problem solving process facilitator

Search form

• Table of Contents
• Troubleshooting Guide
• A Model for Getting Started
• Justice Action Toolkit
• Best Change Processes
• Databases of Best Practices
• Online Courses
• Ask an Advisor
• Subscribe to eNewsletter
• Community Stories
• YouTube Channel
• About the Tool Box
• How to Use the Tool Box
• Privacy Statement
• Workstation/Check Box Sign-In
• Online Training Courses
• Capacity Building Training
• Training Curriculum - Order Now
• Community Check Box Evaluation System
• Build Your Toolbox
• Facilitation of Community Processes
• Community Health Assessment and Planning
• Section 2. Developing Facilitation Skills

Chapter 16 Sections

• Section 1. Conducting Effective Meetings
• Section 3. Capturing What People Say: Tips for Recording a Meeting
• Section 4. Techniques for Leading Group Discussions
• Main Section

What are facilitation skills?

Community organizations are geared towards action. There are urgent problems and issues we need to tackle and solve in our communities. That's why we came together in the first place, isn't it? But for groups to be really successful, we need to spend some time focusing on the skills our members and leaders use to make all of this action happen, both within and outside our organizations.

One of the most important sets of skills for leaders and members are facilitation skills. These are the "process" skills we use to guide and direct key parts of our organizing work with groups of people such as meetings, planning sessions, and training of our members and leaders.

Whether it's a meeting (big or small) or a training session, someone has to shape and guide the process of working together so that you meet your goals and accomplish what you've set out to do. While a group of people might set the agenda and figure out the goals, one person needs to concentrate on how you are going to move through your agenda and meet those goals effectively. This is the person we call the "facilitator."

So, how is facilitating different than chairing a meeting?

Well, it is and it isn't. Facilitation has three basic principles:

• A facilitator is a guide to help people move through a process together, not the seat of wisdom and knowledge. That means a facilitator isn't there to give opinions, but to draw out opinions and ideas of the group members.
• Facilitation focuses on  how people participate in the process of learning or planning, not just on  what gets achieved
• A facilitator is neutral and never takes sides

The best meeting chairs see themselves as facilitators. While they have to get through an agenda and make sure that important issues are discussed, decisions made, and actions taken, good chairs don't feel that they have all of the answers or should talk all the time. The most important thing is what the participants in the meeting have to say. So, focus on how the meeting is structured and run to make sure that everyone can participate. This includes things like:

• Making sure everyone feels comfortable participating
• Developing a structure that allows for everyone's ideas to be heard
• Making members feel good about their contribution to the meeting
• Making sure the group feels that the ideas and decisions are theirs, not just the leader's.
• Supporting everyone's ideas and not criticizing anyone for what they've said.

Why do you need facilitation skills?

If you want to do good planning, keep members involved, and create real leadership opportunities in your organization and skills in your members, you need facilitator skills. The more you know about how to shape and run a good learning and planning process, the more your members will feel empowered about their own ideas and participation, stay invested in your organization, take on responsibility and ownership, and the better your meetings will be.

How do you facilitate?

Meetings are a big part of our organizing life. We seem to always be going from one meeting to the next. Other parts of the Tool Box cover planning and having good meetings in depth. But here, we're going to work on the process skills that good meeting leaders need to have. Remember, these facilitation skills are useful beyond meetings: for planning; for "growing" new leaders; for resolving conflicts; and for keeping good communication in your organization.

Can anyone learn to facilitate a meeting?

Yes, to a degree. Being a good facilitator is both a skill and an art. It is a skill in that people can learn certain techniques and can improve their ability with practice. It is an art in that some people just have more of a knack for it than others. Sometimes organization leaders are required to facilitate meetings: thus, board presidents must be trained in how to facilitate. But other meetings and planning sessions don't require that any one person act as facilitators, so your organization can draw on members who have the skill and the talent.

To put it another way, facilitating actually means:

• Understanding the goals of the meeting and the organization
• Keeping the group on the agenda and moving forward
• Involving everyone in the meeting, including drawing out the quiet participants and controlling the domineering ones
• Making sure that decisions are made democratically

How do you plan a good facilitation process?

A good facilitator is concerned with both the outcome of the meeting or planning session, with how the people in the meeting participate and interact, and also with the process. While achieving the goals and outcomes that everyone wants is of course important, a facilitator also wants to make sure that the process is sound, that everyone is engaged, and that the experience is the best it can be for the participants.

In planning a good meeting process, a facilitator focuses on:

• Climate and environment
• Logistics and room arrangements
• Ground rules

A good facilitator will make plans in each of these areas in advance. Let's look at some of the specifics.

Climate and Environment

There are many factors that impact how safe and comfortable people feel about interacting with each other and participating. The environment and general "climate" of a meeting or planning session sets an important tone for participation.

Key questions you would ask yourself as a facilitator include:

• Is the location a familiar place, one where people feel comfortable? Face it, if you're planning to have an interactive meeting sitting around a conference table in the Mayor's office, some of your folks might feel intimidated and out of their environment. A comfortable and familiar location is key.
• Is the meeting site accessible to everyone? If not, have you provided for transportation or escorts to help people get to the site? Psychologically, if people feel that the site is too far from them or in a place they feel is "dangerous," it may put them off from even coming. If they do come, they may arrive with a feeling that they were not really wanted or that their needs were not really considered. This can put a real damper on communication and participation. Another reminder: can people with disabilities access the site as well? Ensure the meeting site is accessible to all. 
• Is the space the right size? Too large? Too small? If you're wanting to make a planning group feel that it's a team, a large meeting hall for only 10 or 15 people can feel intimidating and make people feel self-conscious and quiet. On the other hand, if you're taking a group of 30 folks through a meeting, a small conference room where people are uncomfortably crunched together can make for disruption: folks shifting in their seats, getting up to stretch and get some air. This can cause a real break in the mood and feeling of your meeting or planning session. You want folks to stay focused and relaxed. Be sure to choose a room size that matches the size of your group.

Logistics and Room Arrangements

Believe it or not: how people sit, whether they are hungry and whether they can hear can make or break your planning process. As a facilitator, the logistics of the meeting should be of great concern to you, whether you're responsible for them or not. Some things to consider are:

• Chair arrangements: Having chairs in a circle or around a table encourages discussion, equality, and familiarity. Speaker's podiums and lecture style seating make people feel intimidated and formal. Avoid them at all costs.
• Places to hang newsprint: You may be using a lot of newsprint or other board space during your meeting. Can you use tape without damaging the walls? Is an easel available? Is there enough space so that you can keep important material visible instead of removing it?
• Sign-In sheet: Is there a table for folks to use? Would it be helpful to provide nametags?
• Refreshments: Grumbling stomachs will definitely take folks' minds off the meeting. If you're having refreshments, who is bringing them? Do you need outlets for coffee pots? Can you set things up so folks can get food without disrupting the meeting? And who's cleaning up afterwards?
• Microphones and audio-visual equipment: Do you need a microphone? Video cameras? Be sure to have someone set up and test the equipment before you start. 

To build a safe as well as comfortable environment, a good facilitator has a few more points to consider. How do you protect folks who are worried their ideas will be attacked or mocked? How do you hold back the big talkers who tend to dominate while still making them feel good about their participation? Much of the answer lies in the Ground Rules.

Ground Rules

Most meetings have some kind of operating rules. Some groups use Robert's Rules of Order (parliamentary procedure) to run their meetings while others have rules they've adopted over time. When you want the participation to flow and for folks to really feel invested in following the rules, the best way to go is to have the group develop them as one of the first steps in the process. This builds a sense of power in the participants ("Hey, she isn't telling us how to act. It's up to us to figure out what we think is important!") and a much greater sense of investment in following the rules. Common ground rules are:

• One person speaks at a time
• Raise your hand if you have something to say
• Listen to what other people are saying
• No mocking or attacking other people's ideas
• Be on time coming back from breaks (if it's a long meeting)
• Respect each other

A process to develop ground rules is:

• Begin by telling folks that you want to set up some ground rules that everyone will follow as we go through our meeting. Put a blank sheet of newsprint on the wall with the heading "Ground Rules."
• Ask for any suggestions from the group. If no one says anything, start by putting one up yourself. That usually starts people off.
• Write any suggestions up on the newsprint. It's usually most effective to "check -in" with the whole group before you write up an idea ("Sue suggested raising our hands if we have something to say. Is that okay with everyone?") Once you have gotten 5 or 6 good rules up, check to see if anyone else has other suggestions.
• When you are finished, check in with the group to be sure they agree with these Ground Rules and are willing to follow them. 

Facilitating a meeting or planning session

The facilitator is responsible for providing a "safe" climate and working atmosphere for the meeting. But you're probably wondering, "What do I actually do  during the meeting to guide the process along?" Here are the basic steps that can be your facilitator's guide:

Start the meeting on time

Few of us start our meetings on time. The result? Those who come on time feel cheated that they rushed to get there! When latecomers straggle in, don't stop your process to acknowledge them. Wait until after a break or another appropriate time to have them introduce themselves.

Welcome everyone

Make a point to welcome everyone who comes. Don't complain about the size of a group if the turnout is small! Nothing will turn the folks off who  did come out faster. Thank all of those who are there for coming and analyze the turnout attendance later. Go with who you have.

Make introductions

There are lots of ways for people to introduce themselves to each other that are better than just going around the room. The kinds of introductions you do should depend on what kind of meeting you are having, the number of people, the overall goals of the meeting, and what kind of information it would be useful to know. Some key questions you can ask members to include in their introductions are:

• How did you first get involved with our organization? (if most people are already involved, but the participants don't know each other well)
• What do you want to know about our organization? (if the meeting is set to introduce your organization to another organization)
• What makes you most angry about this problem? (if the meeting is called to focus on a particular problem)

Sometimes, we combine introductions with something called an "ice breaker." Ice breakers can:

• Break down feelings of unfamiliarity and shyness
• Help people shift roles--from their "work" selves to their "more human" selves
• Build a sense of being part of a team
• Create networking opportunities
• Help share participants' skills and experiences

Some ways to do introductions and icebreakers are:

• In pairs, have people turn to the person next to them and share their name, organization and three other facts about themselves that others might not know. Then, have each pair introduce each other to the group. This helps to get strangers acquainted and for people to feel safe--they already know at least one other person, and didn't have to share information directly in front of a big group at the beginning of the meeting.
• Form small groups and have each of them work on a puzzle. Have them introduce themselves to their group before they get to work. This helps to build a sense of team work.
• In a large group, have everyone write down two true statements about themselves and one false one. Then, every person reads their statements and the whole group has to guess which one is false. This helps folks get acquainted and relaxed.
• Give each participant a survey and have the participants interview each other to find the answers. Make the questions about skills, experience, opinions on the issue you'll be working on, etc. When everyone is finished, have folks share the answers they got.

When doing introductions and icebreakers, it's important to remember:

• Every participant needs to take part in the activity. The only exception may be latecomers who arrive after the introductions are completed. At the first possible moment, ask the latecomers to say their name and any other information you feel they need to share in order for everyone to feel comfortable and equal.
• Be sensitive to the culture, age, gender and literacy levels of participants and any other factors when deciding how to do introductions. For example, an activity that requires physical contact or reading a lengthy instruction sheet may be inappropriate for your group. Also, keep in mind what you want to accomplish with the activity. Don't make a decision to do something only because it seems like fun.
• It is important to make everyone feel welcome and listened to at the beginning of the meeting. Otherwise, participants may feel uncomfortable and unappreciated and won't participate well later on. Also, if you don't get some basic information about who is there, you may miss some golden opportunities. For example, the editor of the regional newspaper may be in the room; but if you don't know, you'll miss the opportunity for a potential interview or special coverage.
• And don't forget to introduce yourself. You want to make sure that you establish some credibility to be facilitating the meeting and that folks know a bit about you. Credibility doesn't mean you have a college degree or 15 years of facilitation experience. It just means that you share some of your background so folks know why you are doing the facilitation and what has led you to be speaking up.

Review the agenda, objectives and ground rules for the meeting

Go over what's going to happen in the meeting. Check with the group to make sure they agree with and like the agenda. You never know if someone will want to comment and suggest something a little different. This builds a sense of ownership of the meeting and lets people know early on that you're there to facilitate  their process and their meeting, not your own agenda.

The same is true for the outcomes of the meeting. You'll want to go over these with folks as well to get their input and check that these are the desired outcomes they're looking for. This is also where the ground rules that we covered earlier come in.

Encourage participation

This is one of your main jobs as a facilitator. It's up to you to get those who need to listen to listen and those who ought to speak. Encourage people to share their experiences and ideas and urge those with relevant background information share it at appropriate times.

Stick to the agenda

Groups have a tendency to wander far from the original agenda, sometimes without knowing it. When you hear the discussion wandering off, bring it to the group's attention. You can say "That's an interesting issue, but perhaps we should get back to the original discussion."

Avoid detailed decision-making

Sometimes, it's easier for groups to discuss the color of napkins than the real issues they are facing. Help the group not to get immersed in details. Suggest instead, "Perhaps the committee could resolve the matter." Do you really want to be involved in that level of detail?

Seek commitments

Getting commitments for future involvement is often a meeting goal. You want leaders to commit to certain tasks, people to volunteer to help on a campaign, or organizations to support your group. Make sure adequate time is allocated for seeking commitment. For small meetings, write people's names down on newsprint next to the tasks they agreed to undertake.

One important rule of thumb is that no one should leave a meeting without something to do. Don't ever close a meeting by saying "We'll get back to you to confirm how you might like to get involved." Seize the moment! Sign them up!

Bring closure to each item

Many groups will discuss things ten times longer than they need to unless a facilitator helps them to recognize they're basically in agreement. Summarize a consensus position, or ask someone in the group to summarize the points of agreement, and then move forward. If one or two people disagree, state the situation as clearly as you can: "Tom and Levonia seem to have other feelings on this matter, but everyone else seems to go in this direction. Perhaps we can decide to go in the direction that most of the group wants, and maybe Tom and Levonia can get back to us on other ways to accommodate their concerns." You may even suggest taking a break so Tom and Levonia can caucus to come up with some options.

Some groups feel strongly about reaching consensus on issues before moving ahead. If your group is one of them, be sure to read a good manual or book on consensus decision making. Many groups, however, find that voting is a fine way to make decisions. A good rule of thumb is that a vote must pass by a two-thirds majority for it to be a valid decision. For most groups to work well, they should seek consensus where possible, but take votes when needed in order to move the process forward.

Respect everyone's rights

The facilitator protects the shy and quiet folks in a meeting and encourages them to speak out. There is also the important job of keeping domineering people from monopolizing the meeting or ridiculing the ideas of others.

Sometimes, people dominate a discussion because they are really passionate about an issue and have lots of things to say. One way to channel their interest is to suggest that they consider serving on a committee or task force on that issue. Other people, however, talk to hear themselves talk. If someone like that shows up at your meeting, look further ahead in this chapter for some tips on dealing with "disrupters."

Be flexible

Sometimes issues will arise in the meeting that are so important, they will take much more time than you thought. Sometimes, nobody will have thought of them at all. You may run over time or have to alter your agenda to discuss them. Be sure to check with group about whether this is O.K. before going ahead with the revised agenda. If necessary, ask for a five-minute break to confer with key leaders or participants on how to handle the issue and how to restructure the agenda. Be prepared to recommend an alternate agenda, dropping some items if necessary.

Summarize the meeting results and needed follow-ups

Before ending the meeting, summarize the key decisions that were made and what else happened. Be sure also to summarize the follow-up actions that were agreed to and need to take place. Remind folks how much good work was done and how effective the meeting hopefully was. Refer back to the objectives or outcomes to show how much you accomplished.

Thank the participants

Take a minute to thank people who prepared things for the meeting, set up the room, brought refreshments, or did any work towards making the meeting happen. Thank all of the participants for their input and energy and for making the meeting a success.

Close the meeting

People appreciate nothing more than a meeting that ends on time! It's usually a good idea to have some "closure" in a meeting, especially if it was long, if there were any sticky situations that caused tension, or if folks worked especially hard to come to decisions or make plans.

