One Simple Trick for Solving Unique and Complex Problems
Analogical thinking is the single best tool for consistent problem solving.
In Range, David Epstein writes that a successful problem solver is able “to determine the deep structure of a problem before they proceed to match a strategy to it.” By identifying the deep structure of a problem, the problem solver is able to draw on analogous solutions with the same deep structure. The solutions can come from anywhere. This is how great problem solvers pull experience across domains of knowledge. Finding those deep similarities is key. Relying on surface similarities is a trap.
As described by researchers Mary Gick and Keith Holyoak:
The essence of analogical thinking is the transfer of knowledge from one situation to another by a process of mapping — finding a set of one-to-one correspondences (often incomplete) between aspects of one body of information and aspects of another.
For example in high-school science you probably heard the analogy that the atom is like a solar system with electrons acting as planets in orbit around a proton-neutron sun. Or you might have been told that electricity flows through wires like water through a hose. Or that your brain works like a computer.
Analogies can be more complex and more subtle, but you get the idea.
One “hack” for creative problem solving is to prime your mind with analogous stories. For business problems that might mean reading case studies. For legal problems it usually means reading case law. But the analogies don’t have to come from the same domain. In fact, distant analogies are often much more powerful because they create a fresh approach that is different than those generated by problem solvers steeped in a single domain.
Mental models are analogy stripped of context.
Analogy is the principle underlying mental models. Mental models are analogy stripped of context. Whether it’s Algebraic Equivalence, Feedback Loops, or one of my favorites: The Map is Not the Territory, the efficacy of the model depends on its deep structural analogy to the problem it’s being applied against. Mental models can be tremendously powerful. But you have to identify the right ones — the models that are the right structural fit for your particular problem. The right analogies.
Personally, analogical thinking has been invaluable in my law practice, which is full of challenging problems built on unique facts. No two situations are identical in their important factual details. But the underlying problems are not unique. The key is to find the most analogous problems — the right precedent, the right case study, the right mental model, or the right structure drawn from some other domain entirely.
When they say that law school teaches you how to think, this is what they mean. And it’s why well-rounded lawyers thrive in so many areas outside the law. This type of thinking is highly portable, but it’s certainly not exclusive to law.
The broad efficacy of this approach is the fundamental reason our firm has taken on a strategy- and operations-consulting role that compliments the more traditional legal role. It better matches what we actually do. We solve challenging, complicated problems. Nominally legal ones. But we’re finding business solutions — marketing solutions, ops solutions, finance solutions — just as often as we’re finding pure “legal” solutions. And we’re drawing those solutions not only from parallel fields — law, sales, accounting — but also from art, philosophy, engineering, politics, and every day experience. As an inward-facing example, we applied the principles of Software as as Service to create our analogous General Counsel as a Service plan. (In our own operations we pull a lot of ideas from software, which as a system of code-based solutions is broadly analogous to law.)
I believe this is the future of legal practice and the future of consulting. I believe it’s the future of most industries, maybe all of them.
Cross pollination of ideas makes problems easier to solve by introducing unique analogies. It works because the edges of real world problems aren’t as neat as our domains of expertise — which are more a taxonomy of academic discipline than a meaningful set of guardrails to actual practice. And because problem patterns tend to repeat themselves in superficially different scenarios across academically distinct domains.
The range of available analogies help determine who learned something new.
Analogical thinking is a simple tool for solving unique and complex problems. But simple is not the same thing as easy. It’s fairly simple to apply a structurally similar solution, by analogy, to a new problem. It’s far more difficult to have a pre-stocked stable of ready analogies to draw from. And it’s harder still to distinguish deep similarities from superficial ones.
David Epstein describes a study that looked at how different research labs approached unusual challenges. The study found that the labs in which scientists had a diverse mix of backgrounds were more likely to find good solutions and more likely to find them quickly than labs staffed with “similar and highly specialized” scientists.
Even if this seems obvious on the surface — how long now have we been preaching the benefits of diversity? — it requires a kind of willful lack of discipline. That’s particularly true where solutions are coming from an individual instead of a team. A team can at least be constructed ad hoc with an eye toward a diversity of experience that will (hopefully) generate a wider range of analogous solutions.
In a single individual that requires a lot of cross-discipline study.
Emily Wapnick calls these people as multipotentialites. Her site, Puttylike, is an homage to and a life manual for individuals with a predilection to bounce from job to job and field to field.
The multipotentialite approach — the approach of a generalist — stands in direct opposition to modern opinions of success. Nobody hits 10,000 hours jumping from field to field. And your peers and parents won’t let you forget it. So it takes a good amount of persistence and will to stick with this approach. Though in fairness, for many of us it feels like the only approach possible. That conflict creates a lot of internal angst and doubt as the generalist predilection grates against the specialist zeitgeist.
Cross-domain analogous thinking is not, of course, the only way to solve problems. Specialized domain expertise makes it possible to solve certain types of problems quickly. If you’re going to put a rocket on the moon you should hire a few rocket scientists. But if you’re going to do something that has never been done, you want people who think across domains.
Another way of saying this is that solutions to usual problems can be found while solutions to unusual problems must be invented.
Here’s the practical takeaway: learn. And work with people and at places that embrace learning. Follow curiosity, because it will give you momentum. Follow it most when it leads you down rabbit trails and into areas you know nothing about. Books are a convenient way to do this. But real-world dabbling and exploration is every bit as important.
And this stuff layers. It’s iterative. The more you learn and experience the better your toolkit of insightful analogies. So go read a book. Have an adventure. Take up painting. The future depends on your hobbies, frivolities, and obsessions.
