in the healthcare industry (17 in leadership positions or consulting in performance improvement and organizational anthropology) and is a Lean Six Sigma Black Belt.

She is a trusted, experienced leader with a keen interest in performance improvement and organizational anthropology. Jennifer is particularly concerned with the sustainability of continuous improvement programs and the cultural values and beliefs that translate into behaviors that either get in our own way or help us succeed in transforming our work.

The views expressed in guest columns represent the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MRSC.

Blog Archives

Weekly e-news.

Get the latest local government news, analysis, and training opportunities in Washington State with MRSC’s Weekly Insights .

Related Materials

Disaster Zone: Lessons from Texas and Lebanon

Strategic Planning

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.7: Problem Solving Process

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 91453

Learning how to use a structured problem solving process will help you to be more organized and support your future courses. Also, it will train your brain how to approach problems. Just like basketball players practice jump shots over and over to train their body how to act in high pressure scenarios, if you are comfortable and familiar with a structured problem solving process, when you’re in a high pressure situation like a test, you can just jump into the problem like muscle memory.

6 Step Problem Solving Method:

• Write out the answer with all necessary information that is given to you. It feels like it takes forever, but it’s important to have the problem and solution next to each other.
• Draw the problem, this is usually a free-body diagram (don’t forget a coordinate frame). Eventually, as you get further into the course, you might need a few drawings. One would be a quick sketch of the problem in the real world, then modelling it into a simplified engineering drawing, and finally the free-body diagram.
• Write out a list of the known/given values with the variable and unit, i.e m = 14 kg   (variable = number unit)
• Write out a list of the unknown values that you will have to solve for in order to solve the problem
• You can also add any assumptions you made here that change the problem.
• Also state any constants, i.e. g = 32.2 ft/m 2   or g = 9.81 m/s 2
• This step helps you to have all of the information in one place when you solve the problem. It’s also important because each number should include units, so you can see if the units match or if you need to convert some numbers so they are all in English or SI. This also gives you the variables side by side to ensure they are unique (so you don’t accidentally have 2 ‘d’ variables and can rename one with a subscript).
• Write a simple sentence or phrase explaining what method/approach you will be using to solve the problem.
• For example: ‘use method of joints’, or equilibrium equations for a rigid body, MMOI for a certain shape, etc.
• This is going to be more important when you get to the later chapters and especially next semester in Dynamics where you can solve the same problem many ways. Might as well practice now!
• This is the actual solving step. This is where you show all the work you have done to solve the problem.
• When you get an answer, restate the variable you are solving for, include the unit, and put a box around the answer.
• Write a simple sentence explaining why (or why not) your answer makes sense. Use logic and common sense for this step.
• When possible, use a second quick numerical analysis to verify your answer. This is the “gut check” to do a quick calculation to ensure your answer is reasonable.
• This is the most confusing step as students often don’t know what to put here and up just writing ‘The number looks reasonable’. This step is vitally important to help you learn how to think about your answer. What does that number mean? What is it close to? For example, if you find that x = 4000 m, that’s a very large distance! In the review, I would say, ‘the object is 4 km long which is reasonable for a long bridge’. See how this is compared to something similar? Or you could do a second calculation to verify the number is correct, such as adding up multiple parts of the problem to confirm the total length is accurate i.e. ‘x + y + z = total, yes it works!’

Additional notes for this course:

• It’s important to include the number and label the steps so it’s clear what you’re doing, as shown in the example below.
• It’s okay if you make mistakes, just put a line through it and keep going.
• Remember your header should include your name, the page number, total number of pages, the course number, and the assignment number. If a problem spans a number of pages, you should include it in the header too.

Key Takeaways

Basically: Use a 6-step structured problem solving process: 1. Problem, 2. Draw, 3. Known & Unknown, 4. Approach, 5. Analysis (Solve), 6. Review

Application: In your future job there is likely a structure for analysis reports that will be used. Each company has a different approach, but most have a standard that should be followed. This is good practice.

Looking ahead: This will be part of every homework assignment.