A nice way to close a meeting is to go around the room and have people say one word that describes how they are feeling now that all of this work has been done. You'll usually get answers from "exhausted" to "energized!" If it's been a good meeting, even the "exhausted" ones will stick around before leaving.

Facilitator skills and tips

Here are a few more points to remember that will help to maximize your role as a facilitator:

Don't memorize a script

Even with a well-prepared agenda and key points you must make, you need to be flexible and natural. If people sense that you are reading memorized lines, they will feel like they are being talked down to, and won't respond freely.

Watch the group's body language

Are people shifting in their seats? Are they bored? Tired? Looking confused? If folks seem restless or in a haze, you may need to take a break, or speed up or slow down the pace of the meeting. And if you see confused looks on too many faces, you may need to stop and check in with the group, to make sure that everyone knows where you are in the agenda and that the group is with you.

Always check back with the group

Be careful about deciding where the meeting should go. Check back after each major part of the process to see if there are questions and that everyone understands and agrees with decisions that were made.

Summarize and pause

When you finish a point or a part of the meeting process, sum up what was done and decided, and pause for questions and comments before moving on. Learn to "feel out" how long to pause -- too short, and people don't really have time to ask questions; too long, and folks will start to get uncomfortable from the silence.

Be aware of your own behavior

Take a break to calm down if you feel nervous or are losing control. Watch that you're not repeating yourself, saying "ah" between each word, or speaking too fast. Watch your voice and physical manner. (Are you standing too close to folks so they feel intimidated, making eye contact so people feel engaged?) How you act makes an impact on how participants feel.

Occupy your hands

Hold onto a marker, chalk, or the back of a chair. Don't play with the change in your pocket!

Watch your speech

Be careful you are not offending or alienating anyone in the group. Use swear words at your own risk!

Use body language of our own

Using body language to control the dynamics in the room can be a great tool. Moving up close to a shy, quiet participant and asking them to speak may make them feel more willing, because they can look at you instead of the big group and feel less intimidated. Also, walking around engages people in the process. Don't just stand in front of the room for the entire meeting.

Don't talk to the newsprint, blackboard or walls--they can't talk back!

Always wait until you have stopped writing and are facing the group to talk.

Dealing with disrupters: Preventions and interventions

Along with these tips on facilitation, there are some things you can do both to prevent disruption before it occurs to stop it when it's happening in the meeting. The most common kinds of disrupters are people who try to dominate, keep going off the agenda, have side conversations with the person sitting next to them, or folks who think they are right and ridicule and attack other's ideas.

Preventions. Try using these "Preventions" when you set up your meeting to try to rule out disruption:

Get agreement on the agenda, ground rules and outcomes. In other words, agree on the process. These process agreements create a sense of shared accountability and ownership of the meeting, joint responsibility for how the meeting is run, and group investment in whether the outcomes and goals are achieved.

Listen carefully. Don't just pretend to listen to what someone in the meeting is saying. People can tell. Listen closely to understand a point someone is making. And check back if you are summarizing, always asking the person if you understood their idea correctly.

Show respect for experience. We can't say it enough. Encourage folks to share strategies, stories from the field, and lessons they've learned. Value the experience and wisdom in the room.

Find out the group's expectations. Make sure that you uncover at the start what participants think they are meeting for. When you find out, be clear about what will and won't be covered in this meeting. Make plans for how to cover issues that won't be dealt with: Write them down on newsprint and agree to deal with them at the end of the meeting, or have the group agree on a follow-up meeting to cover unfinished issues.

There are lots of ways to find out what the group's expectations of the meeting are: Try asking everyone to finish this sentence: "I want to leave here today knowing...." You don't want people sitting through the meeting feeling angry that they're in the wrong place and no one bothered to ask them what they wanted to achieve here. These folks may act out their frustration during the meeting and become your biggest disrupters.

Stay in your facilitator role. You cannot be an effective facilitator and a participant at the same time. When you cross the line, you risk alienating participants, causing resentment, and losing control of the meeting. Offer strategies, resources, and ideas for the group to work with, but  not opinions.

Don't be defensive. If you are attacked or criticized, take a "mental step" backwards before responding. Once you become defensive, you risk losing the group's respect and trust, and might cause folks to feel they can't be honest with you.

"Buy-in" power players. These folks can turn your meeting into a nightmare if they don't feel that their influence and role are acknowledged and respected. If possible, give them acknowledgment up front at the start of the meeting. Try giving them roles to play during the meeting such as a "sounding board" for you at breaks, to check in with about how the meeting is going.

Interventions. Try using these "Interventions" when disruption is happening during the meeting:

• First try to remind them about the agreed-on agenda. If that doesn't work, throw it back to the group and ask them how they feel about that person's participation. Let the group support you.
• Go back to that agenda and those ground rules and remind folks of the agreements made at the beginning of the meeting.
• It's better to say what's going on than try to cover it up. Everyone will be aware of the dynamic in the room. The group will get behind you if you are honest and up -front about the situation.
• Try a humorous comment or a joke. If it's self-deprecating, so much the better. Humor almost always lightens the mood. It's one of the best tension-relievers we have.
• Try one or more of these approaches : Show that you understand their issue by making it clear that you hear how important it is to them. Legitimize the issue by saying, "It's a very important point and one I'm sure we all feel is critical." Make a bargain to deal with their issue for a short period of time ("O.K., let's deal with your issue for 5 minutes and then we ought to move on.") If that doesn't work, agree to defer the issue to the end of the meeting, or set up a committee to explore it further.
• Use body language. Move closer to conversers, or to the quiet ones. Make eye contact with them to get their attention and covey your intent.
• In case you've tried all of the above suggestions and nothing has worked, it's time to take a break, invite the disruptive person outside the room and politely but firmly state your feelings about how disruptive their behavior is to the group. Make it clear that the disruption needs to end. But also try to find out what's going on, and see if there are other ways to address that person's concerns.
• Confront the disruptive person politely but very firmly in the room. Tell the person very explicitly that the disruption needs to stop now. Use body language to encourage other group members to support you. This is absolutely the last resort when action must be taken and no alternatives remain!

Online Resources

Facilitating Political Discussions from the Institute for Democracy and Higher Education at Tufts University is designed to assist experienced facilitators in training others to facilitate politically charged conversations. The materials are broken down into "modules" and facilitation trainers can use some or all of them to suit their needs.

Inclusive Facilitation for Social Change  from FSG provides assistance in facilitating inclusive meetings to create effective and empowering experiences for everyone involved.

Making Meetings Work  from the Collective Impact Forum is a blog post from Paul Schmitz discussing lessons we can apply to ensure that meetings are purposeful, engaging, and advance our work in ways that people anticipate with enthusiasm instead of dread.

Print Resources

Auvine, B., Dinsmore, B., Extrom, M., Poole, S., & Shanklin, M. (1978). A manual for group facilitators . Madison, WI: The Center for Conflict Resolution.

Bobo, K., Kendall, J., & Max, S., (1991). A manual for activists in the 1990s . Cabin John, MD: Seven Locks Press.

Nelson-Jones, R. (1992). Group leadership: A training approach . Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Schwarz, R. (1994). The skilled facilitator: Practical wisdom for developing effective groups . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

How to Facilitate Creative Problem Solving Workshops

Posted in Blog , Create , Facilitation , Innovation , Virtual Facilitation by Jo North

This article gives you a comprehensive guide to creative problem solving, what it is and a brief history. It also covers how creative problem solving works, with a step-by-step guide to show you how to solve challenging opportunities and problems in your own organization through fresh approaches, and how to facilitate a creative problem solving workshop.

Here are The Big Bang Partnership we are expert facilitators of creative problem solving workshops . Please do comment or email us if you would like any further tips or advice, or if you’d like to explore having us design and facilitate a workshop for you.

What is Creative Problem Solving?

Creative problem solving, sometimes abbreviated to CPS, is a step-by-step process designed to spark creative thinking and innovative solutions for purposeful change.

The creative problem solving process is at the root of other contemporary creativity and innovation processes, such as innovation sprints and design sprints or design thinking . These methods have adapted and repackaged the fundamental principles of creative problem solving.

Creative Problem Solving Definition

Here are definitions of each component of the term creative problem solving process:

• Creative – Production of new and useful ideas or options.
• Problem – A gap between what you have and what you want.
• Solving – Taking action.
• Process – Steps; a method of doing something.

Source: Creative Leadership: Skills that Drive Change Puccio, Murdock, Mance (2007)

The definition of creative problem solving (CPS) is that it’s a way of solving challenges or opportunities when the usual ways of thinking have not worked.

The creative problem solving process encourages people to find fresh perspectives and come up with novel solutions. This means that they can create a plan to overcome obstacles and reach their goals by combining problem solving and creative thinking skills in one process.

Using creative problem-solving removes the haphazard way in which most organizations approach challenges and increases the probability of a successful solution that all stakeholders support.

For an overview of the history of the creative problem solving process, have a read of my article here .

Creative Problems to Solve

Just a few examples of creative problems to solve using the creative problem solving process are:

• Shaping a strategy for your organization
• Developing or improving a new product or service
• Creating a new marketing campaign
• Bringing diverse stakeholders together to collaborate on a joint plan
• Formulating work-winning solutions for new business proposals, bids or tenders
• Working on a more sustainable business model
• Finding eco-innovation solutions
• Social or community innovation
• Co-creation leading to co-production

Messy, Wicked and Tame Problems

If your problem or challenge is ‘ messy ’ or ‘ wicked ’, using the creative problem solving process is an excellent method for getting key stakeholders together to work on it collaboratively. The creative problem solving process will help you to make progress towards improving elements of your challenge.

Messy Problems

In the field of innovation, a messy problem is made up of clusters of interrelated or interdependent problems, or systems of problems. For example, the problems of unemployment in a community, the culture in a workplace or how to reach new markets are likely to be caused by multiple factors.

It’s important to deconstruct messy problems and solve each key problem area. The creative problem solving process provides a valuable method of doing so.

Wicked Problems

Design theorists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber introduced the term “ wicked problem ” in 1973 to describe the complexities of resolving planning and social policy problems.

Wicked problems are challenges that have unclear aims and solutions. They are often challenges that keep changing and evolving. Some examples of current wicked problems are tackling climate change, obesity, hunger, poverty and more.

Tame Problems

‘ Tame ’ problems are those which have a straightforward solution and can be solved through logic and existing know-how. There is little value in using the creative problem solving process to solve tame problems.

Creative Problem Solving Skills

Specific thinking skills are essential to various aspects of the creative problem solving process. They include both cognitive (or intellectual) skills and affective (or attitudinal, motivational) skills.

There are also three overarching affective skills that are needed throughout the entire creative problem solving Process. These creative problem solving skills are:

• Openness to new things, meaning the ability to entertain ideas that at first seem outlandish and risky
• Tolerance for ambiguity, which is the ability to deal with uncertainty without leaping to conclusions
• Tolerance for complexity, defined as being able to stay open and persevere without being overwhelmed by large amounts of information, interrelated and complex issues and competing perspectives

They show an individual’s readiness to participate in creative problem solving activities.

Creative Problem Solving and Critical Thinking

Critical thinking involves reflecting analytically and more objectively on your learning experiences and working processes. Based on your reflection, you can identify opportunities for improvement and make more effective decisions.

Critical thinking is an important skill when using the creative problem solving process because it will drive you to seek clarity, accuracy, relevance and evidence throughout.

Strategies for Creative Problem Solving

One of the most successful strategies for creative problem solving process is to get a multi-disciplinary team of internal, and sometimes external, stakeholders together for a creative problem solving workshop. Here is a process that you can use to facilitate your own creative problem solving workshop.

How to Facilitate a Creative Problem Solving Workshop

Challenge or problem statement.

The first, potentially most important, stage of the creative problem solving process is to create a challenge statement or problem statement. This means clearly defining the problem that you want to work on.

A challenge or problem statement is usually a sentence or two that explains the problem that you want to address through your creative problem solving workshop.

How might we…?

A good way of expressing your challenge is to use the starting phrase “How might we …?” to produce a question that will form the core of your creative problem solving mission. Framing your problem as a question in this way helps people to begin to think about possibilities and gives scope for experimentation and ideation.

Why it’s important to have a clear problem statement

Defining your problem or challenge statement matters because it will give you and your colleagues clarity from the outset and set out a specific mission for your collaborative working.

If you begin the creative problem solving process without a clear problem or challenge statement, you’ll likely experience misunderstanding and misalignment, and need to retrace your steps. Taking time to get your challenge or problem statement right is time well spent. You can download my free resources on how to create a challenge statement for innovation and growth here .

Creative Problem Solving Process

Once you have defined your creative problem to solve, and the strategies for creative problem solving that you want to use, the next steps are to work through each stage of the creative problem solving process. You can do this on your own, with your team, working cross-functionally with people from across your organization and with external stakeholders. For every step in the creative problem solving process there is a myriad of different techniques and activities that you can use. You could literally run scores of creative problem solving workshops and never have to repeat the same format or techniques! The creative problem solving techniques that I’m sharing here are just a few examples to get you started.

Creative Problem Solving Workshop Agenda

To make the creative problem solving process more accessible to more people, I’ve built on the work by Osborn, Parnes, Puccio and others, to create our Creative Problem Solving Workshop Journey Approach that you can use and adapt to work on literally any problem or challenge statement that you have. I’ve used it in sectors as diverse as nuclear engineering, digital and tech, utilities, local government, retail and e-ecommerce, transport, financial services, not-for-profit and many, many more.

Every single workshop we design for our clients is unique, and our starting point is always our ‘go-to’ outline agenda that we can use to save ourselves time and know that our sessions are well-designed and put together.

The timings are just my suggestion, so please do change them to suit the specific needs of your creative problem-solving workshop.

All the activities I suggest are presented for in-person workshops, and they can be adapted super-easily for virtual workshops, using and online whiteboard such as Miro .

Keep the activities for each agenda item long enough to allow people to get into it, but not too long. You want the sessions to feel appropriately pacey, active and engaging. Activities that are allowed to go on too long drag and sap creative energy.

Outline Agenda

Welcome and Warm-up                                             0900-0930

Where do we want to be, and why?                         0930-1000

Where are we today?                                                 1000-1030

Break                                                                           1030-1045

Why are we where we are today?                            1045-1115

Moving forward – Idea generation                           1115-1230

Lunch                                                                          1230-1315

Energiser                                                                     1315-1330

Moving forward – Idea development                       1330-1415

Break                                                                           1415-1445

Action Planning                                                           1445-1530

Review, feedback and close                                      1530-1600

Here is the agenda with more detail, and suggested activities for each item.

Detailed Creative Problem Solving Workshop Agenda

Welcome and warm-up.

The welcome and warm-up session is important because:

• For groups who don’t know each other, it’s essential that people introduce themselves and start to get to know who everyone is.
• This session also helps people to transition from their other work and activities to focusing on the purpose of the day.
• It sets the tone for the rest of the event.

Items to include in the welcome and warm-up are:

• Welcome to the event.
• Thank people for taking the time.
• The purpose and objectives of the event, and an overview of the agenda for the day. Introduce your problem or challenge statement.
• Ground rules in terms of phone usage, breaks, confidentiality.

It’s good to have the agenda and ground rules visible so that everyone can see them throughout the day, and don’t forget to inform people of any fire evacuation instructions that need to be shared, and information on refreshments, washrooms and so on.

Remember to introduce yourself and say a little bit about you as the workshop leader, keeping it brief.

Things to look out for are:

• How people are feeling – energy, interest, sociability, nervousness and so on.
• Cliques or groups of people who choose to sit together. Make a mental note to move the groups around for different activities so that people get to work with as many different people as possible to stimulate thinking and make new connections.

If you’d like some ideas for icebreakers and warmups, there are lots to choose from in these articles:

Icebreakers for online meetings

Creative warmups and energizers that you can do outside

Where do we want to be, and why?

The first session in your creative problem-solving workshop aims to start with thinking about what the group wants to achieve in the future. As well as setting the direction for your problem statement for the day, it allows delegates to stretch their thinking before they become too embedded in working through their current position, issues and concerns. It is positive and motivational to identify those aspirations that everyone shares, even if the reasons or details differ from person to person.

