How Do You Know if the Cement Is Good
Reprint: R1209F The rigor with which a problem is defined is the near important factor in finding a good solution. Many organizations, nevertheless, are not practiced at articulating their problems and identifying which ones are crucial to their strategies. They may even be trying to solve the incorrect problems—missing opportunities and wasting resources in the procedure. The key is to ask the right questions. The writer describes a process that his firm, InnoCentive, has used to help clients define and articulate business, technical, social, and policy challenges and and so present them to an online community of more than than 250,000 solvers. The four-stride process consists of asking a series of questions and using the answers to create a problem statement that will elicit novel ideas from an array of experts. EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a nonprofit organization, used this process to observe a low-cost, lightweight, and convenient product that expands access to clean drinking water in the developing world.
"If I were given i hr to salvage the planet, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and i minute resolving it," Albert Einstein said.
Those were wise words, but from what I have observed, most organizations don't heed them when tackling innovation projects. Indeed, when developing new products, processes, or even businesses, most companies aren't sufficiently rigorous in defining the issues they're attempting to solve and articulating why those issues are important. Without that rigor, organizations miss opportunities, waste resource, and end up pursuing innovation initiatives that aren't aligned with their strategies. How many times have y'all seen a project become down one path but to realize in retrospect that it should have gone down another? How many times accept you seen an innovation plan deliver a seemingly breakthrough issue simply to find that it can't exist implemented or it addresses the incorrect problem? Many organizations need to go better at asking the right questions so that they tackle the correct problems.
I offer here a procedure for defining problems that any organization can employ on its own. My firm, InnoCentive, has used information technology to assist more than 100 corporations, government agencies, and foundations better the quality and efficiency of their innovation efforts and, every bit a upshot, their overall performance. Through this process, which nosotros call challenge-driven innovation, clients ascertain and clear their business organisation, technical, social, and policy bug and present them as challenges to a customs of more than 250,000 solvers—scientists, engineers, and other experts who hail from 200 countries—on InnoCentive.com, our innovation marketplace. Successful solvers have earned awards of $v,000 to $i meg.
Since our launch, more 10 years ago, we take managed more than 2,000 problems and solved more than than half of them—a much higher proportion than most organizations achieve on their own. Indeed, our success rates take improved dramatically over the years (34% in 2006, 39% in 2009, and 57% in 2011), which is a function of the increasing quality of the questions we pose and of our solver customs. Interestingly, even unsolved bug have been tremendously valuable to many clients, allowing them to abolish sick-blighted programs much earlier than they otherwise would accept and then redeploy their resource.
In our early years, we focused on highly specific technical bug, but we have since expanded, taking on everything from basic R&D and production evolution to the health and safety of astronauts to cyberbanking services in developing countries. We now know that the rigor with which a problem is defined is the most of import factor in finding a suitable solution. But we've seen that well-nigh organizations are not proficient at articulating their problems clearly and concisely. Many have considerable difficulty even identifying which problems are crucial to their missions and strategies.
In fact, many clients have realized while working with us that they may not exist tackling the right problems. Consider a visitor that engages InnoCentive to observe a lubricant for its manufacturing mechanism. This substitution ensues:
InnoCentive staffer: "Why practise you need the lubricant?"
Client's engineer: "Considering nosotros're at present expecting our machinery to practise things information technology was not designed to do, and it needs a item lubricant to operate."
InnoCentive staffer: "Why don't you lot supercede the machinery?"
Client's engineer: "Because no ane makes equipment that exactly fits our needs."
This raises a deeper question: Does the company need the lubricant, or does it demand a new way to make its production? It could exist that rethinking the manufacturing process would give the firm a new ground for competitive advantage. (Request questions until you become to the root cause of a problem draws from the famous Five Whys problem-solving technique developed at Toyota and employed in 6 Sigma.)
The case is similar many we've seen: Someone in the bowels of the organization is assigned to fix a very specific, near-term problem. Only considering the firm doesn't utilize a rigorous process for understanding the dimensions of the problem, leaders miss an opportunity to accost underlying strategic issues. The situation is exacerbated by what Stefan Thomke and Donald Reinertsen have identified every bit the fallacy of "The sooner the project is started, the sooner it will exist finished." (Meet "Six Myths of Production Development," HBR May 2012.) Organizational teams speed toward a solution, fearing that if they spend besides much time defining the problem, their superiors will punish them for taking so long to become to the starting line.