Written by Gayla & Libby

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.1: George Polya's Four Step Problem Solving Process

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 132871

Step 1: Understand the Problem

• Do you understand all the words?
• Can you restate the problem in your own words?
• Do you know what is given?
• Do you know what the goal is?
• Is there enough information?
• Is there extraneous information?
• Is this problem similar to another problem you have solved?

Step 2: Devise a Plan: Below are some strategies one might use to solve a problem. Can one (or more) of the following strategies be used? (A strategy is defined as an artful means to an end.)

We Signed 5 Fortune 500 Companies in 2 Years. Here’s How.

Selling your product to a Fortune 500 company takes a little more legwork on the front end, but the rewards are worth it. Our expert explains his process.

For early-stage B2B SaaS startups, your first hurdle is to establish product-market fit and sign your first customer. But if you’ve done all that, the next hurdle comes when you begin to scale, move up market, and sign your first Fortune 500 customer.

Selling to larger enterprises requires an entirely different skill set than smaller ones. Your product often needs to be tweaked and tailored to suit the needs of these larger organizations. Also, the sales process is longer. It often takes well over a year to close larger enterprise deals, according to SaaStr . Although getting the deal over the finish line can be a slog, the benefits are massive.

At Focal Point, five of the first 10 deals we closed in our first two years were with Fortune 500 companies. So, how’d we do it?

Having a quality product that solves a real problem is step one. Beyond that, though, the thing that will help you rise above your competition is how you continue to communicate your value.

4 Steps to Closing a Fortune 500 Company

• Don ’t skip over the basics: customize!
• Pitch the right person. Understand their role.
• Be clear about the problem you’re solving.
• Be ready to hear  “no” in an extra-long sales cycle.

More in Sales How to Win Over Gatekeepers and Close More Deals

1. Don’t Skip Over the Basics: Customize!

When meeting with Fortune 500 professionals, your instinct may be to default to high-level, sometimes jargon-y marketing language.

They’re being pitched dozens of times daily; don’t waste their time with generalities. Get to the point and customize your pitch to their unique set of problems. Tailored pitches require consistent, customized communication, guiding your lead throughout the process. It works: Nurtured leads make purchases 47 percent larger than non-nurtured leads.

Nurturing your leads can start before you even pitch them. Are you connected on LinkedIn ? You can build trust and authority by becoming a thought leader in your niche. Are you talking about the problems they encounter every day? Make the lead even warmer by setting yourself up as a thought partner and ally rather than one more solution in a sea of them.

The truth of the matter is that there are only 500 Fortune 500 companies. You have no excuse for not knowing every target intimately, crafting unique selling points for each one, and offering an unparalleled level of service.

Selling to public companies can actually be a straightforward process. They have to disclose performance, and you can turn their disclosures into value propositions if you read between the lines and do your homework. For example, If one of your targets discloses goals related to sustainability, make sure to angle your pitch toward the ways your product or service helps reduce environmental impact. For instance, in our case, Focal Point helps identify more sustainable, compliant vendors, vastly improving the environmental health of the company’s supply chain overall. If your company offers a cleaner technology or a more efficient use of resources, these could be compelling points of interest for leaders on the receiving end of your outreach.

The ABCs of sales are “always be closing,” but perhaps just as important is ABL: “Always be learning.” Always be learning about your customers, incorporate their feedback into your pitch, and stay in front of them with consistent, customized communication.

For example, if you walk them through a demo, be very intentional about what you show them. Your dummy data needs to be a realistic representation of what you think your prospects see and feel every day.

To maximize the effectiveness of your demos, prepare scenarios that might occur in their industry. For example, if sudden market changes are common in their industry, show how your tool can quickly adapt to provide new insights or alter workflows.

It needs to be familiar, highlight that you understand their problems, and that can solve them from day one. And, if you can’t solve all of their exact problems from day one, assure them you’ll have a path to build the required product features quickly.

2. Pitch the Right Person. Understand Their Role.

Although customizing your pitch to a company is crucial, don’t stop there. Customize it to the person. Finding the right person to pitch can be everything.

For example, Focal Point is a procurement solution. If we had started engaging Fortune 500 companies by pitching their COOs, we’d have gotten nowhere. Instead, we started with procurement professionals at the mid- to senior-level: Heads of procurement, chief procurement officers, etc.

