Leadership: Problem Identification

Comment: This is the second post of the Leadership Process series. I began this series because I saw a lack of rigor and discipline to leadership. The deliverable is a vision statement. 

Leadership: Problem Identification

Discussion: Identification of a problem is not as easy as it sounds. Often the issues out in front or on the surface are only symptomatic of a deeper root cause. Moreover, the problems leaders address are different than problems the everyday person deals with. Leadership seeks to improve things by getting at root causes and adjust culture, direction, and other broad sweeping concerns. The problem identified is foundational to the vision formulated. Hence, the deliverable of problem identification is a vision that improves or corrects a problem condition.

There are methods and techniques for getting at the real problem in order to formulate the right vision. Please note the use of ‘real’ and ‘right’ terms. For leaders, a virtuous and realistic focus is an essential method and part of character that infuses into the vision in order to be appreciated by all. Returning to the methods and techniques for getting at the real problem there are several approaches to root cause analysis (RCA).

One must understand the difference between problems and symptoms. Problems originate out of underlying structural relationships among a system’s components. A system can be human, physical, or organizational from which the problems and symptoms emerge. A symptom is the outcome or effect of the problem and can be mistaken for the problem itself. One technique is the ‘Little Boy’ method who asked, ‘but why?’ to every answer. The ‘multiple why’ process can be used to unpeel the onion until the root cause is exposed. This approach is simple and effective for linear relationships that lead to a root cause.

Another RCA approach is to ask the 5W’s; What, Why, When, Where, and Who. This approach unpeels the onion in a different manner by looking for patterns in the causes; human, physical, or organizational. Often multiple interrelated causes are revealed. The recursive nature of these two approaches can be taken to the origin of the universe at the extreme. The leader must ask the ‘so what’ question and stop at a useful or purposeful point using good judgment and a little common sense.

Five Step Root Cause Analysis

The first two approaches were more or less shooting from the hip methods. A more formal approach is Five Step RCA. This approach considers the Customer or end user, Actors, Transformation processes, Worldviews, Owners or stakeholders, and Environmental constraints (CATWOE). More in depth questions are asked at each stage.

The root-cause identification process:

1. Define the surface issue or problem, the starting point. 
2. Collect Data 
3. Identify Possible Causal Factors. Some of the tooling to get at the causal factors includes:
   • Appreciation: Ask the ‘so what’
   • The Why’s: Ask why until you are at the root cause
   • Drill down: Breaking the big picture into manageable components.
   • Cause and effect diagramming: The classic TQM fishbone method.
4. Identify the Root Cause(s) 
5. Recommend and Implement Solutions. The solution is the vision the leader desires to pursue to resolve the identified root cause problem.

Problem identification hands off to vision formulation. A vision is the deliverable of the effort.

Vision Formulation is to Begin with the End in Mind

Vision is to be strategic and focuses diverse constituencies on a big picture. Vision is most often a departure from the status quo and may not even be readily apparent to most people until a leader reveals the vision. Ideally, that is a Ah Ha moment. In formulating vision one cannot easily take the current and extrapolate to the future. The future must be mapped back to the present in order to develop the roadmap forward. As Stephen Covey states this, "Begin with the end in mind."  

Beginning with the end in mind means that once the problem is defined one can generally make a judgment on what the situation should be. Hence, the differenital is the problem. The basic components of vision are:

• Intent: This is a sweeping statement of purpose that usually states the problem that will require some sort of action. For example, to restore market to normalcy.
• Objective: This is the goal or criteria of success usually stated in terms of actionable intent. For example, to achieve market normalcy ensuring diversified control of supply points.
• End State: This is the outcome of the objective and intent. For example, a market operating under fair and competitive market conditions.

A future model is the vision. Future modeling is siginificantly different in that it cannot be achieved most of the time by the natural course of action or current path. Future models require leadership to make the necessary adjustments in order to arrive at the future model. The idea is that leadership not only formulates the vision but also lays out the roadmap to achieve the vision. Often this is called Performance Management.  Moveover, leadership can be positive or it can be not so good in the visions sought. Leadership begins with problem identification then formulates a vision of how the conditions should be.

Comment: This concludes the problem identification post.  The next post will discuss goal setting or developing the roadmap.