Slow Down To Speed Up: Problem Identification Drives Transformation
Slowing down to define the problem may feel counterintuitive when urgency is high. Yet, it is the clearest path to long-term success.
getty
Most managers are both excellent and flawed problem solvers, depending on the context. They have remarkable cognitive skills, but being human, they also suffer from a broad range of innate biases and limitations.
There's an old story of a man searching for his keys one night under a streetlight. Eventually, a handful of good Samaritans join the search. After some time with no success, someone finally asks the man, 'Are you sure this is where you lost them?' The man replies, 'No, I lost them in the park.' The helper, confused, asks him why he is looking for them here. The man replies, 'Because this is where the light is.'
This scenario is more common than many people realize. In business, the data we collect and the way we interpret it can sometimes be like the streetlight in the parable. People tend to look for answers in the most familiar or obvious places rather than digging deeper. In organizations, this type of problem-solving can lead to wasted resources, lost time, and mounting frustration.
Consider the case of a food manufacturing company we recently worked with. This company had a specialty line of allergen-free food products, which required rigorous testing to ensure that trace amounts of peanut residue were not present in their facilities. Despite the fact that their workers diligently cleaned and re-cleaned the lines, testing after each cycle, their production lines repeatedly failed quality control tests. Production was backlogged, costs were up, and workers were frustrated. How could even the slightest trace of residue remain?
Someone finally asked a key question: 'Have you tested the testing room?' It turned out that the testing room—not the production line—was contaminated with peanut residue.
This type of situational tunnel vision is often heightened when problems arise in routine tasks or familiar environments. Thinking outside the box becomes increasingly challenging when you spend all your time inside it—whether that box is your role, company, or industry.
Nobel-Prize-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman introduced the concept of two types of thinking in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow. His theory breaks down human thought processes into two systems. System 1 thinking is fast, intuitive, and handles routine tasks. It's very efficient but prone to errors and biases because we all tend to jump to conclusions based on patterns we recognize. Within familiar settings, we often rely on mental shortcuts and routine assumptions. This is efficient for everyday tasks but can create blind spots when tackling unique or complex problems.
System 2 thinking is more deliberate and analytical. It requires effort, attention, and reasoning, and we use it for complex problems or unfamiliar situations. It might be more reliable, but it's definitely more taxing and slower.
A simple example might be when you're driving a familiar route home. You primarily use System 1. You basically operate on autopilot, checking your mirrors or changing lanes without much conscious input. But if something unexpected happens, you're low on gas, or a detour sign forces you to find a new route, your slower and more conscious System 2 thinking kicks in.
Seasoned managers and experienced consultants can sometimes fall into the same trap. Familiarity with a topic is not always an advantage for solving complex problems, particularly if your experience leads you to think the problem is not complex.
With our own consulting teams, we try to stem this tendency to jump to conclusions by relying on a structured problem-solving methodology designed to reveal problems that are baked into routine operations. But the real secret to this is that we force System 2 thinking on bright people who might otherwise believe they can jump to a solution. This is particularly important at the front end of an engagement, to make sure we properly understand what the actual problems are that we, and the client, need to solve.
System 1 and System 2 thinking is well worth considering for companies rushing to take advantage of the many benefits of artificial intelligence (AI). While AI offers enormous potential, it is often treated as a solution in search of a problem. What we currently observe with many organizations is a rush to apply the solution without carefully and thoughtfully understanding the underlying problems that need to be fixed.
One company invested heavily in an AI tool to speed up customer support response times. The system performed well, but customer satisfaction scores did not improve. It turned out that customers valued resolution accuracy more than speed. The company had wasted considerable resources applying an elegant fix to the wrong problem.
Another recent client believed their challenges stemmed from outdated technology. A deeper analysis revealed that the true cause was poor interdepartmental communication. Fixing the miscommunication saved significant time and money, while the assumed 'solution' (investing in new technology) would not have addressed the underlying issues and may have baked the problems deeper into the routine process.
I asked one of our managers, Caleb Emerson, for his thoughts on AI integration. He had three points:
Whether it's AI or any other tool, solutions are only as effective as the value of the problems they address. A key constraint that hinders capturing AI's value is the integrity of the underlying data. Unless that is addressed, automation and increasingly sophisticated algorithms will struggle to deliver meaningful results.