Once you’ve found the right person, start to understand the nuances of their role. A head of procurement is likely facing different day-to-day issues than a chief procurement officer, and a chief procurement officer at one Fortune 500 company could have very different responsibilities than the same one at another.

We rely heavily on testimony from our existing clients to make this happen. We ask our clients pointed questions to understand the internal dynamics at play. Although not every client is the same, if you ask enough questions, you begin to understand the patterns in the answers. This helps us inform who we go to first. 

When we pitched procurement professionals at Fortune 500 companies, we wanted to create an evangelist for our product on the inside who understood the problems we were solving and could be an internal champion for our solution.

We tailored our pitches to them because they were the first and most important gatekeepers, but the work doesn’t stop there. You should also understand that no one in any function works independently. Work to understand the needs of, and sell to, the other stakeholders who need to buy in: the CTO, CIO, CFO, and in some cases CEO. Even with a champion on the inside, you have to speak the language of the decision-making C-suite. 

As we spoke to more stakeholders throughout the process, we again tailored our conversations to those audiences. You accomplish this by analyzing your audience and their needs. If we’re pitching to a chief procurement officer, we tailor our pitch to introduce the product as a solution that simplifies procurement processes, reduces costs, and enhances supplier management. But, when we’re talking to the CFO, we highlight the cost-effectiveness, ROI, and impact of our product on the bottom line. The process will evolve, and your pitches can’t be stagnant.

3. Be Clear About the Problem You’re Solving 

Companies that undersell a problem and oversell their solution are doing themselves a disservice. They’re setting customers up to be underwhelmed.

Instead, start with the problem first. This means positioning your product around a discrete problem. It’s not the solution to all their problems. It’s not their savior. It solves a specific issue they experience regularly, and it does so elegantly.

This type of transparency builds trust. Our customers appreciate the candor; they understand that procurement is complex and messy. It takes time to address the process end-to-end, which is why incremental improvements are so important.

Strive to communicate to prospects how your organization will tackle the team’s future problems. The sales team has an opportunity to demonstrate its expertise and vision to grow with the company by anticipating future challenges and a plan to address them. 

To use the example from above, if our client has expressed an intent to prioritize sustainability, we emphasize that our team is actively developing features that will help them evaluate suppliers not just on cost and quality, but on their environmental and social governance standards.

Laying out a plan from start to finish and acknowledging that you’re prepared to pivot along the way brings customers into your journey, makes them feel like stakeholders, and gives them input into the vision for your solution.

4. Be Ready to Hear ‘ No ’ in an Extra-Long Sales Cycle

This one sounds counterintuitive, but that’s precisely what makes it effective. Prompt buyers with questions that require a “no.” For example, “Do you have [insert your unique value proposition]?” You know the answer. They know the answer. It’s “no.”

But just the act of them saying that they don’t have a solution out loud requires them to really focus on the issue at hand. It’s almost cathartic. Let the “no” resonate with them. Let them sit in it.

Sometimes the “no” can be unnerving. For example, “You’ve seen the value our solution can bring, but are your teams set up to access that value from day one?”

Sometimes that’s a “no” as well, and while that can be unsettling for you as the salesperson, it forces you both to think through the logistics. Your goal isn’t just delivering the best tech, it’s to find the best way to organize, train, and deploy their teams around that tech. This is where you think through onboarding, training, legacy systems, bureaucracy, etc.

This thought exercise forces your target to imagine what a partnership would look like. They have to get specific and prescriptive. They need to figure out both what they need from you and what you’ll need from them.

In many cases, “nos” are the best path forward in an extra-long sales cycle.

More for Founders 3 Tips for Scaling a Startup Without Overheating

Prep, Then Sell

We signed five Fortune 500 clients in our first two years. It wasn’t easy. But we made our lives a lot easier by going into each call armed with the knowledge that we were talking to the right person, at the right company, with the right problem statement, and with the right amount of transparent honesty.

Now, that’s not going to work for every B2B SaaS company. You have to get the problem statement and product down first. But once you do, it’s off to the races.

Recent Expert Contributors Articles