Ironically, that approach is more likely to waste time and money and reduce the odds of success than i that strives at the outset to achieve an in-depth agreement of the problem and its importance to the firm. With this in mind, we developed a four-stride process for defining and articulating issues, which nosotros have honed with our clients. It consists of request a series of questions and using the answers to create a thorough problem statement. This procedure is important for two reasons. First, it rallies the organization around a shared understanding of the problem, why the business firm should tackle it, and the level of resources it should receive. Firms that don't engage in this process often allocate too few resources to solving major problems or too many to solving low-priority or wrongly divers ones. It's useful to assign a value to the solution: An arrangement will be more willing to devote considerable fourth dimension and resource to an effort that is shown to represent a $100 million market opportunity than to an initiative whose value is much less or is unclear. Second, the process helps an organization cast the widest possible net for potential solutions, giving internal and external experts in disparate fields the data they demand to crack the trouble.
This article also appears in:
To illustrate how the procedure works, nosotros'll describe an initiative to aggrandize access to clean drinking h2o undertaken past the nonprofit EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a division of Relief International. EWV's mission is to foster economical growth and enhance the standard of living in developing countries by expanding access to technologies and helping entrepreneurs build sustainable businesses.
The system chose Jon Naugle, its technical director, every bit the initiative's "problem champion." Individuals in this role should have a deep understanding of the field or domain and be capable programme administrators. Because problem champions may besides exist charged with implementing solutions, a proven leader with the authorisation, responsibility, and resource to meet the projection through tin exist invaluable in this role, particularly for a larger and more strategic undertaking. Naugle, an engineer with more than than 25 years of agricultural and rural-development experience in Due east and West Africa and the Caribbean, fit the bill. He was supported by specialists who understood local market atmospheric condition, available materials, and other disquisitional issues related to the delivery of drinking h2o.
Step 1: Found the Need for a Solution
The purpose of this step is to articulate the problem in the simplest terms possible: "We are looking for X in order to reach Z equally measured by Due west." Such a statement, akin to an elevator pitch, is a call to arms that clarifies the importance of the event and helps secure resources to address it. This initial framing answers 3 questions:
What is the bones need?
This is the essential problem, stated clearly and concisely. It is of import at this phase to focus on the need that's at the heart of the trouble instead of jumping to a solution. Defining the scope is besides important. Clearly, looking for lubricant for a piece of mechanism is different from seeking a radically new manufacturing procedure.
The basic demand EWV identified was access to make clean drinking water for the estimated one.1 billion people in the globe who lack it. This is a pressing issue even in areas that have enough of rainfall, because the water is not effectively captured, stored, and distributed.
What is the desired event?
Answering this question requires understanding the perspectives of customers and other beneficiaries. (The Five Whys approach can be very helpful.) Again, avoid the temptation to favor a particular solution or arroyo. This question should exist addressed qualitatively and quantitatively whenever possible. A high-level but specific goal, such as "improving fuel efficiency to 100 mpg past 2020," tin can be helpful at this stage.
In answering this question, Naugle and his squad realized that the upshot had to be more access to water; the access had to be convenient. Women and children in countries such as Uganda frequently must walk long distances to fetch h2o from valleys and so carry information technology uphill to their villages. The desired upshot EWV defined was to provide water for daily family needs without requiring enormous expenditures of time and energy.
Who stands to benefit and why?
Answering this question compels an organization to identify all potential customers and beneficiaries. It is at this stage that you lot understand whether, say, you are solving a lubricant trouble for the engineer or for the head of manufacturing—whose definitions of success may vary considerably.
If the problem y'all desire to solve is industrywide, it'south crucial to understand why the market has failed to accost it.
By pondering this question, EWV came to run across that the benefits would accrue to individuals and families as well as to regions and countries. Women would spend less fourth dimension walking to retrieve water, giving them more than time for working in the field or in outside employment that would bring their families needed income. Children would be able to nourish schoolhouse. And over the longer term, regions and countries would benefit from the improved education and productivity of the population.
Step 2: Justify the Need
The purpose of answering the questions in this step is to explain why your arrangement should endeavor to solve the problem.
Is the effort aligned with our strategy?
In other words, will satisfying the need serve the system's strategic goals? Information technology is not unusual for an arrangement to be working on problems that are no longer in sync with its strategy or mission. In that instance, the effort (and peradventure the whole initiative) should be reconsidered.
In the example of EWV, simply improving access to make clean drinking water wouldn't exist enough; to fit the organization's mission, the solution should generate economic development and opportunities for local businesses. Information technology needed to involve something that people would purchase.
In addition, you should consider whether the trouble fits with your firm's priorities. Since EWV'due south other projects included providing access to affordable products such as cookstoves and treadle pumps, the drinking water project was advisable.