Suggested creative problem-solving techniques for Where do we want to be, and why ?

Horizon Scanning

Brief the delegates as follows:

• Use the resources / idea generators provided [e.g. magazines, newspapers, scissors, glue, stickers, glitter, any other craft items you like, flip chart paper) and your own thoughts.
• Identify a range of themes that are relevant to the challenge statement you are working on in this workshop. Feel free to use your imagination and be creative!
• For each theme, explain why it is important to the challenge statement.

This activity can be adapted for virtual workshops using online whiteboards such as Miro.

WIFI – Wouldn’t It Be Fantastic If…

This creative problem solving technique opens up delegates’ thinking and frames challenges as a positive and motivational possibility.

Ask delegates to spend just a few minutes completing the following statement as many times as they can with real items relating to their challenge for the workshop:

Wouldn’t it be fantastic if… (‘wifi’)

Delegates should then select the wibfi statements that would make the most material difference to their challenge.

They might have a couple or more of connected statements that they want to combine into a new one. If so, that’s completely fine.

Ask them to write their final statement on a flipchart.

Where are we today?

After establishing the vision for the future, it is important to gain a collective view on the starting point, and gain different, individual perspectives on the current position.

Suggested creative techniques for Where are we today?

Rich pictures

Rich pictures provide a useful way of capturing the elements of messy, unstructured situations and ambiguous and complex problems.

A rich picture is intended to portray the unstructured situation that the delegates are working with.

Brief the activity in as follows, noting that they can assist in the construction of a rich picture which should initially be rich in content, but the meaning of which may not be initially apparent. 

• Ask delegates to consider the messy problem or situation that they are facing and dump all the elements of the scenario they are viewing in an unstructured manner using symbols and doodles.
• Ask them to look for elements of structure such as buildings and so on, and elements of process such as things in a state of change. They may see ways in which the structure and process interact as they use hard factual data and soft subjective information in the picture. 
• If appropriate, ask the delegates to include themselves in the picture as participants or observers, or both, and to give the rich picture meaningful and descriptive title.
• Without explanation, one group’s rich picture is often a mystery to another observer, so ask small working groups to talk through the, to the wider group. It is not meant to be a work of art but a working tool to assist your delegates in understanding an unstructured problem or change scenario.

Out of the box

Representing a problem in any new medium can help bring greater understanding and provide a rich vehicle for discussion and idea generation.

Collect a range of (clean and safe!) junk materials, such as cardboard boxes, empty packets, old magazines and newspapers etc.

You will also need some string, glue and tape.

Ask delegates to use the items around them to create (a) 3D vision(s) of the solution(s) to their challenge.

This provides a different perspective, as well as getting everyone engaged, active and conversing.

Why are we here?

This stage of the away day focuses on helping the group to understand the critical success factors that have driven positive outcomes, as well as any constraints, perceived or real, that are getting in the way of future progress. It identifies items that can be explored further in the idea generation, selection and development stages.

Suggested creative techniques for Why are we here?

Ishikawa Fish Bone

The fishbone diagram was developed by Professor Ishikawa of the University of Tokyo. It can encourage development of a comprehensive and balanced picture, involving everyone, keeping everyone on track, discouraging partial or premature solutions, and showing the relative importance and interrelationships between different parts of the challenge.

Ask the delegates to write their problem statement to the fish bone template, like the example shown here.

Then ask them to identify the major categories of causes of the problem. If they are stuck on this, suggest some generic categories to get them going, such as:

Delegates should then write the categories of causes as branches from the main arrow.

Next, they will identify all the possible causes of the problem, asking: “Why does this happen?”

As each idea is given, one of the delegates in each group writes it as a branch from the appropriate category. Causes can be written in several places if they relate to several categories.

Again, get the delegates to ask: “why does this happen?” about each cause, and write sub–causes branching off the causes.

If you have time, ask the delegates to carry on asking “Why?” and generating deeper levels of causes.

Mind mapping

The term mind mapping was devised by Tony Buzan for the representation of ideas, notes, information and so on in radial tree diagrams, sometimes also called spider diagrams.

These are now very widely used.

To brief in the mind map technique, the instructions below are usually best communicated via a quick demonstration by the facilitator, using an everyday, fun topic and asking delegates to shout out ideas for you to capture.

How to mind map:

• Ask delegates to turn their paper to landscape format and write a brief title for the overall topic in the middle of the page.
• For each major subtopic or cluster of materials ask them to start a new major branch from the central topic and label it.
• Continue in this way for ever finer sub-branches.
• Delegates may find that they want to put an item in more than one place. They could just copy it into each place or they could just draw a line to show the connections.
• Encourage delegates to use colour, doodles and to have fun with their mind map. This stimulates more right brain, creative thinking.

Moving forward – Idea generation

The next sessions are all about coming up with ideas, potential solutions to get from your starting position to the vision for the future that you all created earlier.

I recommend that you use at least two, or preferably all three of the idea generation techniques I have provided here because if you only use one, you are more likely to only get the most obvious, top of mind ideas from your team.

By looking at your challenge or opportunity from different perspectives using a range of techniques, you are more likely to create greater diversity of ideas.

This technique is really good for almost any subject, and especially…

…getting input from everyone. The noisy ones have much less opportunity to dominate!

…getting all the thoughts that people have out of their heads and onto paper.

…getting you started. This is a really accessible technique that is easy to run.

…getting people talking and engaged.

You will need plenty of sticky notes and pens.

Clustering with sticky notes – step-by-step guide

• Ask people to focus on the challenge that is the subject of the session.
• Each person is to work individually at first. They will take a pile of post-it notes and a pen, and get as many items down on the post-it notes as they can, writing only one item on each post-it note so that each person has a pile of written notes in front of them (12-15 each would be great).
• Say to the group that if they think they have finished, it probably is just a mental pause. The best thing for them to do is to look out of the window or move around briefly (but not look at their phones, laptop or disturb other people!) because they are likely to have a second burst of thinking. This is really important because it means you will get more thoughts down than just the obvious front-of-mind ones that come out early on. Allow 5-10 minutes for this step.
• Make sure that people don’t put more than one item on a post-it note.
• When everyone has got a pile of sticky notes and generally have run out of steam, ask them to “cluster” their notes as a group into similar themes on the flip chart paper, a bit like playing the card game “Snap”. Things that no-one else has should be included as a cluster of one item.
• Ask the groups to put a ring around each cluster and give it a name that summarises the content.
• Ask each group to feedback on the contents of their clusters, note similarities and differences and agree your next steps, writing them up on the flip chart for everyone to see.

Force-fitting with pictures

Force-fitting is about using dissimilar, or apparently unrelated, objects, elements, or ideas to obtain fresh new possibilities for a challenge or opportunity. You will need some magazines, photos or newspapers for this activity.

It is a very useful and fun-filled method of generating ideas. The idea is to compare the problem with something else that has little or nothing in common and gain new insights as a result.

You can force a relationship between almost anything, and get new insights – companies and whales, management systems and data networks, or your relationship and a hedgehog. Forcing relationships is one of the most powerful ways to develop ways to develop new insights and new solutions.

The following activity – Random Stimulus, a useful way of generating ideas through a selection of objects or cards with pictures – takes about 15 to 20 minutes to complete in total.

It is important to brief delegates to work intuitively through this process rather than over-thinking it. Just follow each of the simple steps outlined here in order.

Force-fitting with pictures step-by-step guide

Step 1 : Choose an image from the ones below at random. It really does not matter which one you choose, so just pick one that you think is interesting. This should take you no longer than a few seconds! Do this first before you move to the next steps.

Step 2: Now look at the image that you have selected. Feel free to pull it out so you can have it in front of you as you work. Write down as many interesting words as you can that come to mind when you look at the picture you have selected.

Step 3 : Now go back and “force fit” each of your interesting words into a potential solution for your challenge. If you have a negative word, turn it into a positive solution. Do this for every word on your list. You don’t have to work through the list in order – if you get stuck on a word, do another one and then come back to it when you’re ready. Don’t forget – premature evaluation stifles creativity. Just write stuff down without judging anything. You will have the opportunity to go back and select what you want / don’t want to use later.

Step 4 : Look at your outputs from this activity and highlight the things that resonate with you in terms of making progress with your challenge.

The SCAMPER technique is based very simply on the idea that anything new is actually a modification of existing old things around us.

SCAMPER was first introduced by Bob Eberle to address targeted questions that help solve problems or ignite creativity during creative meetings.

The name SCAMPER is acronym for seven thinking activities: ( S ) substitute, ( C ) combine, ( A ) adapt, ( M ) modify, ( P ) put to another use, ( E ) eliminate and ( R ) reverse. These keywords represent the necessary questions addressed during the creative thinking meeting. Ask you delegates to work through each one.

• S —Substitute (e.g., components, materials, people)
• C —Combine (e.g., mix, combine with other assemblies or services, integrate)
• A —Adapt (e.g., alter, change function, use part of another element)
• M —Magnify/Modify (e.g., increase or reduce in scale, change shape, modify attributes)
• P —Put to other uses
• E —Eliminate (e.g., remove elements, simplify, reduce to core functionality)
• R —Rearrange/Reverse (e.g., turn inside out or upside down)

Moving forward – Idea development

The objective of this session is to select the most useful or interesting ideas that you have come up with in the earlier idea generation activities, and shape them into a useful solution.

Suggested creative techniques for Moving forward – Idea development:

This is a useful exercise to help your delegates to quickly prioritise their ideas as a team.

• Ask delegates to use the grid shown here to plot their ideas, using sticky notes/
• They should then write a question for each of their ‘yes’ and perhaps some of your ‘maybe’ items that begins with the words ‘ How could we …? ’
• Then ask them to work on each of their questions, capturing their work a flipchart.

Sticky dot voting

Sticky dot voting is a quick, widely used voting method. Once all the ideas are on display give each group member a number of sticky dots (for example 5 each) to ‘vote’ for their favourite solution or preferred option. The number of sticky dots can vary according to what you think will work.

• Give everyone a few minutes of quiet planning time so that they can privately work out their distribution of votes.
• They may distribute their votes as they wish, for example: 2 or 3 on one idea, one each on a couple of others, all on one idea or one each on a whole series of ideas.
• To minimise the risk of people being influenced by one another’s votes, no votes are placed until everyone is ready. When everyone is finished deciding, they go up to the display and place their votes by sticking dots beside the items of their choice.
• As facilitator, lead a discussion on the vote pattern, and help the group to translate it into a shortlist for further development.

Once your delegates have selected their most promising ideas, choose from these creative problem solving techniques to help your group develop their thinking.

Assumption surfacing

Assumption surfacing is all about making underlying assumptions more visible.

• Ask the group to identify the key choices they have made, thinking about what assumptions have guided these choices and why they feel they are appropriate.
• Delegates should list the assumptions, and then add in a possible counter-assumption for each one.
• They should then work down the list and delete any assumption / counter assumption pairs that do not materially affect the outcome of the choice.
• Finally, ask delegates to reflect on the remaining assumptions, consider how these assumptions potentially impact their thinking and whether anything needs to be done as a result.

The words who, why, what, where, when, how are  known as 5Ws and H, or Kipling’s list.

They provide a powerful checklist for imagination or enquiry that is simple enough to prompt thinking but not get in the way.

Ask delegates to:

• Create a list of key questions relating to their challenge, using 5Ws and H as prompts.
• Then ask them to answer of their questions as a way of info gathering and solution-finding for their challenge.

Force field analysis

Force field analysis represents the opposing driving and restraining forces in situation.

For example, it can help to map out the factors involved in a problematic situation at the problem exploration stage, or to understand factors likely to help or hinder the action planning and implementation stages.

The process is as follows:

• Delegates identify a list of the driving and restraining forces and discuss their perceptions of them.
• All the driving forces are arrows propelling the situation, and all the restraining forces are arrows that push back against the direction of the current situation.
• Delegates can use arrow thickness to indicate strength of the force, and arrow lengths to indicate either how difficult the force would be to modify, although these elements are optional.
• Delegates can then use the diagrams to generate ideas around possible ways to move in the desired direction by finding ways to remove the restraining forces and by increasing the driving forces.

Wizard of Oz prototyping

In the classic story of the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy and her friends go to see the Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz only to discover that he’s a fraud with no real magic.

Wizard of Oz Prototyping means creating a user experience that looks and feels very realistic, but is an illusion created to test an idea and generate a lot of really useful feedback very quickly and early on in your design process. The approach also means that you avoid incurring the cost of having to build the real solution.

In the workshop, ask delegates to consider how they could create a Wizard of Oz prototype through rough design sketches, lego or modelling clay.

Action Planning

I’m sure that many of us have been to meetings or events that have been interesting and maybe even fun at the time, but quickly forgotten due to lack of follow up or commitment to take action once the workshop is over.

The action planning phase is an essential part of mobilising the thinking from the workshop into meaningful, pragmatic activity and progress in the organisation. Getting commitment to deliver specific actions within agreed timescales from individuals at the workshop is as essential part of any event.

Suggested creative technique for Action Planning :

Blockbusters

You may remember the 80s quiz show called Blockbusters? Teenage contestants had to get from one side of the board to the other by answering questions.

This technique is based on a similar (sort of!) principle, and it is useful for action planning and helping delegates to visualise moving from where they are now to where they want to be.

• First ask delegates to write down the key aspects of where they are now on sticky notes (one item per sticky note) and put them down the left-hand side of a piece of flipchart paper, landscape.
• Then delegates are to do the same for the key aspects of where they would like to be, this time placing the sticky notes on the right-hand side of the paper, each one aligned to a relevant note on the left-hand side. For example, of they have a sticky note that says ‘struggling for sales’ on the left, they might have one that says ‘increase turnover by 35%’ on the right, both positioned level with each other.
• The final step is for delegates to fill in the space between with the 5 key actions for each item that will get them from where they are now to where they want to be. These can be different and separate actions, and don’t have to be in chronological order.
• You can ask delegates to add in target timescales and owners for each action as well.

Review, feedback and close

At the end of the day, it’s essential to bring everything together, review the progress and thank attendees.

It’s also a great opportunity to gain some feedback on the participants’ experience of the session.

Suggested creative technique for Review, feedback and close :

Goldfish Bowl

The general idea of this technique is that a small group (the core) is the focus of the wider group. The small group discusses while the rest of the participants sit around the outside and observe without interrupting. Facilitation is focused on the core group discussion.

A variation is to invite people from the outside group to ‘jump in’ and replace a member of the core group. It sounds a bit odd on paper, but it works very well and can be great fun.

Sometimes people in the core group are quite pleased to be ‘relieved’ of their duties!

In smaller events, it is also a good idea to make it a game. Make sure that everyone jumps into the core group at least once.

 This can really help people focus on active listening, and on building on each other’s points.

Often the best way to brief this in is by demonstrating it with a willing volunteer.

For more facilitation tips, techniques and ideas, have a look at my articles here:

How to design a virtual innovation sprint

How to facilitate a virtual brainstorming session

How to facilitate a goal setting workshop

How to be a great facilitator

I’d love to hear from you, whether you’re facilitating your own creative problem solving workshops, or would like some help from us to design and facilitate them for you. I hope you’ve found this article helpful. If you’d like to join my free, private Facebook group, Idea Time for Workshop Facilitators , for even more ideas and resources, please do come and join us.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Some of our clients
• Jo's PhD Research
• CONTENT STUDIO
• Idea Time Book
• Innovation Events
• Innovation Consulting
• Creative Facilitation Skills
• Executive Development

Privacy Policy © The Big Bang Partnership Limited 2023

Privacy Overview

10 Tips for Facilitating Your Problem-Solving Workshop

A problem-solving workshop is a structured approach to address a particular challenge or issue that a team or organization is facing. The workshop is designed to bring together a diverse group of individuals with different perspectives, skills, and knowledge to collaborate on identifying and solving the problem at hand.

The workshop typically involves a series of activities and exercises designed to help participants understand the problem, generate ideas for potential solutions, and evaluate and prioritise those solutions based on a set of criteria or metrics . Depending on the nature of the problem and the desired outcomes of the workshop, the exercises may include brainstorming sessions, group discussions, role-playing exercises, prototyping, or other activities.

