The Mindset of a Problem-Solver
We are constantly faced with problems.
We often take shortcuts or avoid problems altogether and never really solving them
But as Karl Popper, one of the most influential 25th-century scientific philosophers said, “All life is problem-solving”.
There will always be challenges, highs and lows…good and bad. This is what keeps life in balance.
The issue is, we avoid problems. We turn away. We could cope with them, but we never deal with them.
Why? Because it’s more convenient.
But is it really?
What if we could see our challenges as catalysts of growth rather than obstacles in our path?
To expect the obstacles to come, and laugh at their arrival.
It’s like your problems are knocking at your door, and you can try and hold the door shut. Or you choose to let them in.
Let me paint a scenario. I was surfing the internet trying to gather information on a problem I wanted to solve and just like every normal human being, I turned to Quora.
As I scanned through numerous submissions, I couldn’t help but notice a trend. There were two approaches people took when answering a question. It was never in-between, it was either the first or the second and two answers really stood out as perfect examples both ends of the spectrum.
You’re probably asking what are these two approaches, probably making a few guesses already (that’s good).
It’s quite simple; One was a Problem-Controlled approach and the other a Problem-Solving approach. Before I delved deeper into this, allow me to take you into the world of Cognitive Psychology.
If I tell you the light being reflected on an object is blue but you want it to be green, you’ll never be able to tell the difference between both colors.
The World of Cognitive Psychology
The art or rather science of problem-solving; the mental process of discovering, analyzing and solving problems has its roots deep into cognitive psychology. While there are many common mental constructs that impede our ability to correctly solve problems in the most efficient manner as possible, there are four constructs that stand out.
Assumptions and Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias is an unintentional bias caused by the collection and use of data in a way that favors a preconceived notion. For example, there’s a 96% chance you have been hellbent on defending a notion because you had personal attachments to it even though it’s not necessarily an objective truth.
That is called confirmation bias. When dealing with a problem, people often make assumptions about the constraints and obstacles that prevent certain solutions. If I tell you the light being reflected on an object is blue but you want it to be green, you’ll never be able to tell the difference between both colors.
Mental set
You can’t see beyond what you think you can see. As a man thinks in his heart, so he is. We have the tendency to only use solutions that have worked in the past rather than looking for alternative ideas.
“It’s always worked this way before, so why try something new?”
Right? Even when the solution proves ineffective the next time, sticking to it regardless, is having a mental set.
Our mental sets are often shaped by our past experiences and habits. For example, if the last time your computer froze you restarted it and it worked, that might be the only solution you can think of the next time it freezes. Mental sets can also be in the negative, “It’s never worked before, so why try?” even when there’s a possibility of success.
Functional Fixedness
Do any of these statements sound familiar? “I can’t do it because it’s not my style”, “We’ve always done things this way”, “This is the only way to do it”, “No, it’s not possible, I know because I’ve tried”, “I didn’t know it could do that” and finally “You can’t use a kettle to boil an egg”.
Functional fixedness is a type of mental set where only having a primary function of the object itself hinder the ability of it serving another purpose other than its original function. There’s nothing wrong with having a pre-defined system (sometimes, it’s needed).
But imagine you see someone trying to kill a bug that’s about to escape, he only has a can of air freshener in his hands but he starts looking for something else to kill the bug because cans weren’t made for killing bugs.
It seems absurd but we do it all the time, even to ourselves, we limit ourselves, we limit the possibilities around us and so we end up wasting precious time exploring already used up options.
So having nine dots doesn’t always mean you’ll get a square.
Irrelevant or Misleading Information
When you are trying to solve a problem, it is important to distinguish between information that is relevant and non-relevant data that will lead to faulty solutions. When a problem is very complex, it becomes easier to focus on misleading or irrelevant information. An example of this:
The unemployment rate in Nigeria is 23.1%. You select 200 graduates in different companies, how do you list them in the unemployment scheme?
Before you start nerve-racking trying to solve this problem. Graduates in companies are already employed and so they have no business being listed in the current unemployment scheme. It’s like saying weight-loss is paramount to national security (apparently, that’s a thing, https://dailypost.ng/2019/05/07/buhari-must-apologise-nigerians-weight-loss-comment-fela-durotoye/).
Unnecessary constraints
This happens when a person tries to solve problems subconsciously but then also places boundaries on the task at hand. The solver hits a barrier when they become fixated on only one way to solve their problem. A famous example is the dot problem.
In this problem, there are nine dots arranged in a 3 x 3 square. And you are asked to draw no more than four lines, without lifting their pen or pencil from the paper, that connects all of the dots. Try on a piece of paper and see if you get it.
The image of nine dots forces people to think of a square. What often happens is that the solver creates an assumption in their mind that they must connect the dots without letting the lines go outside the square of dots.
The constraints prevent the solver from thinking beyond the bounds of the dots. Sounds familiar? Yes, this is the phenomenon that gave birth to the expression “think outside the box”. So having nine dots doesn’t always mean you’ll get a square. But be careful not to let this solution become a mental set as there are more than one ways to solve a dot-problem. See if you can find some yourself.
While constraints exist in the real world, this is not a call to throw them away but to ask if those constraints truly exist or if you just set those unnecessary constraints for yourself.
Now with all these constraints in mind, let’s examine the two mindsets when approaching problems.
Most times the obstacles before us are created in our minds.
The Problem-Controlled approach
This is the path of least resistance. It limits your decisions, actions, and attitude around you. A common question that puts in this position is asking “Can it even be done?”. That mindset already becomes a constraint.
If you are controlled by the problem, you will always be stuck facing them, rather than conquering them, and facing life.
The Problem-Solving approach
This a mark of true leaders. The ability to ask the question “How can it be done?” rather than “Can it be done?”. The differences between those two statements determine whether you put constraints on your mind or not. Most times the obstacles before us are created in our minds.
People with a problem-solving mindset seek problems out because they understand that in overcoming obstacles, they limit the number of obstacles facing them — they see problems as opportunities to grow rather than a painful experience.
Yes, failures happen but understanding that you happen to life and life doesn’t happen to you makes all the difference.
A problem-solving mindset is being realistic and rather than try to tackle a whole skyscraper at once, it is taking it apart one brick at a time.
I’ll show you the two answers I found. So please to take the time to analyze both answers, you’ll learn a thing or two.
Now ask yourself, what approach did each person have?
What constraints did the person create?
If you were in the same scenario, what would be your answer?
Lastly, decide the kind of person you want to be.