What are the desired benefits for the company, and how will we measure them?
In for-profit companies, the desired benefit could be to attain a revenue target, accomplish a sure market share, or achieve specific cycle-time improvements. EWV hoped to farther its goal of being a recognized leader in helping the globe's poor by transferring technology through the private sector. That benefit would exist measured by market impact: How many families are paying for the solution? How is it affecting their lives? Are sales and installation creating jobs? Given the potential benefits, EWV accounted the priority to exist high.
How will we ensure that a solution is implemented?
Assume that a solution is found. Someone in the arrangement must be responsible for carrying information technology out—whether that means installing a new manufacturing technology, launching a new business, or commercializing a product innovation. That person could exist the problem champion, just he or she could also exist the manager of an existing partitioning, a cross-functional team, or a new section.
At EWV, Jon Naugle was besides put in accuse of carrying out the solution. In addition to his technical background, Naugle had a rail record of successfully implementing like projects. For instance, he had served as EWV's land director in Niger, where he oversaw a component of a Earth Banking concern airplane pilot project to promote small-scale-scale private irrigation. His role of the project involved getting the private sector to manufacture treadle pumps and manually drill wells.
It is important at this stage to initiate a loftier-level conversation in the organization well-nigh the resources a solution might require. This can seem premature—after all, yous're still defining the trouble, and the field of possible solutions could be very big—but it's really not too early on to begin exploring what resources your organization is willing and able to devote to evaluating solutions then implementing the all-time ane. Even at the outset, you may take an clue that implementing a solution will be much more expensive than others in the organization realize. In that case, it's of import to communicate a rough approximate of the money and people that volition be required and to make sure that the system is willing to continue downwards this path. The result of such a word might be that some constraints on resourcing must be built into the trouble argument. Early on in its drinking water project, EWV ready a cap on how much information technology would devote to initial research and the testing of possible solutions.
Now that you take laid out the need for a solution and its importance to the organization, you lot must define the problem in item. This involves applying a rigorous method to ensure that you have captured all the information that someone—including people in fields far removed from your manufacture—might need to solve the trouble.
Step three: Contextualize the Problem
Examining by efforts to detect a solution tin can save time and resource and generate highly innovative thinking. If the problem is industrywide, it'due south crucial to understand why the market has failed to address it.
What approaches accept nosotros tried?
The aim hither is to find solutions that might already exist in your organization and identify those that it has disproved. By answering this question, you can avoid reinventing the wheel or going downward a dead end.
In previous efforts to aggrandize access to clean water, EWV had offered products and services ranging from manually drilled wells for irrigation to filters for household water treatment. Every bit with all its projects, EWV identified products that low-income consumers could beget and, if possible, that local entrepreneurs could manufacture or service. As Naugle and his team revisited those efforts, they realized that both solutions worked but if a h2o source, such as surface water or a shallow aquifer, was close to the household. As a result, they decided to focus on rainwater—which falls everywhere in the globe to a greater or lesser extent—as a source that could attain many more than people. More specifically, the team turned its attending to the concept of rainwater harvesting. "Rainwater is delivered straight to the terminate user," Naugle says. "Information technology's every bit close equally yous can go to a piped water organization without having a piped water supply."
What accept others tried?
EWV'south investigation of previous attempts at rainwater harvesting involved reviewing enquiry on the topic, conducting five field studies, and surveying 20 countries to ask what engineering science was being used, what was and was non working, what prevented or encouraged the apply of various solutions, how much the solutions toll, and what part authorities played.
"I of the key things we learned from the surveys," Naugle says, "was that once you have a hard roof—which many people do—to use as a collection surface, the most expensive thing is storage."
Here was the problem that needed to be solved. EWV establish that existing solutions for storing rainwater, such every bit physical tanks, were also expensive for low-income families in developing countries, so households were sharing storage tanks. But because no one took buying of the communal facilities, they frequently fell into busted. Consequently, Naugle and his team homed in on the concept of a low-toll household rainwater-storage device.
Their research into prior solutions surfaced what seemed initially like a promising approach: storing rainwater in a 525-gallon jar that was almost as tall as an adult and iii times as broad. In Thailand, they learned, 5 million of those jars had been deployed over v years. After further investigation, even so, they constitute that the jars were made of cement, which was bachelor in Thailand at a low cost. More important, the country'due south good roads made it possible to manufacture the jars in one location and ship them in trucks around the country. That solution wouldn't work in areas that had neither cement nor high-quality roads. Indeed, through interviews with villagers in Uganda, EWV found that even empty polyethylene barrels big enough to agree only l gallons of water were difficult to carry along a path. It became clear that a viable storage solution had to be calorie-free enough to exist carried some distance in areas without roads.
