Be Truly Innovative by Changing Your Problem Solving Tactics

Innovation is something into the future that most of us can’t see…

Be creative. Be innovative. We’ve all come across these inspiring slogans multiple times; though slightly motivated, people never really put effort into following such cheering instructions. Lacking special ideas might be a fundamental issue, yet the difficulty of being creative or innovative also severely undermines such process — especially when the latter requires one to actually develop ideas into something useful and practical.

The hard fact is, innovation is something into the future that most of us can’t see. Unless you are a visionary or fortuneteller, you shouldn’t be able to invent something only from scrap. Some might argue that new products are being launched out daily, but when something can be derived from our current understanding, it is really just an improvement, not an innovation.

So, how can one be truly innovative?

By diving into two different problem solving approaches with us, you might just discover the right path that leads you to the exit of a complicated maze.

The typical problem solving process usually starts with an issue which would later be digested through a set of system (knowledge, experience, know how, rules, etc), and finally resolved through layers of systematic top down analysis.

Don’t get us wrong, this is perfectly fine to address ‘improvement’ opportunities; but if we go by our definition of innovation, this is incorrect in many perspectives.

Problem

First of all, the problem addressed this way is usually ‘generic’. And as a rule of thumb, generic problem attracts, and deserves, generic solution. The defect of generic solution is that while it may be appealing to senior management and co-founding teams, they are not actually implementable.

Secondly, these problems are often framed by the subjective experience of the person tackling the problem (a third party, i.e. often ‘management’); usually very little attention is paid to the person who is actually experiencing the problem.

System

Innovation do not generally (though it can) fit into an existing set of systems. We can’t use what we know to find out what we don’t know! Established understanding can really hinder our ability to differentiate assumption, hypothesis and possibilities. Seniority and authority dictate the ability to challenge each of the assumption, hypothesis and possibilities.

Analysis

Analyzing is great but it is only useful for something that is established, something that is well understood. For those cases, it makes sense to ask “why would this work?” However, in view of innovation, when we are not sure about the potential outcome or even expectations, it makes more sense to ask the question, “how could this work?”

Therefore, rather than following a rigid problem solving tactics that restricts the possibilities of creation with fixed system and sets you up for failure, you might want to approach the process with a totally different angle to open up a new path— user stories.

Story

Understand the pain points through the eyes of the actual person dealing with the problem. For example, when there is a sales issue, don’t just assume the sales representatives are bad. Sure, there are often bad staffs, but the key to come up with innovation, rather than general improvement, is that we need to take on an empowerment mindset. If people are given the right tools, purpose, and environment, they generally do much better than otherwise. This is how innovation happens!

Hypothesis

Our cognitive function tells us we need to know everything. Our education system teaches us how to respond as if we know everything. Google and Wiki help create this curtain that we all can hide behind to pretend we know everything.

We need to have the patience and humility to ask ‘why’ and admit we really don’t know everything. Even for things that we think we know it all already. Otherwise, where would innovation come from?

Validation

Taking little steps is always much more meaningful than winning big arguments. Especially in the realm of innovation where everything is assumed to be unknown, doing something is much more impactful than thinking something — even if this means we will need to iterate much more often.

Luckily, we can afford to iterate much more often nowadays. The reason behind this is not just about our ability to confront failure, but also because modern technologies allow us to do so — at a much different pace than before. So this creates the learning path to innovation.

While innovation is the latest hype, it does not, and should not, be expected to solve everything. Whilst the impact of innovation can be huge, the implementation of innovation should always be small, or agile, so that learning can happen at a rate that matches the externalities.

Originally posted on May 6th, 2018 by Leroy Yau. Edited on August 29th, 2019 by Billy Kuo