The goal of a problem-solving workshop is to create a collaborative, creative, and open environment where participants feel empowered to share their ideas, challenge assumptions, and work together towards a common goal. By bringing together a diverse group of individuals with different perspectives and expertise, the workshop can tap into a wide range of knowledge and experience, which can lead to more innovative and effective solutions.

The workshop may be facilitated by an internal or external facilitator, who can help to guide the participants through the process and keep them focused on the problem at hand. Depending on the complexity of the problem and the size of the group, the workshop may take anywhere from a few hours to several days to complete.

Our top tips for facilitating a problem solving workshop are:

• Clearly define the problem: Before starting the workshop, make sure the problem is clearly defined and understood by all participants.
• Establish ground rule s: Set clear guidelines for how the workshop will be conducted, including rules for respectful communication and decision-making.
• Encourage diverse perspectives: Encourage participants to share their diverse perspectives and experiences, and consider using techniques such as brainstorming to generate a wide range of ideas.
• Use a structured process: Utilize a structured problem-solving process, such as the six-step process outlined by the International Association of Facilitators, to guide the workshop.
• Promote active listening : Encourage participants to actively listen to each other and seek to understand different viewpoints.
• Encourage collaboration : Foster a collaborative atmosphere by encouraging teamwork and shared ownership of the problem-solving process.
• Facilitate decision making : Help participants make informed decisions by providing them with the necessary information and resources.
• Encourage creativity : Encourage participants to think creatively and outside the box to generate new ideas and solutions.
• Monitor and manage group dynamics : Pay attention to group dynamics and intervene as needed to keep the workshop on track and prevent conflicts.
• Follow up and review: Follow up on the outcomes of the workshop and review the results to continually improve the problem-solving process.

Here are some exercises that may be more fun and engaging for a problem-solving workshop:

• Escape room : Create an escape room-style challenge that requires participants to solve a series of problems to escape the room.
• Treasure hunt: Create a treasure hunt that requires participants to solve clues and riddles to find hidden objects or reach a goal.
• Charades: Have participants act out different scenarios related to the problem and have the rest of the group guess what they are trying to communicate.
• Jigsaw puzzles : Use jigsaw puzzles as a metaphor for solving problems and have participants work together to piece the puzzle together.
• Improv games: Use improv games, such as “Yes, And,” to encourage creativity and build teamwork skills.
• Scavenger hunt : Create a scavenger hunt that requires participants to solve clues and challenges to find hidden objects or complete tasks.
• Board games : Use board games that require problem-solving skills, such as escape room-style games or strategy games, to make problem-solving more interactive and fun.
• Puzzle-based challenges: Create puzzle-based challenges that require participants to solve a series of interconnected problems to reach a goal.
• Role-playing games : Use role-playing games, such as Dungeons and Dragons, to encourage creative problem solving and teamwork.
• Creativity challenges : Use creativity challenges, such as “the Marshmallow Challenge,” to encourage out-of-the-box thinking and teamwork.

In conclusion, a problem-solving workshop can be a powerful tool for teams and organisations looking to tackle complex challenges and drive innovation. By bringing together a diverse group of individuals with different perspectives and expertise, the workshop can create a collaborative, creative, and open environment where participants feel empowered to share their ideas, challenge assumptions, and work towards a common goal.

While the success of a problem-solving workshop depends on many factors, such as the facilitation, the quality of the problem statement, and the engagement of the participants, the potential benefits are significant. By tapping into the collective intelligence of the group, the workshop can generate new ideas, identify blind spots, and build consensus around potential solutions. Moreover, the workshop can help to foster a culture of collaboration, learning, and innovation that can have a lasting impact on the team or organization.

Related Posts

The 16th Annual State of Agile Report

How Do Web3 and Agile Combine To Enhance Development

Difference Between Agile and Explain Organic Agile

Why Spillover Happens and Why You Shouldn’t Worry

The Johari Window and Agile Methodologies – An Explosive Combo

“Dual Track” Agile

Main Differences Between Three Concepts – Agile, Scrum, And Kanban

Why Teams Outcome Is More Important Than Its Velocity or Even Output

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Copyright © 2023 Agile Heuristics. All rights reserved. Agile Heuristics Ltd is a private limited company, registered in the United Kingdom, with company number 14699131

• White Papers

The Value of a Facilitator in Organizational Problem Solving and Decision Making

• Facilitation Services Integrate analytic thinking skills into the way work gets done Learn More

Overcome the five biggest barriers to group troubleshooting success

In today´s world of complex technology, dealing with multiple teams of hard-core specialists, it becomes more and more difficult to manage actions and stay in control. At Kepner-Tregoe (KT), our research and experience show that one specific role can provide a troubleshooting group with the clear focus and strong leadership that brings closure more quickly and initiates the actions to prevent a reoccurrence. That role is the facilitator.

In many organizations, the initial response to a major incident such as a service outage is to hold a meeting or set up a bridge call. The hope, obviously, is that the problem at hand can be solved by bringing together people with the right knowledge and experience. That these meetings often occur under high pressure—with services already down and stakeholders demanding resolution—makes achieving a positive outcome that much more difficult.

So, the way these meetings are run becomes extremely important. It not only determines whether they produce an effective solution, it also makes a difference in the emotional burden, financial cost and the reputation of the support organization.

Bridge calls and meetings benefit from strong leadership that keeps the group focused on the issues and avoids finger pointing or jumping to conclusions. Guidance and focus are just as important for meetings or calls which don’t take place under pressure but are convened to address ongoing problems. After all, it can be de-motivating to the whole team to be working on an issue which has been open for many months only to discover that the wrong actions have been taken.

Answering questions such as the following, can help you determine the effectiveness of these meetings or their leadership:

• What progress was made during group troubleshooting sessions?
• How much clarity was gained from the meeting?
• To what extent were people involved?
• Were the right people present?
• Was there a free exchange of ideas or was the group forced to listen to the one who shouted the loudest?

Imagine yourself as the leader, or recall the last time you led a problem-solving group. How well do you think you were in control? What tips, tricks or magic did you use to assert your leadership and direct the group in the right direction? Do you know the most effective way to lead a group to a successful outcome?

This article will describe the role of a facilitator: the challenges organizations face which call for a facilitator’s help, the skills they need in order to stay in control and the benefits of having this role recognized within an organization.

What is a facilitator?

The dictionary defines a facilitator as someone who helps a group of people understand their common objectives and assists them in achieving them without taking a particular position in the discussion. In performing this function, a facilitator:

• Stays neutral, while guiding the group to consensus.
• Uses a structured process to gain an overview of the issue.
• Supports everyone to do their best thinking and work.
• Synergizes the group to work more effectively.
• Stimulates group creativity and encourages everyone to contribute.

A facilitator makes it easier for the group to work together as a team. In this sense, a facilitator acts like a catalyst. He or she does not wield a magic wand that will solve all the issues facing the group, but rather focuses the group on the process that leads towards a common resolution. The role of a facilitator is very much like a conductor in front of an orchestra.

Why is facilitation needed?

Now that we understand what a facilitator is, why is it valuable to distinguish this role and give people the skills to become a process facilitator?

Based on our research, the primary value of a skilled facilitator is the ability to lead groups to effective solutions by helping them to overcome the five biggest challenges in problem solving and decision making. In project meetings, shift-handovers, troubleshooting sessions, decision making bodies, operational meetings and crisis management situations, we have seen effective application of facilitator skills prove invaluable in overcoming these challenges.

Challenge 1: Thinking within the box

Groups assembled to solve an organizational problem typically consist of people who fill any one of four primary roles:

• Subject Matter Experts: those who have a deep, technical understanding of the issue at hand. They are needed for the correct and factual information they can provide for solving the problem. Subject matter experts may come from inside or from outside the company; for example, they could be partners, sub-contractors or suppliers.
• Problem Owner: the one person who has the authority and accountability to address a problem’s cause, and initiate the solution, thus resolving the problem and reversing its effects. This is the person who most feels the need to get the issue resolved, and who should be able to command the influence and budget to make that happen. The group could also include a person representing the end-customers who are affected by the problem, but do not have ownership of its cause or resolution.
• Third Parties: representatives from other teams—for example legal, insurance or marketing—who are interested in “who to blame”.
• Facilitator: the one who chairs the meeting and takes a leading role in managing the underlying structure of the problem resolution. The facilitator provides guidance for the group by keeping an oversight of the issue and managing the group’s troubleshooting process.

Because of the different viewpoints that people bring to these different roles, some of them may not be the best choice to serve as a facilitator.

Subject matter experts who attempt the facilitator role may have difficulty seeing beyond their particular areas of competency, knowledge and experience. Expertise in itself doesn’t make them the right facilitator. Often too focused on the content, experts may elaborate on the details of a specific operation and jump to incorrect conclusions.

Problem owners tend to manage the issue at hand from their own agenda: fix it quickly and push for the solution, with no interest in finding the root cause.

Third parties may not know much about the content, but are looking for someone to blame. As a result, they tend not to contribute to resolving the issue. Taking the lead as a facilitator, they would be interested only in finding a scapegoat.

Separating and clarifying these roles will minimize conflicts of interest within the group, help to avoid the development of biased solutions and ensure the following of a rational process that keeps all stakeholders involved. A facilitator may not need content knowledge, but he or she does need experience in the underlying processes and techniques to promote thinking outside the box and to help the group address the issue from different perspectives that its members bring to the discussion.

Challenge 2: Increasing technical complexity

To manage their most complex or urgent issues, organizations most often appoint people with deep technical background and experience and long service in the company. It is a fact of life within IT service support organizations that (third-party) technologies, internal processes and new features and artifacts are constantly changing and growing increasingly complex.

“Everything is changing too rapidly, and no one can keep up with all the latest developments” is a common complaint heard from technicians and their management. Among some users, technological change and complexity can in fact, cause panic.

In a group troubleshooting situation, the problem of technical complexity and who actually understands it leads to an important question: is more technical knowledge directing you straight to the right solution or is it diverting you onto side tracks and away from your ultimate goal? [1, 2].

A facilitator guiding a highly technical discussion will use his or her skills to draw out the facts first, paving the path towards resolution, unravelling the complexity of the issue and directing the group where it needs to go. Perhaps more importantly, the facilitator will maintain the logic of where the discussion should not go.

Figure 1: There is a widening gap between the capability of the technology that companies support and their service engineers’ understanding of it.

Challenge 3: The solution that worked before

Subject matter experts naturally draw on their experience in solving problems. It’s understandable that their initial response to an apparently familiar problem would be along the lines of “I have seen this before…it must be this….”

Is it possible, however, that instead of leading to a quick and accurate solution, the expert’s extensive knowledge and experience are in fact blocking their ability to solve the problem? Thinking they know the answer, they may jump to conclusions too quickly without proving their thinking. Circling around their own assumptions and conclusions, they dig the hole of a favorite possible cause deeper and deeper.

In neuroscience these tendencies are known as pattern recognition and emotional tagging [3]. Pattern recognition integrates as many as 30 different parts of the brain so that in a new situation we make assumptions based on prior experiences and judgment. In emotional tagging, emotional information becomes attached to the thoughts and experiences stored in our memories. This emotional information tells us whether to pay attention to something or not.

Pattern recognition and emotional tagging are at work when we assume that if a workaround was successful before it should work again in what we see as a similar situation. The content of our heads prescribes our range of possible actions.

To use a computer analogy, we need to change the way we work with our available hardware (our brain) and the data stored in it (the existing, deeply learned patterns) by installing and using the correct operating software (or thinking approach). A facilitator who can do this will be able to avoid the pitfall of jumping to inappropriate conclusions.

Challenge 4: Poor quality of information

Most companies have in place incident response procedures for managing the escalation of incidents from initial report to eventual resolution. Typically, these procedures specify when during an incident to inform whom of an update to the “Incident Statement.”

In many organizations, these procedures often seem to have been created with the primary goal of updating management by specifying the impact of the problem, the expected time to restoration and so on, without specifying exactly what is going on. No clear context or reason is given for why certain actions are taken. Messages such as “I am busy working on it, called network specialist,” or “all the branches in Scotland are down, hoping for service restoration at noon” give the receiver very little information or confidence, compared with a specific action report such as: “DB049 having time outs with ERRxyz, DB050/051 are OK. Working on further specifying the problem.”

In a group troubleshooting process, the management of stakeholders’ experience and expectations is critical. Stakeholders get upset when they perceive a lack of quality information and can pile even more pressure on the team that is trying to solve the problem. Chaos can ensue and overwhelm the incident management team should a key stakeholder take over due to a lack of confidence in how the incident is being managed. In many situations, this has led to huge numbers of people attending conference calls, in which only a very limited group of engineers are actually working on resolving the issue.

The facilitator using a predefined process will see that the group has the right information on which to make decisions, keep the group focused during such calls, control involvement of the right people and ensure that follow-up actions are defined and responsibilities taken.

Challenge 5: Lack of a common understanding of the issue

It is amazing to see how often people understand an issue far less than they think they do. This is easily discovered by reading what a worker wrote down on an incident ticket (or repeated in a bridge call) compared to what was really meant by the person communicating the original message.

Bogus conclusions are easily drawn on assumptions made by the reader of information who does not check the facts. Misunderstanding of the actual problem can guide the resolution team in the wrong direction. It is very hard for team members to get a real understanding of an issue when the people providing information assume cause-and-effect relationships which are not proven or speak in company jargon which is not fully understood.

Superior knowledge and understanding of customer issues and their resolution is possible only by using structured questioning techniques, checking facts versus assumptions and listening very carefully to what is being said and to what is not said. Before a problem can be solved, the facilitator’s first job is to lead a team of highly motivated, highly skilled and experienced individuals to reach a common understanding of the situation.

What are the right skills to help a facilitator stay in control?

It takes a specific set of skills to create oversight, avoid jumping to conclusions and manage a group.

Using a structured problem solving and decision making process

A facilitator will benefit from a rehearsed, reproducible process to manage and stay in control of the group’s analysis of a problem. A standard way of working will:

• Help to get all people on board and working together (instead of looking for blame or losing oneself in technical expertise).
• Provide clear guidance to the group.
• Provide something recognizably “independent” that will help the facilitator focus the group on what is needed at that moment and stay out of content.

According to our research, the lack of a structured troubleshooting process is often one of the reasons that certain problems stay open for a long time. Workers may be misusing problem tickets to share statements about organizational issues that are vague, based upon assumptions or possibly not even related to the problem. Invalid conclusions may then be drawn based on this misinformation.

The task for a facilitator is to bring structure to situations such as this. An effective facilitator will use an analytical process to define the facts, filter out and appropriately handle opinions, challenge assumptions, provide summaries and ensure that everybody is appropriately involved.

Returning to our computer-and-brain analogy, for over 60 years, Kepner-Tregoe’s expertise in Rational Thinking has proven to be the right “software” for our brains to operate correctly and follow a structured process, even when under pressure [4]. The fundamental idea is that effective trouble-shooters and decision-makers reach conclusions by following a series of clearly defined steps and principles. They also know what to do when actions do not have the desired outcome: they look ahead and prepare next steps to keep working towards a resolution. The KT processes provide the how for the company’s procedures for handling problems and incidents.

Of course, the more people who are familiar with the same operating software, the more effective a team’s collaboration will be and the easier it will be for a facilitator and the team to make progress towards a resolution.

Using a Facilitation Process

A facilitator must be able to prepare, lead and follow-up on the process facilitation sessions. The tasks required to complete each stage are easily defined:

• Prepare the session: Set the scope and get clarification on the issue to be resolved, define objectives and constraints, ensure the right people will be involved and plan the session logistically.
• Facilitate the session: Start, and lead the meeting by using a structured process. Making sure that everyone´s thinking is kept visible and focus on the analysis is kept.
• Follow-up the session: Document progress and define follow-up actions.
• Lead the group: Stimulating effective collaboration by involving everybody in order to get balanced participation, regularly summarizing to keep oversight, managing conflict and seeking consensus.

Figure 2: KT´s Facilitation Process

Having the right hardware; minimum specifications for a facilitator

Among the most fundamental required skills, a facilitator must be able to:

• Ask open ended questions designed to elicit more meaningful responses.
• Listen actively to what is being said (and not said).
• Work with a range of styles and personalities.
• Develop relations quickly.
• Build rapport and very rapidly create an effective group.
• Take the lead in a group of enthusiastic experts.