What are the internal and external constraints on implementing a solution?
Now that yous have a better idea of what you want to achieve, information technology'due south time to revisit the effect of resource and organizational commitment: Do you have the necessary back up for soliciting and and then evaluating possible solutions? Are you sure that you can obtain the money and the people to implement the virtually promising 1?
External constraints are simply as of import to evaluate: Are there bug concerning patents or intellectual-property rights? Are in that location laws and regulations to exist considered? Answering these questions may require consultation with various stakeholders and experts.
Exercise you have the necessary support for soliciting and evaluating possible solutions? Do y'all have the money and the people to implement the most promising one?
EWV's exploration of possible external constraints included examining government policies regarding rainwater storage. Naugle and his squad establish that the governments of Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam supported the thought, merely the strongest proponent was Uganda's government minister of h2o and the environment, Maria Mutagamba. Consequently, EWV decided to examination the storage solution in Uganda.
Step 4: Write the Problem Argument
Now information technology'southward time to write a total description of the problem you're seeking to solve and the requirements the solution must meet. The problem statement, which captures all that the arrangement has learned through answering the questions in the previous steps, helps constitute a consensus on what a viable solution would be and what resources would be required to achieve it.
A total, clear description besides helps people both inside and outside the organization speedily grasp the effect. This is especially important considering solutions to circuitous problems in an industry or discipline often come from experts in other fields (run across "Getting Unusual Suspects to Solve R&D Puzzles," HBR May 2007). For example, the method for moving pasty oil from spills in Arctic and subarctic waters from collection barges to disposal tanks came from a chemist in the cement industry, who responded to the Oil Spill Recovery Institute'due south clarification of the trouble in terms that were precise but not specific to the petroleum industry. Thus the institute was able to solve in a matter of months a claiming that had stumped petroleum engineers for years. (To read the institute's full problem statement, visit hbr.org/trouble-statement1.)
Here are some questions that tin help y'all develop a thorough problem statement:
Is the problem actually many problems?
The aim hither is to drill downwards to root causes. Complex, seemingly insoluble issues are much more approachable when broken into discrete elements.
For EWV, this meant making it clear that the solution needed to be a storage production that individual households could afford, that was calorie-free enough to be easily transported on poor-quality roads or paths, and that could exist easily maintained.
What requirements must a solution meet?
EWV conducted all-encompassing on-the-ground surveys with potential customers in Uganda to identify the must-have versus the nice-to-have elements of a solution. (Encounter the sidebar "Elements of a Successful Solution.") It didn't affair to EWV whether the solution was a new device or an adaptation of an existing one. As well, the solution didn't need to be one that could be mass-produced. That is, information technology could be something that local minor-scale entrepreneurs could industry.
Experts in rainwater harvesting told Naugle and his team that their target price of $xx was unachievable, which meant that subsidies would be required. Merely a subsidized production was against EWV's strategy and philosophy.
Which problem solvers should we engage?
The dead stop EWV hitting in seeking a $20 solution from those experts led the arrangement to conclude that it needed to enlist as many experts outside the field as possible. That is when EWV decided to engage InnoCentive and its network of 250,000 solvers.
What information and linguistic communication should the problem statement include?
To appoint the largest number of solvers from the widest diversity of fields, a problem argument must run into the twin goals of being extremely specific only not unnecessarily technical. It shouldn't comprise industry or discipline jargon or presuppose noesis of a item field. It may (and probably should) include a summary of previous solution attempts and detailed requirements.
With those criteria in mind, Naugle and his team crafted a problem statement. (The post-obit is the abstract; for the full problem argument, visit hbr.org/trouble-statement2.) "EnterpriseWorks is seeking design ideas for a low-cost rainwater storage system that can be installed in households in developing countries. The solution is expected to facilitate access to clean water at a household level, addressing a problem that affects millions of people worldwide who are living in impoverished communities or rural areas where access to clean water is limited. Domestic rainwater harvesting is a proven engineering science that can be a valuable selection for accessing and storing h2o yr round. Notwithstanding, the high price of available rainwater storage systems makes them well beyond the attain of low-income families to install in their homes. A solution to this problem would not only provide user-friendly and affordable access to scarce water resource only would likewise allow families, particularly the women and children who are unremarkably tasked with water collection, to spend less time walking distances to collect h2o and more fourth dimension on activities that can bring in income and improve the quality of life."