Slowing down to define the problem may feel counterintuitive when urgency is high. Yet, it is the clearest path to long-term success. Proper problem identification saves time, money, and frustration by focusing resources on effective solutions instead of misguided assumptions. When you take the time to identify the real problems, you accelerate the pace of meaningful change. Instead of spinning your wheels, you are better equipped to drive progress where it counts most.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Decoding your kid's report card: What it says and what it really means
Sarah Jane had just finished writing report cards for her Grade 7 students when she called her principal and declared she was done with teaching. 'It was the tipping point,' says the Niagara-area teacher who retired in 2021, marking the end of a 35-year career. 'I thought I just don't want to do another set of report cards and be all stressed out. It's so much work. 'I loved the kids, and I loved teaching. But I felt like report cards are too sugar-coated and sometimes even dishonest because we always have to say what the child does well … You want to find a child's strength, but we're always trying to phrase everything so positively that I think parents don't always know where their child is' academically. Jane is the creator of Ontario Report Card Comments , a Facebook group with nearly 15,000 members where educators share tips and support to get through one of the most nuanced, high-stakes and emotionally charged tasks facing teachers. Report card flashback: What teachers said to a future Nobel prize winner, a prolific author and a future premier The results of which are imminent: final report cards are about to land in the hands of students across the province. For families, it's a nerve-wracking moment that can bring great pride or crushing disappointment. Reviewing anyone's performance can be stressful and intimidating, says Brampton high school teacher Jason Bradshaw, but 'imagine speaking of somebody's child, that takes it to another level. People are going to be all the more emotionally invested. So teachers have a responsibility to be constructive and transparent.' But report cards don't always successfully reflect that. Vague, standardized language and a lack of personalization can leave families unsure of how their child is progressing. To help decode this familiar yet at times cryptic document, the Star spoke with educators who shared how challenging it is to capture a student's story in just a few chosen lines. That homework causing family tension every night? It doesn't count. While homework is important for reinforcing learning, Growing Success , Ontario's education policy on reporting student achievement, makes it clear assignments done at home shouldn't be factored into final marks. Still, skipping homework isn't without consequence — it can show up under learning skills, a key part of assessment for all students in grades 1 to 12. 'In the age of ChatGPT, a lot of educators are moving to the position where we simply do not evaluate work that isn't done in front of us,' says Bradshaw. 'We now have to build in time for students to complete that work entirely in class, to know it's authentic.' In high school, marks are given as percentages and accumulate over a semester. In grades 1 to 6, letters reflect progress since the last report — not from the start of the year. 'The kind of writing a student is doing in September isn't going to be the same as the writing they are doing in December,' says Angela Simone, a Grade 3 teacher with the York Catholic school board. 'It's not really fair to go back; you want to focus on their most recent work.' Teachers mark tests, presentations and assignments according a four-level rubric, which is translated into percentages or letter grades for report cards: Level 4 equals A- to A+ and 80-100 per cent; Level 3 is B- to B+ and 70-79; Level 2 is C- to C+ and 60-69; Level 1 is D- to D+ and 50-59 per cent. 'There's a lot of pressure to see those Level 4 or those As,' says Simone. 'But it's important that people recognize that a Level 3 means they're at the provincial expectations. So there's nothing wrong with a B.' Grades are based on numeric data. Learning skills rely on something else entirely — observation, interpretation and a fair amount of subjectivity. All children in Ontario grades 1 to 12 are evaluated on six competencies: responsibility, organization, independent work, collaboration, initiative and self-regulation. 'You really have to know the child and be able to back up anything you say with proof,' says Jane, who found evaluating these skills the most challenging and time-consuming part of assessment duties, likening it to having to write three separate essays on each student — one for every report card. Simone agrees it can be tedious. 'You don't want to be repetitive, and every child is their own and you want to speak to that child's individuality, but how many times can you say, 'Your desk is messy?' ' The subjectivity required also makes them possibly problematic. A 2018 study using Toronto District School Board data found that students with identical scores on standardized math tests may have different evaluations of their learning skills — differences that correlated with race and gender. Educators often discuss skill expectations with students, and in some cases, have them evaluate their strengths and weaknesses so, as Jane says, they 'take ownership for some of it.' Joanne Sallay, president of tutoring company Teachers on Call , notes that when students struggle, it's often not the curriculum — it's motivation: 'It's handing in work on time — organization, planning skills and how to study effectively. These are really important for the future of work — skills that as adults determine our success.' It's perhaps why on report cards, learning skills are given prime position. That doesn't stop students and parents from skipping over them to check out subject grades. 'We are hardwired to do that,' says Christopher DeLuca, a Queen's University professor of educational assessment . 'And yet, if we understand learning a little bit more deeply, we understand that how we learn impacts what we learn.' DeLuca adds that of all the skills measured on the report card, strong self-regulation is the most critical. The province's Growing Success policy states that all parents should receive 'standard, clear, detailed and straightforward information' about their child's progress based on the Ontario curriculum. That may explain why teacher comments can sound like they've been lifted from a jargon-filled curriculum manual — sometimes they are. 'It's hard when you have 30 students to write an authentic communication of each student's learning,' says Toronto public elementary teacher Andrew Delost. 