Furthermore, a basic understanding of the business and how organizations work will help build the facilitator’s credibility. The person should be open to self reflection and analysis in order to improve themselves and continuously increase their skills.

What’s Next?

By recognizing the role of a facilitator, organizations will make more effective use of the existing knowledge and experience available in their organization. Problems which have been persistently stuck can get the push that will move them toward resolution. Major incident calls can gain the oversight and structure of the facilitator’s strong leadership.

Having the fundamental requirements in place can help assure the success of the facilitator role in your organization:

• Equip the facilitator with the right facilitation processes and skills.
• Set up the right infrastructure and physical environment.
• Ensure management commitment.
• Provide the facilitator with continuous feedback.

What can you accomplish with these elements in place? Well, these are the very same processes followed by the engineers at NASA, who—under the most extreme pressure imaginable—solved what went wrong aboard Apollo XIII, developed a solution and brought the astronauts safely home [5]. So whatever problems are standing in the way of your organization’s success, with an effective facilitator helping you achieve a solution, the sky is quite literally the limit.

[1] Joosten, M.H.M. 2010. It’s all becoming too complex! TrainingZone.co.uk. Posted 2010 May 4. http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/topic/training-cycle/its-all-becoming-too-complex/139462.

[2] Goldenstern, C. 2009. Closing the 21st Century Service Capability Gap. Kepner-Tregoe.

[3] Campbell, A., Whitehead, J., Finkelstein, S. 2009. Why good leaders make bad decisions. Harvard Business Review. February.

[4] Kepner, C. and Tregoe, B. 1997. The New Rational Manager. Princeton Research Press.

[5] Ibid. p.57. Trouble Aboard Apollo XIII.

Martine Joosten Consultant, Kepner-Tregoe

Martine Joosten is a consultant with Kepner-Tregoe Europe (KT), based in The Netherlands. With KT since 2005, Martine is a specialist in business process improvement and has many years of practical experience with consulting and training related to process improvement and implementation in the pharmaceuticals, medical devices, telecommunications, informationtechnology and semiconductor industries.

Before joining KT, Martine was a Quality Manager in the semiconductor industry, implementing and maintaining quality management systems (based on ISO 9000 standards). She has extended experience in facilitating, teams analyzing business processes, identifying opportunities for improvement and working together to implement the best way of working. Martine gained her Master’s of Science in Public Administration at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands in 1993. She also holds a Foundation Certificate in IT-Service Management and is a member of ITSMF.

About Kepner-Tregoe

Kepner-Tregoe is the leader in problem-solving. For over six decades, Kepner-Tregoe has helped thousands of organizations worldwide solve millions of problems through more effective root cause analysis and decision-making skills. Kepner-Tregoe partners with organizations to significantly reduce cost and improve operational performance through problem-solving training, technology and consulting services.

We are experts in:

For inquiries, details, or a proposal!

Subscribe to the KT Newsletter

• How it Works
• For Facilitators

Begin Search

1-877-212-2361

Meeting Facilitation | October 16, 2014

How To Facilitate a Creative Problem-Solving Meeting

Creative problem-solving (“CPS”) takes your meetings beyond conventional thinking styles. It is a deliberate process that corporate facilitators use to help organizations solve problems or find opportunities that have not been explored previously. The key word here is deliberate. Creative problem-solving should be facilitated by a professional facilitator for it to be successful.

Before the Session

Any creative problem-solving facilitated session actually begins with a pre-session meeting with the client. During this meeting, the certified facilitator discusses the situation with the client, assesses what the client’s needs and goals are for the session, gathers important data and determines what stage of creative problem-solving would most benefit the session. Every situation is different, and the facilitator will do his or her part to be fully prepared for the unique task at hand.

A Typical Session

When the actual facilitated session occurs, it will involve three parties: the client, the resource group (typically employees who have been working on the problem with no solution) and the facilitator. The facilitator will guide the session, make decisions about where to start with the CPS process, guide the participants through relevant process stages and offer specific tools as needed.

Beyond that basic summary, though, every session is unique. One group may need to start at one part of the creative problem-solving process and work through each step to get to their goal, whereas another might start with a completely different part of the process and find the solution to their issue almost immediately. Ultimately, it all depends on how the participants react and what the professional facilitator believes will benefit the session most. At the end of the session, the facilitator will provide a wrap-up to determine what has been accomplished and what steps will need to be taken in the future.

Process Steps

There are six steps that can be explored during creative problem-solving sessions. They can be explored in any order and are typically represented in a hexagon figure instead of an ordered list. These steps, in no particular order, are:

• Plan for action.
• Imagine the future.
• Find the questions.
• Generate ideas.
• Craft solutions.
• Explore acceptance.

The central and most essential piece to the CPS diagram, though, is a seventh step: facilitation. A Certified Master Facilitator is essential to the success of any creative problem-solving exercise, as they provide the participants with gentle guidance and a neutral perspective while they work through the process.

Ready to Secure Your Facilitator?

Connect with a dedicated Client Executive today at 877-212-2361 or search our database.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions

• CPS Training
• CPS Facilitation

Site Sponsor

Site author.

Paul Reali, MS, MBA OmniSkills Founder & Principal 336.926.8833 * E-mail Paul

PLEASE READ: Permissions to Use Site Content

We encourage you to use the content you find on this site, in accordance with the Creative Commons license specified here, and on each page:

Click the image above for a description of these terms. For additional permissions (e.g., to license the work for commercial use), e-mail us .

CPS STAGE: FACILITATE

About this stage.

The CPS process includes one meta-process, Facilitate, which is the act of managing the process itself. This is necessary because the CPS process is organic; it is adapted to each situation, and does not always follow a linear path.

The CPS facilitator (working in concert with the problem's owner) continuously assesses the situation and manages the CPS process. For instance, the facilitator decides whether to use CPS versus another process; where to enter the process; which tools to use at each stage; which directions are worth pursuing; and when to exit the process.

USING A NEUTRAL FACILITATOR

While the problem owner or other interested party can serve as the CPS process facilitator, we recommend that a neutral party serve as facilitator. The reason: to separate process from content.

The problem owner, and the resource group assembled to help with the thinking, should have all of their focus and energy on the content: on the problem itself and its solutions. The facilitator should have all of his or her focus on the process: on managing the use of CPS to address the content and the needs of the problem owner. The best facilitators stay completely out of the content. When one person tries to be both participant and facilitator, one role invariably suffers.

Here are some choices:

• Learn more about CPS facilitation or roles in a CPS session .
• Click any part of the model above to examine that stage in more detail.
• Continue the tour in a linear way by moving on to Imagine the Future .

Roles in a Creative Problem Solving Session

by Roger Firestien | Sep 5, 2017 | Blog | 0 comments

Clearly defined roles are one of the most important aspects when applying Creative Problem Solving in a group, just as clearly defined roles are essential for a rescue squad or a sports team. There are three essential roles for an effective CPS session: client, facilitator, and resource group.

One: Client

The person who owns the challenge and has primary decision-making authority on how it is to be dealt with is the client. Sometimes an entire team owns the challenge and all the members share the client role.

Two: Facilitator

The facilitator is the process expert who manages the Creative Problem Solving process and keeps the group and the client moving toward a successful resolution to the challenge. The facilitator is never involved in the actual content of the session. For example, changes, modifications, or the facilitator’s attempt to improve ideas that the group generates are forms of judgment and will stifle and derail the creative process.

Three: Resource Group

The people who generate options or ideas to help deal effectively with the challenge are the members of the resource group. These individuals are trained in Creative Problem Solving methods . I recommend that some of the resource group members be well versed in the problem on which the group is working, but it is also helpful to have some people in the group who are not familiar with the problem at all. It is these people who bring a fresh perspective to the situation. These are the people who don’t know what can’t be done. They are not aware of the previous methods that have been applied to the problem, that may or may not have worked, and therefore don’t have those mental blocks.

A word on the size of the Resource Group

An effective Creative Problem Solving resource group is five to seven people. If there are less than five people in a group, the members will be working pretty hard to generate problem statements and ideas. If you have more than seven people in a group, a behavior called “social loafing” often occurs.

Social loafing happens when the group is big enough for members of the group to “hide” in it. In groups larger than seven people, it is much easier for one or two members to hang back and not participate. So, if you have more people involved in the problem, you might consider forming two sub-groups with a facilitator in each group.

It is also helpful to have a facilitator assistant who has equal or more experience than the facilitator. This “process buddy” can remind the facilitator of the appropriate Creative Problem Solving techniques to use, help to post flip chart paper and give the facilitator another pair of eyes and ears to monitor the group process.

You can read more about the roles in a Creative Problem Solving session in my book, Leading on the Creative Edge.

When was the last time you deliberately defined roles in a meeting? When you did, how did it work?

Register Now For Roger's

Mastering your creativity: discovering breakthrough solutions fast.

Through a series of structured learning experiences, you will learn to become deliberately creative and build your skills to lead innovation teams in your organization. You will be instructed by Dr. Roger Firestien who has presented programs on innovation to over 600 organizations around the world including: fortune 500 corporations, government agencies, universities, associations and religious institutions.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Submit Comment

Related Content

Guest Post on thoughtleadersllc.com

Innovation Can’t be “Managed”

My mom is 93 years old today. She is my inspiration for a lifetime of creativity.

Elvis’s Dark Symphony: How Environment Shapes Creativity

Smokestacks equal soot. Soot is black.

Take Five Minutes: Solve the Real Problem

Join our FREE training and learn the 5 things you can do to become a top 1% facilitator

What is problem-solving and how to do it right steps, processes, exercises.

The better your problem-solving skills are, the better (and easier!) your life will be. Organized problem-solving is a killer career skill - learn all about it here.

Whether we’re trying to solve a technical problem at work, or trying to navigate around a roadblock that Google Maps doesn’t see – most people are problem-solving every single day . 

But how effective are you at tackling the challenges in your life? Do you have a bullet-proof process you follow that ensures solid outcomes, or... Do you act on a whim of inspiration (or lack thereof) to resolve your pressing problems?

Here’s the thing: the better your problem-solving skills are - the better (and easier!) your life will be (both professionally and personally). Organized problem-solving is a killer career (and life!) skill, so if you want to learn how to do it in the most efficient way possible, you’ve come to the right place.  

Read along to learn more about the steps, techniques and exercises of the problem-solving process.

• 1. Do you want a Career in UX? 
•  Learn the Principles of UX Design
• Master a UX Design Tool ‍

What is Problem-Solving?

We’re faced with the reality of having to solve problems every day, both in our private and professional lives. So why do we even need to learn about problem-solving? Aren’t we versed in it well enough already?

Well, what separates problem-solving from dealing with the usual day-to-day issues is that it’s a distinct process that allows you to go beyond the standard approaches to solving a problem and allows you to come up with more effective and efficient solutions. Or in other words, problem-solving allows you to knock out those problems with less effort. 

Just like with any other skill, there’s an efficient way to solve problems, and a non-efficient one. While it might be tempting to go for the quickest fix for your challenge without giving it much thought, it will only end up costing you more time down the road. Quick fixes are rarely (if ever!) effective and end up being massive time wasters. 

What separates problem-solving from dealing with the usual day-to-day issues is that it’s a distinct process that allows you to go beyond the standard approaches to solving a problem and allows you to come up with more effective and efficient solutions.

On the other hand, following a systemized clear process for problem-solving allows you to shortcut inefficiencies and time-wasters, turn your challenges into opportunities, and tackle problems of any scope without the usual stress and hassle. 

What is the process that you need to follow, then? We’re glad you asked...

The Five Stages of Problem-Solving

So what’s the best way to move through the problem-solving process? There’s a 5-step process that you can follow that will allow you to solve your challenges more efficiently and effectively. In short, you need to move through these 5 steps: 

• Defining a problem
• Ideating on a solution
• Committing to a course of action
• Implementing your solution
• And finally – analyzing the results. 

Let’s look at each of those stages in detail.

Step 1: Defining The Problem

The first step might sound obvious, but trust us, you don’t want to skip it! Clearly defining and framing your challenge will help you guide your efforts and make sure you’re focussing on the things that matter, instead of being distracted by a myriad of other options, problems and issues that come up. 

For once, you have to make sure you’re trying to solve the root cause, and not trying to mend the symptoms of it. For instance, if you keep losing users during your app onboarding process, you might jump to the conclusion that you need to tweak the process itself: change the copy, the screens, or the sequence of steps.

But unless you have clear evidence that confirms your hypothesis, your challenge might have an entirely different root cause, e.g. in confusing marketing communication prior to the app download. 

Clearly defining and framing your challenge will help you guide your efforts and make sure you’re focussing on the things that matter, all the while ensuring that you’re trying to solve the root cause, and not trying to mend the symptoms of it

That’s why it’s essential you take a close look at the entire problem, not just at a fraction of it.

There are several exercises that can help you get a broader, more holistic view of the problem, some of our all-time favorites include Expert Interviews, How Might We, or The Map. Check out the step-by-step instructions on how to run them (along with 5 more exercises for framing your challenge!) here. 

When in doubt, map out your challenge, and always try to tackle the bottlenecks that are more upstream - it’s likely that solving them will solve a couple of other challenges down the flow.

You also have to be mindful of how you frame the challenge: resist the urge to include a pre-defined solution into your problem statement. Priming your solutions to a predestined outcome destroys the purpose of following a step-by-step process in the first place!  

Steer clear of formulations like:

We need to change the onboarding process... or We need to improve ad copy to increase conversions. 

Instead, opt for more neutral, problem-oriented statements that don’t include a solution suggestion in them:

The drop off rate during the onboarding process is too high or Our ad conversion rates are below the norm.

Pro tip: Reframing your challenge as a ‘How Might We’ statement is a great way to spark up new ideas, opening your problem to a broader set of solutions, and is just a great way to reframe your problem into a more positive statement (without implying the possible solution!)

For example, following the onboarding drop-off rate problem we mentioned earlier, instead of framing it as a problem, you could opt for:

How Might We decrease the drop-off rate during the onboarding process? 

Find out more about the best exercises for problem framing here!

Now that you have a clear idea of what you’re trying to solve, it’s move on to the next phase of the problem-solving process.

Learn more about facilitation and workshopping in our FREE FACILITATION COMMUNITY

Step 2: ideating a solution.

Get ready to roll up your sleeves and challenge the status quo! This step of the problem-solving process is all about thinking outside of the box, challenging old assumptions, and thinking laterally. 

This stage is the one that tends to cause the most overwhelm in teams because it requires just the right balance of creativity and critical thinking, which tends to cause a lot of friction.

Our best advice?

Let go of the pressure to produce a polished, thought-through solution at this stage. You can hash out the details at a later point. Our goal right now is to come up with a direction, a prototype if you may, of where we want to move towards. 

Embrace the “quantity over quality” motto, and let your creative juices flow! Now, we’re not saying you should roll with sub-par ideas. But you shouldn’t get too fixated on feasibility and viability just yet . 

Your main goal during this step is to spark ideas, kick off your thinking process in the right direction, venture out of the familiar territories and think outside the box. 

For the ideation to be the most effective your team will have to feel safe to challenge the norm and wide-spread assumptions. So lay judgment by side, there is no space for “that’s the way it’s always been done” in this step.

For your ideation sessions to be as efficient as possible, we highly recommend to run them in a workshop setting: this helps reduce the usual drawbacks of open discussions in teams (i.e. groupthink & team politics!)

Our favorite exercises to run during this phase include Lightning Demos, Sketching, and variations of Brainstorming.  We crafted an entire article on how to run and facilitate these exercises in a separate article, so check it out of you’re going to be running an ideation session anytime soon!

Step 3: Choosing the Best Strategy & Committing

It’s time to decide which of the ideas that you generated in the last step will be the one you’ll implement. 

This step is arguably the hardest one to complete smoothly: groupthink, team politics, differences in opinions and communication styles all make it very hard to align a team on a common course of action. 

