Redefining a problem — metaphors and associations

The method redefines a problem.

The redefinitions rest on metaphors — attempts to paraphrase the problem — and on associations, analogies with other cases and other events.

When to use it

  1. When you are not sure the problem has been defined the right way.
  2. When you solved the problem with 5 Why or the Ishikawa diagram but the solution has not produced anything.

When not to use it

  1. When you still do not understand what exactly happened; see 5W+H.
  2. When you are sure of the definition of the problem.

The goal: used well, the tool leaves you with several definitions of the problem, from which you pick the truest.

How to use it

Metaphors and associations let you arrive at a clear definition by placing it on the axis from specific to general, and by using associations to open the problem up to being redefined.

1. Ground rules — what to keep in mind

  1. That you are trying to understand:
    1. Which factors are the crucial ones?
    2. Which factors did the definition leave out?
    3. Which factors could the definition do without?
  2. That defining the problem means finding the balance between a definition that is too general and one that is too specific.

2. Gathering information

You can start by asking the 5W+H questions: Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?

If you need more:

  • What does the problem cost?
  • How big is it?
  • How many defects?
  • What is at risk?

3. Running the meeting

  1. Put forward the first proposed definition of the problem.
  2. Go through the ground rules from point 1.

Your team should be drawn from as many different roles and departments as you can manage, so that the problem gets looked at from several sides.

4. The specific-to-general axis

Using metaphor and analogy, prepare two more definitions. One should be as detailed as possible and hold every detail you know. The other as general as possible — as general as still makes sense.

5. Redefining the problem

Through association, look for connections with real problems elsewhere — other fields, other sectors. Holding the general definition, the specific one and those connections in mind, try to write a new definition of the problem.

6. Going further

You can do it once more, looking at the distance between the general and the specific definitions and working to bring them closer together.

With the final definition in hand, check that it still answers what you set out with. If it does, use it. If it does not, go back and find out where that went wrong.

Use it in TeamKit