The answer-shaped hole
METASKILLS Chapter 27
The number-one hazard for innovators is getting stuck in the tar pits of knowledge. Knowledge has a powerful influence over creativity. While it can free us to imagine new-to-the-world ideas, it can also trap us into believing opportunities are smaller than they are. When we’re stumped by a problem, or when we feel hurried to solve it, our brains can easily default to off-the-shelf solutions based on “what everyone knows.” The problem-solving mind is a sucker for a pretty fact. But what we know today may not be what we need to know tomorrow, since every challenge brings with it new requirements for understanding.
Arthur Conan Doyle, in the voice of Sherlock Holmes, expressed something similar when he said, “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” To avoid jumping to conclusions, we need to hold off solving a problem until we can perceive the general shape of its solution. There are three steps in generating the answer to a problem: 1) discover what is; 2) imagine what could be; and 3) describe the attributes of success. Let’s take them one by one.
What is. This is the body of known facts about a problem. Why is it a problem? What is its history? What is the conventional thinking about it? How have similar problems been solved in the past? In other domains? Other cultures? And what are the practical constraints of the problem?
Constraints are the limitations imposed by the subject matter, or by the context, of a problem. They might have to do with budgets, time, manpower, physics, habits, conventions, or human fears. They squeeze the problem down to a size you can focus on. They force you to writhe uncomfortably in its grip while you struggle to break free. Without constraints, solutions tend towards the ungainly, the unfocused, and the unimaginative. Unbounded challenges are anathema to innovators, draining their energy without delivering insight. Bounded challenges provide not only a starting place but a booster shot of adrenaline.
Without constraints, solutions tend toward the ungainly, the unfocused, and the unimaginative.
Louis Pasteur, in a famous 1854 lecture at the University of Lille, said: “Dans les champs de l’observation, le hasard ne favorise que les esprit préparés.” In the field of observation, chance favors only the prepared mind. Pasteur’s statement is often used to support the idea that hard work trumps talent, but it also suggests that the better you understand the facts and constraints, the better your chances of solving the problem.
What could be. Facts and constraints are necessary but insufficient. To envision what’s possible, you also need imagination. If innovation is determined by what’s “useful, novel, and nonobvious,” as the US patent system puts it, then you need ways to get beyond the obvious. One such way is by asking deeper questions.
For example, let’s say you run a marketing department in a large company. The director of marketing, or perhaps the CEO, asks you to address declining revenues by improving the company’s advertising. You could figure out how the existing campaign might be improved with stronger headlines, better product photography, or more precise targeting. Or you could go a little deeper and think about the strategy of the campaign, questioning the underlying concept. You could go deeper still and ask whether advertising is the best place to address the revenue decline. Maybe the real problem lies in product positioning, requiring a shift in brand strategy to outmaneuver the competition. Then again, you might wonder if positioning can save a product line that’s become commoditized over time. Or maybe the problem is the company itself, increasingly hampered by an outdated business model or an uninspired workforce. As the questions go deeper, the answers get bigger.
When Thomas Edison imagined the light bulb, he didn’t frame the question as, How can we create an alternative source of light? Instead he framed it as, How can we make electricity so cheap that “only the rich will burn candles”? While you can easily overreach the possibilities by thinking too big, it’s much easier to tame a wild idea than reanimate a dead one. The best problem solvers are “high yearners,” people who reach for the stars and land on the moon.
The attributes of success. The shape of the missing answer is formed at the intersection of affordances and desiderata. Affordances are the counterpoint to constraints. They consist of creative possibilities that are native to the subject, the method, the tools, or the challenge. For example, a movie about the early days of movies contains the possibility of being a silent film (The Artist). A car designed for the poor population of India contains the possibility of being extremely minimal (Tata Motors). A company with a breadth of experience but a commoditized product line has the possibility becoming a consulting firm (IBM).
Desiderata are secondary objectives that support a goal or a solution. I once hired a pair of young architects to help me build out a new office space. My company was a startup, so the budget for design and construction was modest. Yet I needed to leave my clients with a memorable experience, and also create a convivial and productive environment for my employees. The desiderata included the budget (small), the hoped-for look (stunning), the number of workspaces (15), the type of workstation privacy (semi-open), and the need for electrical outlets where there were none.
The architects came back with a plan to spend my entire budget on a single element: a large, curving wall of translucent, corrugated plastic that contained interior uplighting and electrical outlets to feed the entire workspace. Inside the wall was a huge logo looming softly over the reception area. In a single move, this simple but inspired solution established the identity for the new firm, separated the client spaces from the working spaces, supplied electricity to the workstations, and created a buzzworthy experience for visitors. When I asked the two how they were able to conceive such a surprising solution, they grinned at each other and replied in unison: “Talent.”
The principle of desiderata can be applied to any number of problems. It’s really as simple as compiling a wish list. Ask yourself this question and fill in the blank: Wouldn’t it be great if ______? When you finish your list, call out the wishes that would create the most compelling outcome. These will form a sort of matrix, a convergence of vectors that define the shape of the answer. When the answer appears, it’ll pop into place like the final piece of a jigsaw puzzle.
I loved reading this, thank you. Do you have a picture of the wall?