If you want to avoid the usual pitfalls of team decision-making, we recommend you steer clear of open unstructured discussion. While it’s useful in some scenarios, it’s a poor choice for when you need to make a decision, because it tends to reward the loudest people in the room, rather than give way to the best ideas. 

It’s crucial you not only commit to a course of action but get full buy-in from the team. If your team members don’t understand the reasons for a decision, or are not fully onboard, the implementation of your decision will be half-hearted, and that’s definitely not what you want! 

To achieve that, opt for anonymized, multi-layered voting, and include guided exercises like Storyboarding to prioritize your ideas. 

We’ve gathered the list of our top-rated decision-making exercises, along with step-by-step instructions on how to run them in this article!

As a bonus tip, we recommend you involve a facilitator throughout the entire process. They will help align the team, and guide them through prioritizing and de-prioritizing solutions, as well as defining the next steps. 

Pro tip : If you’re not the ultimate decision maker on the issue you’re trying to solve, make sure they’re in the room when the call is being made! Having a Decider in the room ensures that the decisions you come to will actually get executed on after, instead of getting shut down by your superiors after. 

Join our FREE community and connect with other Facilitators and Workshoppers

Step 4: implementing your solution.

Here’s a truth that might be hard to swallow: it doesn’t matter how innovative, creative, or original your idea is, if your execution is weak. 

One of our favourite illustrations of how this works in practice comes from the book “ Anything you want ” by Derek Sivers. He reveals that ideas should be treated as multipliers of execution. What this means is that a mediocre, “so-so” idea could be worth millions if executed well, while a “brilliant” idea can completely flop with bad execution. 

That’s why this step is crucial if you want to really master the problem-solving process. 

What do we mean by execution? Everything that happens after the whiteboards are wiped clean and your team starts to action the outcomes of your sessions, be it prototyping, development, or promotion. 

But don’t just take our word for it, look at the example of how execution affected Nintendo’s sales:

In the past few years, Nintendo has come up with 3 products: the Wii, the Wii U and the Switch. Check out their sales figures on the graph below - Wii is the clear-cut leader, followed by Switch, and finally Wii U lagging behind.

The Wii was unbelievably successful - it was a genuinely unique, “brilliant”-level idea and it had a “brilliant” execution (20x $10 million = $200 million). It is  one of the fastest selling game consoles of all time and it completely took over the market.

The next product was called Wii U and it was a “great” concept but the execution was absolutely terrible. So even though this product was very interesting and innovative, the end result was 15x $1,000 = $15,000. 

Finally, Nintendo took the Wii U concept and tried it again with the Switch. The idea was “so so” as it was already done before, but the execution was “brilliant”. So, 5x $10 million = $50 million! Much better.

Bottom line?  

The same idea can either make no dent in the market and damage your share price OR become a market hit and increase your share price dramatically. The only difference between the two scenarios – execution.

So shift your focus from coming up with crazy, innovative, outlandish ideas that will disrupt the market, and concentrate on really nailing down your execution instead. 

This is likely the least “workshoppy” step out of the entire problem-solving process because it requires less alignment and decision-making and more..well.. Execution!

But hey, we wouldn’t be called “Workshopper” if we didn't offer you at least one way to optimize and workshopify (yup, we’re making it a thing) your execution process. 

Cue in….prototyping. 

We’re huge fans of prototyping all big solutions (and testing them!) The main reason?

This saves us time AND money! Prototyping and testing your solutions (especially if they’re time and investment-demanding) is a great way to make sure you’re creating something that is actually needed. 

The key with prototyping the right way is to keep it simple. Don’t invest too much time, or resources into it. The goal is to gather data for your future decisions, not to create a near-to-perfect mockup of your solution.  

There are LOADS of prototyping forms and techniques, and if you’d like to learn more on the subject you should definitely check out our extensive prototyping guide.  

Step 5: Analyzing the Results

You’re nearly done, woo! Now that you have defined the right problem to tackle, brainstormed the solutions, aligned your team on the course of action, and put your plan into action it’s time to take stock of your efforts. 

Seek feedback from all involved parties, analyze the data you’ve gathered, look at the bottom line of your efforts, and  take a hard look at your problem: did it get solved? And even more than that, did the process feel smoother, easier, and more efficient than it normally is?

Running a retrospective is a great way to highlight things that went well and that you should keep for your next round of problem.solving, as well as pinpoint inefficiencies that you can eliminate.

‍ But which kind of retrospective should you run? There are loads of options, and it’s easy to feel overwhelmed by them all, so we gathered our favorite retrospective variations in this article.

And there you have it, you just completed the cycle of  problem-solving. We highly recommend you follow through with all the steps, without leaving any out. They all complement and build on each other, and it’s the combination of all 5 of them that makes the process effective. 

Now that you have the problem solving process down, you might be wondering…

Do I need any special skills in order to be able to move through that process?

And the answer is… sort of! More in this in the next section.

Problem-Solving Skills 

While your skill set will need to adapt and change based on the challenges you’ll be working on, most efficient problem-solvers have a solid foundation of these key skills:   

• Active listening. While you might be the expert in the area of your challenge, there’s not a single person on Earth that knows it all! Being open to others’ perspectives and practicing active listening will come in very handy during step 1 of the process, as you’re trying to define the scope and the exact angle of the problem you’re working on.
• Analytical approach. Your analytical skills will help you understand problems and effectively develop solutions. You will also need analytical skills during research to help distinguish between effective and ineffective solutions.
• Communication. Is there a single area of expertise that DOESN’T require strong communication skills? We honestly don’t think so! Just like with any other life area, clear communication can make or break your problem-solving process. Being able to clearly communicate why you need to solve this challenge to your team, as well as align your team on the course of action are crucial for the success of the process. 
• Decision-making. Ultimately, you will need to make a decision about how to solve problems that arise. A process without outcomes–regardless of how well thought-out and elaborate–is useless! If you want your problem-solving huddles to be effective, you have to come to grips with prioritization techniques and decision-making frameworks. 
• Facilitation. Problem-solving revolves around being able to guide a group or a team to a common decision, and facilitation skills are essential in making that happen. Knowing how to facilitate will make it easy to keep the group focussed on the challenge, shortcut circular discussions, and make sure you’re moving along to solving the problem instead of just treading waters with fruitless discussions. 

Not checking every single skill of your list just yet? Not to worry, the next section will give you practical tools on how to level up and improve your problem-solving skills.

How to Improve Your Problem-Solving Skills

Just like with any other skill, problem-solving is not an innate talent that you either have or you don’t.  There are concrete steps you can take to improve your skills. 

Here are some things that will get you closer to mastering the problem-solving process:

• Practice, Practice, Practice

Practice makes perfect, and problem-solving skills are no exception! Seek opportunities to utilize and develop these skills any time you can. 

If you don’t know where or how to start just yet, here’s a suggestion that will get you up and running in no time: run a quick problem-solving session on a challenge that has been bothering your team for a while now. 

It doesn’t need to be the big strategic decision or the issue defining the future of the company. Something easy and manageable (like optimizing office space or improving team communication) will do. 

As you start feeling more comfortable with the problem-solving techniques, you can start tackling bigger challenges. Before you know it, you’ll master the art of creative problem-solving!

• Use a tried and tested problem-solving workshop

Facilitation is one of the essential skills for problem-solving. But here’s the thing… Facilitation skills on their own won’t lead you to a solved challenge.

While being able to shortcut aimless discussions is a great skill, you have to make sure your problem-solving session has tangible outcomes. Using a tried and tested method, a workshop, is one of the easiest ways to do that. 

Our best advice is to get started with a tried and tested problem-solving workshop like the Lightning Decision Jam . The LDJ has all the right ingredients for quick, effective problem solving that leads to tangible outcomes. Give it a go!

• Learn from your peers

You may have colleagues who are skilled problem solvers. Observing how those colleagues solve problems can help you improve your own skills. 

If possible, ask one of your more experienced colleagues if you can observe their techniques. Ask them relevant questions and try to apply as many of the new found skills i your career as possible. 

• Learn & Practice the best problem-solving exercises

Having a toolbox of problem-solving exercises to pull from that can fit any type of challenge will make you a more versatile problem-solver and will make solving challenges that much easier for you! 

Once you get used to the groove of learning how to combine them into effective sessions or workshops, there’ll be no stopping you. What are some of the most effective problem-solving exercises? Glad you asked! We’ve gathered our favorite ones here, check it out! 

And there you have it, you’re now fully equipped for running creative problem-sessions with confidence and ease! Whichever method or exercise you choose, remember to keep track of your wins, and learn as much as you can from your losses! 

Anastasia Ushakova

Brand Strategist, Digital Marketer, and a Workshopper.

When Do You Need a Facilitator?

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus.

The Ultimate Facilitation Glossary: 50 Facilitation Terms You Should Know (From A-Z)

How To Improve Team Collaboration

Strategies for Better Facilitation and Team Problem Solving

Published: September 29, 2014 by Michael Carver

Many people want to attribute these failures (and they are failures) to the quality methodologies used. It is not uncommon to hear, for example, that Six Sigma is too complex or that Lean works best in production environments. For every method there is an excuse. But the failures transcend industry, culture, education and reward structure. What is more frustrating about this “almost engaged,” “almost empowered” phenomenon is that the people participating believe, during the workshops, that they are doing everything right. They believe they are highly engaged and most outsiders would look in and agree.

So what is wrong? Why do what appear to be highly engaged teams opt out when it comes time to act, and why do they not believe they have opted out? Keep reading to learn how to achieve successful problem-solving and continuous improvement execution.

Four Dysfunctions

One of the benefits of making a career in Lean Six Sigma is learning to distrust instincts and demand data. Ask any instrument-rated pilot, however, and it is clear that learning to distrust instincts is hard!

When it comes to the facilitation of a group, many practitioners rely on instincts derived from prevailing wisdom about how to lead teams. While those habits and instincts are hard to ignore, that prevailing wisdom might actually be teaching people to disengage.

How a leader manages or facilitates a team determines who executes the projects a team designs – that is, who does the work. Four simple observations – or dysfunctions – of team dynamics suggest common pitfalls of facilitation and ultimately how to improve team performance.

Dysfunction 1: How Does the Team View the Improvement Process?

How does the team view the improvement process? Is it a short-term event, or is this part of an overall improvement program? Do team members see the goals as long-term and far reaching, or is this a tactical engagement that might look good on a resume but is not likely to impact the participants personally? The key to long-term engagement is to win the hearts and minds of the involved individuals. Anything else and individuals will pretend to engage, meaning they are really expecting the facilitator to be the person who executes change, NOT them. They are advising and assisting but are not committed.

Dysfunction 2: What Level of Participation Is Achieved?

Once beyond the programme du jour roadblock, the second dysfunction is the level of participation that is achieved. There are two issues here:  1) overall participation (average engagement) and 2) individual engagement (median engagement). It is important to remember that engagement is a process and if there is a difference between the average and the median, there is a non-random problem (i.e., not normal). Since there are no fundamentals that dictate engagement to be anything other than normal, it is safe to assume that that difference means there are disparate groups within a team. In other words, it is not team; a non-team will not perform like a team.

Dysfunction 3: Where Does the Team Place Its Focus?

The third dysfunction is well known – it relates to where the team places its focus. If the team places its focus on blaming others for problems (for example, it is almost always information technology’s [IT] fault), then the expectation is that those groups receiving the blame should fix the problem. If the team focuses on business constraints, they are actually shifting from themselves to those who impose the constraints (for example, when it is not IT’s fault, it is quality’s fault). Consider the problem solving the team is engaging in. Is their focus on how to solve the problem or why the problem exists? When teams focus too early on the tactical solution what they are really doing is disengaging from the problem-solving process. They want the problem solved immediately so they can return to their “day” jobs.

Dysfunction 4: With Whom Is the Team Discussing the Problem?

The forth dysfunction requires an attentive eye. Look to see with whom the team is discussing the problem. When all of the discussion is arbitrated by the facilitator, the team is not so subtly informing the facilitator that they are providing information for someone else to employ when solving the problem. It is only when the team discusses issues among themselves – without the intervention and arbitration of the facilitator – that they engage in team problem solving.

It is deceptive because in the early stages of the team’s forming, the facilitator often provides all of the structure and tries to coax the rest of the team into participation. Furthermore, most leaders got to be leaders by being good at execution, so the natural tendency is to lead by driving the rest of the team to do what you want. The problem comes when a facilitator does not step back after the process is underway. If the facilitator always leads, the team may be comfortable continuing to expect them to lead the project execution as well as the problem-solving process. They stay engaged while the facilitator forces them to be engaged.

Three Causes of Problems

These dysfunctions are not spontaneous and every business or project does not experience all of them. They are, however, prevalent enough to warrant a look at not only why they occur but also how to actively guard against them creeping into a team process. There are three key drivers that create these problems. They are not independent, and to correlate one cause with any single dysfunction would be an  oversimplification. The only clear correlation is that these issues tend to diminish with experience.

Cause 1: Lack of Patience

The first major cause of problems with team dynamics is a lack of patience. A team leader must always remember that people learn at different rates. A facilitator must be careful not to become overly impatient with those who have not yet gotten on board with the program. Change is a difficult proposition and many will feel threatened by the prospect of enduring change let alone creating that change. The leader must help the team members engage.

Cause 2: Cost Cutting Rather Than Value Creation

Team leaders are not the only ones who must exude patience. Executive leadership must also understand that there is a fine line between demanding rapid results and destroying long-term gains in favor of short-term fixes. When leadership is unrealistic or overzealous in setting expectations, they risk creating a situation where the process improvement teams do not engage for fear of failure. When leadership focuses on tactical gains they should not be surprised that their employees also shorten their decision horizon. Sometimes that event horizon gets so close that every action is reactive and continuous improvement becomes impossible.

This second cause for poor team dynamics most commonly manifests in a focus on cost cutting rather than value creation. No one has ever been able to economize their way to growth.

Cause 3: The Facilitator

The final underlying cause for team dysfunction relates to the facilitators themselves and self-confidence. In a true Kaizen environment, for example, the leader is not at the center of attention. Rank falls to the background, leaders sit side by side with team members and the product of the team’s labor (with its associated problems and issues) is the center of focus. There is no need for posturing or self-aggrandizement. Unfortunately, this is often not how things work. In most instances, the team members talk to the facilitator, not to each other. The facilitator exerts expert influence (and often positional influence) to direct the team. Although it may look like a team process, decision making and discussion is staged and limited. It is important to know what is happening, but a facilitator cannot let team members feel inferior if they are to participate.

Five Strategies for Problem Solving

How can businesses move from a team room standoff between the ego of the leaders and the fear of the participants? How can problems be the focus rather than blame? People need to participate and change the way they view improvement. Businesses must take a long-term view, and individuals need to work with each other and not look to others to solve their problems for them. The following is a list of strategies for solving these problems.

Strategy 1: Listen

One of the biggest mistakes leaders can make is not giving their people a voice in the processes they manage. How much dialogue is created in meetings is directly correlated to how confident leaders are that those who are being led will act in a desired manner. It is not about leaders’ needs, feelings or fears – it is about their insecurities. A good leader must not constantly fill the space and demand that teams step up. Otherwise, deference is being subtly promoted, as is permission for team members to opt-out.

The best leaders lead from the ranks. This is not to say they have no positional authority but rather that they choose to exercise that authority in a strategic manner. Remember, in the end it is the team – not just the leader – who must execute the project. This means they must buy-in and believe in the change they are about to create. In other words, it must be their change, not the leader’s alone. Leaders must help team members create change rather than direct them to do so.

Strategy 2: Leave Ranks at the Door

Giving up the floor means that leaders also give up some control. Good leaders know that they gain more than they lose in this transition but it is important to remember that each person will have a unique perspective and approach to solving problems. The trick is to embrace these differences and exploit them rather than expect everyone to act in the manner with which leaders are most comfortable.

The problem, however, is that no one wants to contradict the leaders, so as long as they act as “the boss,” discussion is stifled. Leaders probably do not intend for this to be the case. But even if they say that everyone should treated equally, when all the other signals indicate that the leader is the boss, that equality will not result. If team members are talking to the leaders, to impress them, they are not speaking with each other; they are not a team and will not ultimately embrace the responsibility to do the project.