'Sometimes it's going to sound robotic because a teacher might just be copying and pasting.' Delost recently developed Curricumate , an AI-based assistant to support Ontario educators as they navigate through 'pain points,' including writing report cards. Filling out a report card can take 20 minutes to four hours per student, plus months of tracking grades and recording observations. While professional development days are dedicated to the task, the work usually spills into evenings and weekends. Curricumate, which has 4,000 users, integrates the Ontario curriculum so teachers can select relevant comments and personalize them while maintaining student confidentiality. Teachers have relied on some form of comment banks for decades — whether self-made, shared by colleagues or provided by school boards. More recently, many have turned to tools like ChatGPT. Still, most agree: AI can support feedback, but it shouldn't replace it. Direct communication with parents, they say, remains the most effective way to support student growth. Even as generalized and vague as report comments might seem, clues lie within. 'Qualifiers are so important because that's going to give you a little hint,' says Simone. For example, if a comment on a science unit notes that 'Angela understands plants with a high degree of effectiveness,' she's at a Level 4; if with a considerable degree, she's at Level 3. (Level 2 would use some and limited for Level 1.) Simone says teachers rely on qualifiers particularly when measuring learning skills: If a teacher was to say, 'Sally usually listens well to lesson,' usually means she's not doing it all the time, that she could be chatty, says Simone. 'So even though it doesn't sound like there's an issue, the qualifier lets you know there might be one.' Growing Success advises teachers, when writing anecdotal comments, to 'focus on what students have learned, describe significant strengths, and identify next steps for improvement.' This asset-based reporting emphasizes positive attributes. 'It strengthens and bolsters student confidence,' says DeLuca. But some teachers call it a disservice. 'Only telling students what they're doing well gives them a false impression about what their strengths and weaknesses are, and unfortunately that can catch up to them,' says Bradshaw. 'I can understand how that might be frustrating for parents because we are essentially asking them to read between the lines.' Comments are limited by strict word counts, giving teachers little space to focus on more than one key message. This is especially challenging in math and language, where recent curriculum changes eliminated separate grades for individual strands. Instead of seeing distinct marks for oral communication, writing, reading and media literacy, for example, parents now get just one overall language grade. Check the attendance field. Teachers say missed classes and lateness are often overlooked by parents who may be unaware of their child's habits. Absences can explain why achievements are below expectations. Yes, but not easily. How failing grades are reported varies by board. (One board, for example, will round up a 46 per cent to 50 for a pass.) Up to Grade 8, a decision to hold back a child is made in consultation with parents; in high school, students who receive below 50 may repeat materials related only to expectations not achieved. But a failing mark should not come as a surprise to students or parents. 'Failures are used very judiciously, for a reason,' says DeLuca, 'A failure academically is not just about holding a student from progressing to the next grade, it has social consequences for life and career progression.' Assessment is important, says Bradshaw, but it shouldn't be the only priority. 'When we hyper-focus on marks and evaluations, it gives the impression that day-to-day learning doesn't matter.' Progress reports offer an early opportunity to flag concerns without assigning grades, but they come with their own challenges — especially since they come so early that some teachers, particularly itinerant ones, may have seen a student only a handful of times. More effort typically goes into the first provincial report card when there's still time for students to respond to feedback. Final report cards feel high-stakes, but by June, they should contain no surprises. That said, Sallay emphasizes even these reports should include clear next steps. 'I know that it seems final, but a report card shouldn't define your future success,' she says. 'Look at the recommendations and work on them; it doesn't mean you need to give up. 'It's the end of June, but next year is a whole new year.'
2 days ago
Pulitzer Prize-winning book inspires art museum exhibit honoring Harriet Tubman
Author and professor Dr. Edda Fields-Black discusses her Pulitzer Prize-winning book, "Combee: Harriet Tubman, the Combahee River Raid, and Black Freedom During the Civil War."
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
These Were The Most Popular Baby Names Of 2024, And This Girl's Name Has Been No. 1 For Six Years
The data is in! The Social Security Administration has released its official list of the most popular baby names of 2024. For the sixth straight year, the No. 1 name for girls is Olivia, which overtook Emma in 2019. Meanwhile, Liam is still the most popular name for boys for the eight year in a row. Noah and Emma also held steady as the No. 2 names. The SSA compiles the annual list based on the names parents in the U.S. gave their babies born in the previous year. Although the top name rankings usually don't super dramatically from year to year, there were a few interesting small changes from 2023 to 2024. Amelia surpassed Charlotte for the No. 3 spot, Mia jumped up to No. 5 in place of Sophia, and Evelyn knocked Ava down a ranking. Meanwhile, Sofia (with an f) joined the top 10 for the first time ever last year as the 10th most popular name for girls, ousting Luna from the list. As for the boys, Theodore jumped up three places from No. 7 to No. 4. Henry is now the sixth most popular name for boys, having risen two spots, and Mateo moved down to seventh. Without further ado, here are the top 10 girls' and boys' names of 2024. Girls 1. Olivia 2. Emma 3. Amelia 4. Charlotte 5. Mia 6. Sophia 7. Isabella 8. Evelyn American star sprinter Evelyn Ashford celebrates at the Los Angeles Coliseum during the 1984 Summer Olympic Games after winning the gold medal in the women's 100-meter sprint. (Photo by Gilbert Iundt/Corbis/VCG via Getty Images) 9. Ava 10. Sofia Boys 1. Liam 2. Noah 3. Oliver 4. Theodore 5. James 6. Henry 7. Mateo 8. Elijah 9. Lucas 10. William This article originally appeared on HuffPost.