To engage the largest number of solvers from the widest diversity of fields, a trouble argument must encounter the twin goals of being extremely specific merely not unnecessarily technical.
What do solvers demand to submit?
What information about the proposed solution does your system need in order to invest in information technology? For example, would a well-founded hypothetical arroyo be sufficient, or is a full-blown image needed? EWV decided that a solver had to submit a written explanation of the solution and detailed drawings.
What incentives do solvers need?
The signal of asking this question is to ensure that the right people are motivated to address the problem. For internal solvers, incentives can be written into job descriptions or offered every bit promotions and bonuses. For external solvers, the incentive might exist a cash award. EWV offered to pay $15,000 to the solver who provided the all-time solution through the InnoCentive network.
How will solutions be evaluated and success measured?
Addressing this question forces a company to be explicit about how it will evaluate the solutions it receives. Clarity and transparency are crucial to arriving at feasible solutions and to ensuring that the evaluation procedure is off-white and rigorous. In some cases a "nosotros'll know it when we see it" arroyo is reasonable—for example, when a company is looking for a new branding strategy. About of the time, however, it is a sign that before steps in the process have not been approached with sufficient rigor.
EWV stipulated that it would evaluate solutions on their ability to meet the criteria of low toll, high storage capacity, low weight, and easy maintenance. It added that it would prefer designs that were modular (and then that the unit of measurement would exist easier to send) and adaptable or salvageable or had multiple functions (so that owners could reuse the materials later on the product's lifetime or sell them to others for various applications). The overarching goal was to keep costs low and to assistance poor families justify the purchase.
The Winner
Ultimately, the solution to EWV's rainwater-storage problem came from someone exterior the field: a German language inventor whose company specialized in the design of tourist submarines. The solution he proposed required no elaborate mechanism; in fact, information technology had no pumps or moving parts. Information technology was an established industrial technology that had not been applied to h2o storage: a plastic bag within a plastic bag with a tube at the top. The outer handbag (made of less-expensive, woven polypropylene) provided the structure's strength, while the inner bag (made of more than-expensive, linear low-density polyethylene) was impermeable and could concur 125 gallons of h2o. The two-bag approach immune the inner bag to be thinner, reducing the price of the product, while the outer pocketbook was strong enough to contain a ton and a half of water.
The construction folded into a packet the size of a briefcase and weighed virtually 8 pounds. In short, the solution was affordable, commercially viable, could exist easily transported to remote areas, and could exist sold and installed by local entrepreneurs. (Retailers make from $4 to $viii per unit, depending on the book they purchase. Installers of the gutters, downspout, and base earn about $half dozen.)
EWV developed an initial version and tested information technology in Uganda, where the organization asked end users such questions as What do you think of its weight? Does it come across your needs? Even mundane issues like colour came into play: The woven outer bags were white, which women pointed out would immediately look muddy. EWV modified the design on the basis of this input: For example, it changed the colour of the device to chocolate-brown, expanded its size to 350 gallons (while keeping the target price of no more than $20 per 125 gallons of h2o storage), altered its shape to make it more than stable, and replaced the original siphon with an outlet tap.
After 14 months of field testing, EWV rolled out the commercial production in Uganda in March 2011. By the terminate of May 2012, 50 to sixty shops, village sales agents, and cooperatives were selling the product; more than 80 entrepreneurs had been trained to install it; and one,418 units had been deployed in eight districts in southwestern Uganda.
EWV deems this a success at this stage in the rollout. Information technology hopes to make the units available in 10 countries—and have tens or hundreds of thousands of units installed—within five years. Ultimately, it believes, millions of units volition be in use for a variety of applications, including household drinking water, irrigation, and structure. Interestingly, the main obstacle to getting people to buy the device has been skepticism that something that comes in such a small packet (the size of a typical five-gallon jerrican) tin can hold the equivalent of lxx jerricans. Believing that the remedy is to show villagers the installed product, EWV is currently testing various promotion and marketing programs.Equally the EWV story illustrates, critically analyzing and clearly articulating a problem can yield highly innovative solutions. Organizations that utilise these simple concepts and develop the skills and discipline to ask better questions and define their problems with more rigor can create strategic reward, unlock truly groundbreaking innovation, and drive better business functioning. Request better questions delivers better results.
A version of this article appeared in the September 2012 effect of Harvard Business Review.
Source: https://hbr.org/2012/09/are-you-solving-the-right-problem
0 Response to "How Do You Know if the Cement Is Good"
Post a Comment