How can leaders leave rank at the door?

1. Look like a member of the team. This can be as simple as how leaders dress, where they sit and with whom they speak. Their ultimate goal in not expressing rank is for everyone else to step into the power vacuum that they are allowing. For team members to step up, leaders must make it feel safe to do so.

Dress the way the team does. Do not be overly formal or informal in situations where the team will feel uncomfortable matching your attire. If leaders want to leave their ranks at the door, start by not displaying them openly.

Do not sit at the front or rear of the room, or be positioned in a way that makes a leader look less accessible. If leaders take a position of power (such as standing at the front of the room) everyone will focus on them. In a problem-solving session, team members should focus on each other. If a leader takes the position of disconnected oversight (for example, sitting by the door) people will assume the leaders are there to observe and judge (also an expression of power). If leaders stand at the periphery of the group, people will assume they are only going through the motions of being a team member and not really committed. Sit down, dig in and be on the team.

2. Participate fairly. Once a leader looks like part of the team, she must behave as part of the team. This is more complex because others will attempt to push her back into the positional leadership role. Sometimes the leader will need to exercise that authority in a limited manner but remember that for “leaving rank at the door” to work, that rank must stay at the door. If there is a facilitator, leaders should not step into their role. If there are subteams, allow others to lead them. Do not dominate discussions, do take direction from others and do not show favoritism toward direct reports (especially when it undermines their ability to leave their ranks at the door).

3. Ask questions that allow others to demonstrate knowledge, expertise and power. A good portion of leaving rank behind is coaching and mentoring others to lead. Successfully opening a space for them to lead from is not enough; leaders need to make them feel comfortable standing in that space, and this often means needing to help them exert their own personal power. With or without a rank insignia, a leader has positional authority. Help team members express their expertise, help them leverage their relationships to influence others and allow them to exercise their positional authority with others outside the core project team.  The best way to do this is by asking prompting questions.

Remember, the reason we leave rank at the door is to allow others to feel safe from judgment. A leader is the boss, but here the boss must be a colleague. Create an environment for team members to feel safe, secure and strong.

4. Commit to being an active, sincere member of the team. Do not be surprised when a leader claims to be “part of the team” but everyone still thinks otherwise. Words are cheap; actions are needed. If a leader is part of the team, he needs to have the same level of dedication for the task that everyone else on the team is asked to have. Everyone will mimic the level of commitment of the most senior team members. If leaders skip meetings, if leaders have excuses for why they cannot do the work, so will the rest of the team.

Strategy 3: Not All Ideas Are Great, But All Perspectives Are

Do not lose sight of why diverse teams are desired. It is great to have consensus and unanimity but it does not generate innovation. Problem-solving teams need a diversity of thought but, more importantly, everyone on the team needs to feel appreciated and valued. This means hearing their views, accepting their perspectives and considering all ideas.

Old-school brainstorming argues that “there are no bad ideas,” but that is not true. As soon as someone makes that assertion, someone proposes the ludicrous, the outrageous and the simply impossible. There is, however, still value in hearing those concepts to conclusion. Why?

It is possible that these wild ideas will lead to other ideas and one of those will be a breakthrough. It is not likely, but it is possible. This is not the reason leaders should embrace everyone’s ideas, though. The real reason is motivational.

The person who proposed mounting all the furniture on the ceiling or that everyone should wear purple tutus to work on Fridays knows those ideas have zero merit. They are setting up a challenge. The proposal is either an attempt to expand the set of ideas considered or it is an attempt to justify not fully participating. Either way the challenge is made for an effect. How leaders manage those challenges sets up how the team will view them as leaders.

Strategy 4:  Push and Pull the Team Together

Teams do not just happen. People cannot be forced to care about or trust each other. Those relationships must be formed by a team-building process and if that process is shortened, the team will not perform well.  A team leader’s role is not so much to manage the team’s work as it is to manage this team-building process.

In the 1960s, group dynamics researcher Bruce Tuckman penned a team behavior model that explains the four stages of team development. The key learning is that teams must evolve and mature – they do not just happen. How leaders manage teams through these stages of development ultimately determines how successful and how empowered the teams will be.

When this process is shortened, the team does not gel; if the team does not gel, then they devolve into a group of people who may express their ideas, frustrations and expectations. They may engage in solving these problems as individuals but they will not own the solution process and will not fully leverage the expertise and talents of others in the group. Team members will not trust each other and expect them to deliver in their role on the team, and will not commit to ensuring the success of other members of the team. When the members of the team do not gel as a team, the ultimate accountability for the success of the team will fall on the leader rather than the team as a unit.

To be successful, the process to create the team must be actively managed. Once a team is assembled, give them a sense of purpose. Help team members understand their roles as well as the role of everyone else on the team. Let the team members find their niches, express their unique perspectives and bond with their teammates. Reinforce good decision-making strategies and coach the team on how to be inclusive and effective. Celebrate their victories and mourn their setbacks. It is a hard job but rewarding.

Strategy 5:  Focus on Small, Incremental Changes

Often by the time companies engage in continuous improvement, the needs are huge. Improvement teams, eager to make a significant impact and seeing opportunity everywhere, oversell the opportunities. They are not necessarily overpromising intentionally, but the teams that are servicing are overeager to get results. This results in large meetings with diverse constituents attempting to re-engineer entire workstreams; they crash and burn. This does not always happen but it happens too much. Ideally, a LSS culture is being deployed, not just a set of tools. Ideally, an organization is in this for the long-haul. Why rush?

Save your blitzkrieg for the experts who can mop up the mistakes and who already know how the processes and philosophies of LSS work. Teach people in a manner that promotes understanding and retention as they learn new skill sets. Let employees learn how the process really works and then move to more complex systems. When we teach this way, people learn quickly and efficiently.

It that huge opportunity being abandoned? Absolutely not! It is vital to remember that for continuous improvement to be ultimately successful not just processes must change, but also mindsets. Were a leader to magically make all the processes perfect today but fail to instill a mindset in their staff that promotes and demands constant improvements, the gains would be transient and before long an organization would be again facing an improvement opportunity. On the other hand, if leaders instill the correct mindset, the problems will eventually be worn away by people no longer willing to tolerate inefficiency.

Proper Facilitation for Long-term Success

If a business is not getting the desired results from a continuous improvement program, look at the facilitators before switching to another methodology. Properly leading your team will leverage better long-term results than any innovation in problem solving.

It is not the responsibility of the followers to follow, it is the obligation of the leader to convince them to follow.

About the Author

Michael Carver

35 problem-solving techniques and methods for solving complex problems

Design your next session with SessionLab

Join the 150,000+ facilitators 
using SessionLab.

Recommended Articles

A step-by-step guide to planning a workshop, how to create an unforgettable training session in 8 simple steps, 18 free facilitation resources we think you’ll love.

• 47 useful online tools for workshop planning and meeting facilitation

All teams and organizations encounter challenges as they grow. There are problems that might occur for teams when it comes to miscommunication or resolving business-critical issues . You may face challenges around growth , design , user engagement, and even team culture and happiness. In short, problem-solving techniques should be part of every team’s skillset.

Problem-solving methods are primarily designed to help a group or team through a process of first identifying problems and challenges , ideating possible solutions , and then evaluating the most suitable .

Finding effective solutions to complex problems isn’t easy, but by using the right process and techniques, you can help your team be more efficient in the process.

So how do you develop strategies that are engaging, and empower your team to solve problems effectively?

In this blog post, we share a series of problem-solving tools you can use in your next workshop or team meeting. You’ll also find some tips for facilitating the process and how to enable others to solve complex problems.

Let’s get started! 

How do you identify problems?

How do you identify the right solution.

• Tips for more effective problem-solving

Complete problem-solving methods

• Problem-solving techniques to identify and analyze problems
• Problem-solving techniques for developing solutions

Problem-solving warm-up activities

Closing activities for a problem-solving process.

Before you can move towards finding the right solution for a given problem, you first need to identify and define the problem you wish to solve. 

Here, you want to clearly articulate what the problem is and allow your group to do the same. Remember that everyone in a group is likely to have differing perspectives and alignment is necessary in order to help the group move forward. 

Identifying a problem accurately also requires that all members of a group are able to contribute their views in an open and safe manner. It can be scary for people to stand up and contribute, especially if the problems or challenges are emotive or personal in nature. Be sure to try and create a psychologically safe space for these kinds of discussions.

Remember that problem analysis and further discussion are also important. Not taking the time to fully analyze and discuss a challenge can result in the development of solutions that are not fit for purpose or do not address the underlying issue.

Successfully identifying and then analyzing a problem means facilitating a group through activities designed to help them clearly and honestly articulate their thoughts and produce usable insight.

With this data, you might then produce a problem statement that clearly describes the problem you wish to be addressed and also state the goal of any process you undertake to tackle this issue.  

Finding solutions is the end goal of any process. Complex organizational challenges can only be solved with an appropriate solution but discovering them requires using the right problem-solving tool.

After you’ve explored a problem and discussed ideas, you need to help a team discuss and choose the right solution. Consensus tools and methods such as those below help a group explore possible solutions before then voting for the best. They’re a great way to tap into the collective intelligence of the group for great results!

Remember that the process is often iterative. Great problem solvers often roadtest a viable solution in a measured way to see what works too. While you might not get the right solution on your first try, the methods below help teams land on the most likely to succeed solution while also holding space for improvement.

Every effective problem solving process begins with an agenda . A well-structured workshop is one of the best methods for successfully guiding a group from exploring a problem to implementing a solution.

In SessionLab, it’s easy to go from an idea to a complete agenda . Start by dragging and dropping your core problem solving activities into place . Add timings, breaks and necessary materials before sharing your agenda with your colleagues.

The resulting agenda will be your guide to an effective and productive problem solving session that will also help you stay organized on the day!

Tips for more effective problem solving

Problem-solving activities are only one part of the puzzle. While a great method can help unlock your team’s ability to solve problems, without a thoughtful approach and strong facilitation the solutions may not be fit for purpose.

Let’s take a look at some problem-solving tips you can apply to any process to help it be a success!

Clearly define the problem

Jumping straight to solutions can be tempting, though without first clearly articulating a problem, the solution might not be the right one. Many of the problem-solving activities below include sections where the problem is explored and clearly defined before moving on.

This is a vital part of the problem-solving process and taking the time to fully define an issue can save time and effort later. A clear definition helps identify irrelevant information and it also ensures that your team sets off on the right track.

Don’t jump to conclusions

It’s easy for groups to exhibit cognitive bias or have preconceived ideas about both problems and potential solutions. Be sure to back up any problem statements or potential solutions with facts, research, and adequate forethought.

The best techniques ask participants to be methodical and challenge preconceived notions. Make sure you give the group enough time and space to collect relevant information and consider the problem in a new way. By approaching the process with a clear, rational mindset, you’ll often find that better solutions are more forthcoming.  

Try different approaches  

Problems come in all shapes and sizes and so too should the methods you use to solve them. If you find that one approach isn’t yielding results and your team isn’t finding different solutions, try mixing it up. You’ll be surprised at how using a new creative activity can unblock your team and generate great solutions.

Don’t take it personally 

Depending on the nature of your team or organizational problems, it’s easy for conversations to get heated. While it’s good for participants to be engaged in the discussions, ensure that emotions don’t run too high and that blame isn’t thrown around while finding solutions.

You’re all in it together, and even if your team or area is seeing problems, that isn’t necessarily a disparagement of you personally. Using facilitation skills to manage group dynamics is one effective method of helping conversations be more constructive.

Get the right people in the room

Your problem-solving method is often only as effective as the group using it. Getting the right people on the job and managing the number of people present is important too!

If the group is too small, you may not get enough different perspectives to effectively solve a problem. If the group is too large, you can go round and round during the ideation stages.

Creating the right group makeup is also important in ensuring you have the necessary expertise and skillset to both identify and follow up on potential solutions. Carefully consider who to include at each stage to help ensure your problem-solving method is followed and positioned for success.

Document everything

The best solutions can take refinement, iteration, and reflection to come out. Get into a habit of documenting your process in order to keep all the learnings from the session and to allow ideas to mature and develop. Many of the methods below involve the creation of documents or shared resources. Be sure to keep and share these so everyone can benefit from the work done!

Bring a facilitator 

Facilitation is all about making group processes easier. With a subject as potentially emotive and important as problem-solving, having an impartial third party in the form of a facilitator can make all the difference in finding great solutions and keeping the process moving. Consider bringing a facilitator to your problem-solving session to get better results and generate meaningful solutions!

Develop your problem-solving skills

It takes time and practice to be an effective problem solver. While some roles or participants might more naturally gravitate towards problem-solving, it can take development and planning to help everyone create better solutions.

You might develop a training program, run a problem-solving workshop or simply ask your team to practice using the techniques below. Check out our post on problem-solving skills to see how you and your group can develop the right mental process and be more resilient to issues too!

Design a great agenda

Workshops are a great format for solving problems. With the right approach, you can focus a group and help them find the solutions to their own problems. But designing a process can be time-consuming and finding the right activities can be difficult.

Check out our workshop planning guide to level-up your agenda design and start running more effective workshops. Need inspiration? Check out templates designed by expert facilitators to help you kickstart your process!

In this section, we’ll look at in-depth problem-solving methods that provide a complete end-to-end process for developing effective solutions. These will help guide your team from the discovery and definition of a problem through to delivering the right solution.

If you’re looking for an all-encompassing method or problem-solving model, these processes are a great place to start. They’ll ask your team to challenge preconceived ideas and adopt a mindset for solving problems more effectively.

• Six Thinking Hats
• Lightning Decision Jam
• Problem Definition Process
• Discovery & Action Dialogue

Design Sprint 2.0

• Open Space Technology

1. Six Thinking Hats

Individual approaches to solving a problem can be very different based on what team or role an individual holds. It can be easy for existing biases or perspectives to find their way into the mix, or for internal politics to direct a conversation.

Six Thinking Hats is a classic method for identifying the problems that need to be solved and enables your team to consider them from different angles, whether that is by focusing on facts and data, creative solutions, or by considering why a particular solution might not work.

Like all problem-solving frameworks, Six Thinking Hats is effective at helping teams remove roadblocks from a conversation or discussion and come to terms with all the aspects necessary to solve complex problems.

2. Lightning Decision Jam

Featured courtesy of Jonathan Courtney of AJ&Smart Berlin, Lightning Decision Jam is one of those strategies that should be in every facilitation toolbox. Exploring problems and finding solutions is often creative in nature, though as with any creative process, there is the potential to lose focus and get lost.

Unstructured discussions might get you there in the end, but it’s much more effective to use a method that creates a clear process and team focus.

In Lightning Decision Jam, participants are invited to begin by writing challenges, concerns, or mistakes on post-its without discussing them before then being invited by the moderator to present them to the group.

From there, the team vote on which problems to solve and are guided through steps that will allow them to reframe those problems, create solutions and then decide what to execute on. 

By deciding the problems that need to be solved as a team before moving on, this group process is great for ensuring the whole team is aligned and can take ownership over the next stages. 

Lightning Decision Jam (LDJ)   #action   #decision making   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #innovation   #design   #remote-friendly   The problem with anything that requires creative thinking is that it’s easy to get lost—lose focus and fall into the trap of having useless, open-ended, unstructured discussions. Here’s the most effective solution I’ve found: Replace all open, unstructured discussion with a clear process. What to use this exercise for: Anything which requires a group of people to make decisions, solve problems or discuss challenges. It’s always good to frame an LDJ session with a broad topic, here are some examples: The conversion flow of our checkout Our internal design process How we organise events Keeping up with our competition Improving sales flow

3. Problem Definition Process

While problems can be complex, the problem-solving methods you use to identify and solve those problems can often be simple in design. 

By taking the time to truly identify and define a problem before asking the group to reframe the challenge as an opportunity, this method is a great way to enable change.

Begin by identifying a focus question and exploring the ways in which it manifests before splitting into five teams who will each consider the problem using a different method: escape, reversal, exaggeration, distortion or wishful. Teams develop a problem objective and create ideas in line with their method before then feeding them back to the group.

This method is great for enabling in-depth discussions while also creating space for finding creative solutions too!

Problem Definition   #problem solving   #idea generation   #creativity   #online   #remote-friendly   A problem solving technique to define a problem, challenge or opportunity and to generate ideas.

4. The 5 Whys 

Sometimes, a group needs to go further with their strategies and analyze the root cause at the heart of organizational issues. An RCA or root cause analysis is the process of identifying what is at the heart of business problems or recurring challenges. 

The 5 Whys is a simple and effective method of helping a group go find the root cause of any problem or challenge and conduct analysis that will deliver results. 

By beginning with the creation of a problem statement and going through five stages to refine it, The 5 Whys provides everything you need to truly discover the cause of an issue.

The 5 Whys   #hyperisland   #innovation   This simple and powerful method is useful for getting to the core of a problem or challenge. As the title suggests, the group defines a problems, then asks the question “why” five times, often using the resulting explanation as a starting point for creative problem solving.

5. World Cafe

World Cafe is a simple but powerful facilitation technique to help bigger groups to focus their energy and attention on solving complex problems.

World Cafe enables this approach by creating a relaxed atmosphere where participants are able to self-organize and explore topics relevant and important to them which are themed around a central problem-solving purpose. Create the right atmosphere by modeling your space after a cafe and after guiding the group through the method, let them take the lead!

Making problem-solving a part of your organization’s culture in the long term can be a difficult undertaking. More approachable formats like World Cafe can be especially effective in bringing people unfamiliar with workshops into the fold. 

World Cafe   #hyperisland   #innovation   #issue analysis   World Café is a simple yet powerful method, originated by Juanita Brown, for enabling meaningful conversations driven completely by participants and the topics that are relevant and important to them. Facilitators create a cafe-style space and provide simple guidelines. Participants then self-organize and explore a set of relevant topics or questions for conversation.

6. Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)

One of the best approaches is to create a safe space for a group to share and discover practices and behaviors that can help them find their own solutions.

With DAD, you can help a group choose which problems they wish to solve and which approaches they will take to do so. It’s great at helping remove resistance to change and can help get buy-in at every level too!

This process of enabling frontline ownership is great in ensuring follow-through and is one of the methods you will want in your toolbox as a facilitator.

Discovery & Action Dialogue (DAD)   #idea generation   #liberating structures   #action   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   DADs make it easy for a group or community to discover practices and behaviors that enable some individuals (without access to special resources and facing the same constraints) to find better solutions than their peers to common problems. These are called positive deviant (PD) behaviors and practices. DADs make it possible for people in the group, unit, or community to discover by themselves these PD practices. DADs also create favorable conditions for stimulating participants’ creativity in spaces where they can feel safe to invent new and more effective practices. Resistance to change evaporates as participants are unleashed to choose freely which practices they will adopt or try and which problems they will tackle. DADs make it possible to achieve frontline ownership of solutions.

7. Design Sprint 2.0

Want to see how a team can solve big problems and move forward with prototyping and testing solutions in a few days? The Design Sprint 2.0 template from Jake Knapp, author of Sprint, is a complete agenda for a with proven results.

Developing the right agenda can involve difficult but necessary planning. Ensuring all the correct steps are followed can also be stressful or time-consuming depending on your level of experience.

Use this complete 4-day workshop template if you are finding there is no obvious solution to your challenge and want to focus your team around a specific problem that might require a shortcut to launching a minimum viable product or waiting for the organization-wide implementation of a solution.

8. Open space technology

Open space technology- developed by Harrison Owen – creates a space where large groups are invited to take ownership of their problem solving and lead individual sessions. Open space technology is a great format when you have a great deal of expertise and insight in the room and want to allow for different takes and approaches on a particular theme or problem you need to be solved.

Start by bringing your participants together to align around a central theme and focus their efforts. Explain the ground rules to help guide the problem-solving process and then invite members to identify any issue connecting to the central theme that they are interested in and are prepared to take responsibility for.

Once participants have decided on their approach to the core theme, they write their issue on a piece of paper, announce it to the group, pick a session time and place, and post the paper on the wall. As the wall fills up with sessions, the group is then invited to join the sessions that interest them the most and which they can contribute to, then you’re ready to begin!

Everyone joins the problem-solving group they’ve signed up to, record the discussion and if appropriate, findings can then be shared with the rest of the group afterward.

Open Space Technology   #action plan   #idea generation   #problem solving   #issue analysis   #large group   #online   #remote-friendly   Open Space is a methodology for large groups to create their agenda discerning important topics for discussion, suitable for conferences, community gatherings and whole system facilitation

Techniques to identify and analyze problems

Using a problem-solving method to help a team identify and analyze a problem can be a quick and effective addition to any workshop or meeting.

While further actions are always necessary, you can generate momentum and alignment easily, and these activities are a great place to get started.

We’ve put together this list of techniques to help you and your team with problem identification, analysis, and discussion that sets the foundation for developing effective solutions.

Let’s take a look!

• The Creativity Dice
• Fishbone Analysis
• Problem Tree
• SWOT Analysis
• Agreement-Certainty Matrix
• The Journalistic Six
• LEGO Challenge
• What, So What, Now What?
• Journalists

Individual and group perspectives are incredibly important, but what happens if people are set in their minds and need a change of perspective in order to approach a problem more effectively?

Flip It is a method we love because it is both simple to understand and run, and allows groups to understand how their perspectives and biases are formed. 

Participants in Flip It are first invited to consider concerns, issues, or problems from a perspective of fear and write them on a flip chart. Then, the group is asked to consider those same issues from a perspective of hope and flip their understanding.  

No problem and solution is free from existing bias and by changing perspectives with Flip It, you can then develop a problem solving model quickly and effectively.

Flip It!   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Often, a change in a problem or situation comes simply from a change in our perspectives. Flip It! is a quick game designed to show players that perspectives are made, not born.

10. The Creativity Dice

One of the most useful problem solving skills you can teach your team is of approaching challenges with creativity, flexibility, and openness. Games like The Creativity Dice allow teams to overcome the potential hurdle of too much linear thinking and approach the process with a sense of fun and speed. 

In The Creativity Dice, participants are organized around a topic and roll a dice to determine what they will work on for a period of 3 minutes at a time. They might roll a 3 and work on investigating factual information on the chosen topic. They might roll a 1 and work on identifying the specific goals, standards, or criteria for the session.

Encouraging rapid work and iteration while asking participants to be flexible are great skills to cultivate. Having a stage for idea incubation in this game is also important. Moments of pause can help ensure the ideas that are put forward are the most suitable. 

The Creativity Dice   #creativity   #problem solving   #thiagi   #issue analysis   Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.

11. Fishbone Analysis

Organizational or team challenges are rarely simple, and it’s important to remember that one problem can be an indication of something that goes deeper and may require further consideration to be solved.

Fishbone Analysis helps groups to dig deeper and understand the origins of a problem. It’s a great example of a root cause analysis method that is simple for everyone on a team to get their head around. 

Participants in this activity are asked to annotate a diagram of a fish, first adding the problem or issue to be worked on at the head of a fish before then brainstorming the root causes of the problem and adding them as bones on the fish. 

Using abstractions such as a diagram of a fish can really help a team break out of their regular thinking and develop a creative approach.

Fishbone Analysis   #problem solving   ##root cause analysis   #decision making   #online facilitation   A process to help identify and understand the origins of problems, issues or observations.

12. Problem Tree 

Encouraging visual thinking can be an essential part of many strategies. By simply reframing and clarifying problems, a group can move towards developing a problem solving model that works for them. 

In Problem Tree, groups are asked to first brainstorm a list of problems – these can be design problems, team problems or larger business problems – and then organize them into a hierarchy. The hierarchy could be from most important to least important or abstract to practical, though the key thing with problem solving games that involve this aspect is that your group has some way of managing and sorting all the issues that are raised.

Once you have a list of problems that need to be solved and have organized them accordingly, you’re then well-positioned for the next problem solving steps.

Problem tree   #define intentions   #create   #design   #issue analysis   A problem tree is a tool to clarify the hierarchy of problems addressed by the team within a design project; it represents high level problems or related sublevel problems.

13. SWOT Analysis

Chances are you’ve heard of the SWOT Analysis before. This problem-solving method focuses on identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is a tried and tested method for both individuals and teams.

Start by creating a desired end state or outcome and bare this in mind – any process solving model is made more effective by knowing what you are moving towards. Create a quadrant made up of the four categories of a SWOT analysis and ask participants to generate ideas based on each of those quadrants.

Once you have those ideas assembled in their quadrants, cluster them together based on their affinity with other ideas. These clusters are then used to facilitate group conversations and move things forward. 

SWOT analysis   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   #meeting facilitation   The SWOT Analysis is a long-standing technique of looking at what we have, with respect to the desired end state, as well as what we could improve on. It gives us an opportunity to gauge approaching opportunities and dangers, and assess the seriousness of the conditions that affect our future. When we understand those conditions, we can influence what comes next.

14. Agreement-Certainty Matrix

Not every problem-solving approach is right for every challenge, and deciding on the right method for the challenge at hand is a key part of being an effective team.

The Agreement Certainty matrix helps teams align on the nature of the challenges facing them. By sorting problems from simple to chaotic, your team can understand what methods are suitable for each problem and what they can do to ensure effective results. 

If you are already using Liberating Structures techniques as part of your problem-solving strategy, the Agreement-Certainty Matrix can be an invaluable addition to your process. We’ve found it particularly if you are having issues with recurring problems in your organization and want to go deeper in understanding the root cause. 

Agreement-Certainty Matrix   #issue analysis   #liberating structures   #problem solving   You can help individuals or groups avoid the frequent mistake of trying to solve a problem with methods that are not adapted to the nature of their challenge. The combination of two questions makes it possible to easily sort challenges into four categories: simple, complicated, complex , and chaotic .  A problem is simple when it can be solved reliably with practices that are easy to duplicate.  It is complicated when experts are required to devise a sophisticated solution that will yield the desired results predictably.  A problem is complex when there are several valid ways to proceed but outcomes are not predictable in detail.  Chaotic is when the context is too turbulent to identify a path forward.  A loose analogy may be used to describe these differences: simple is like following a recipe, complicated like sending a rocket to the moon, complex like raising a child, and chaotic is like the game “Pin the Tail on the Donkey.”  The Liberating Structures Matching Matrix in Chapter 5 can be used as the first step to clarify the nature of a challenge and avoid the mismatches between problems and solutions that are frequently at the root of chronic, recurring problems.

Organizing and charting a team’s progress can be important in ensuring its success. SQUID (Sequential Question and Insight Diagram) is a great model that allows a team to effectively switch between giving questions and answers and develop the skills they need to stay on track throughout the process. 

Begin with two different colored sticky notes – one for questions and one for answers – and with your central topic (the head of the squid) on the board. Ask the group to first come up with a series of questions connected to their best guess of how to approach the topic. Ask the group to come up with answers to those questions, fix them to the board and connect them with a line. After some discussion, go back to question mode by responding to the generated answers or other points on the board.

It’s rewarding to see a diagram grow throughout the exercise, and a completed SQUID can provide a visual resource for future effort and as an example for other teams.

SQUID   #gamestorming   #project planning   #issue analysis   #problem solving   When exploring an information space, it’s important for a group to know where they are at any given time. By using SQUID, a group charts out the territory as they go and can navigate accordingly. SQUID stands for Sequential Question and Insight Diagram.

16. Speed Boat

To continue with our nautical theme, Speed Boat is a short and sweet activity that can help a team quickly identify what employees, clients or service users might have a problem with and analyze what might be standing in the way of achieving a solution.

Methods that allow for a group to make observations, have insights and obtain those eureka moments quickly are invaluable when trying to solve complex problems.

In Speed Boat, the approach is to first consider what anchors and challenges might be holding an organization (or boat) back. Bonus points if you are able to identify any sharks in the water and develop ideas that can also deal with competitors!   

Speed Boat   #gamestorming   #problem solving   #action   Speedboat is a short and sweet way to identify what your employees or clients don’t like about your product/service or what’s standing in the way of a desired goal.

17. The Journalistic Six

Some of the most effective ways of solving problems is by encouraging teams to be more inclusive and diverse in their thinking.

Based on the six key questions journalism students are taught to answer in articles and news stories, The Journalistic Six helps create teams to see the whole picture. By using who, what, when, where, why, and how to facilitate the conversation and encourage creative thinking, your team can make sure that the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the are covered exhaustively and thoughtfully. Reporter’s notebook and dictaphone optional.

The Journalistic Six – Who What When Where Why How   #idea generation   #issue analysis   #problem solving   #online   #creative thinking   #remote-friendly   A questioning method for generating, explaining, investigating ideas.

18. LEGO Challenge

Now for an activity that is a little out of the (toy) box. LEGO Serious Play is a facilitation methodology that can be used to improve creative thinking and problem-solving skills. 

The LEGO Challenge includes giving each member of the team an assignment that is hidden from the rest of the group while they create a structure without speaking.

What the LEGO challenge brings to the table is a fun working example of working with stakeholders who might not be on the same page to solve problems. Also, it’s LEGO! Who doesn’t love LEGO! 

LEGO Challenge   #hyperisland   #team   A team-building activity in which groups must work together to build a structure out of LEGO, but each individual has a secret “assignment” which makes the collaborative process more challenging. It emphasizes group communication, leadership dynamics, conflict, cooperation, patience and problem solving strategy.

19. What, So What, Now What?

If not carefully managed, the problem identification and problem analysis stages of the problem-solving process can actually create more problems and misunderstandings.

The What, So What, Now What? problem-solving activity is designed to help collect insights and move forward while also eliminating the possibility of disagreement when it comes to identifying, clarifying, and analyzing organizational or work problems. 

Facilitation is all about bringing groups together so that might work on a shared goal and the best problem-solving strategies ensure that teams are aligned in purpose, if not initially in opinion or insight.

Throughout the three steps of this game, you give everyone on a team to reflect on a problem by asking what happened, why it is important, and what actions should then be taken. 

This can be a great activity for bringing our individual perceptions about a problem or challenge and contextualizing it in a larger group setting. This is one of the most important problem-solving skills you can bring to your organization.

W³ – What, So What, Now What?   #issue analysis   #innovation   #liberating structures   You can help groups reflect on a shared experience in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction. Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what actions logically follow with Now What . The shared progression eliminates most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what to do. Voila!

20. Journalists  

Problem analysis can be one of the most important and decisive stages of all problem-solving tools. Sometimes, a team can become bogged down in the details and are unable to move forward.

Journalists is an activity that can avoid a group from getting stuck in the problem identification or problem analysis stages of the process.

In Journalists, the group is invited to draft the front page of a fictional newspaper and figure out what stories deserve to be on the cover and what headlines those stories will have. By reframing how your problems and challenges are approached, you can help a team move productively through the process and be better prepared for the steps to follow.

Journalists   #vision   #big picture   #issue analysis   #remote-friendly   This is an exercise to use when the group gets stuck in details and struggles to see the big picture. Also good for defining a vision.

Problem-solving techniques for developing solutions 

The success of any problem-solving process can be measured by the solutions it produces. After you’ve defined the issue, explored existing ideas, and ideated, it’s time to narrow down to the correct solution.

Use these problem-solving techniques when you want to help your team find consensus, compare possible solutions, and move towards taking action on a particular problem.

• Improved Solutions
• Four-Step Sketch
• 15% Solutions
• How-Now-Wow matrix
• Impact Effort Matrix

21. Mindspin  

Brainstorming is part of the bread and butter of the problem-solving process and all problem-solving strategies benefit from getting ideas out and challenging a team to generate solutions quickly. 

With Mindspin, participants are encouraged not only to generate ideas but to do so under time constraints and by slamming down cards and passing them on. By doing multiple rounds, your team can begin with a free generation of possible solutions before moving on to developing those solutions and encouraging further ideation. 

This is one of our favorite problem-solving activities and can be great for keeping the energy up throughout the workshop. Remember the importance of helping people become engaged in the process – energizing problem-solving techniques like Mindspin can help ensure your team stays engaged and happy, even when the problems they’re coming together to solve are complex. 

MindSpin   #teampedia   #idea generation   #problem solving   #action   A fast and loud method to enhance brainstorming within a team. Since this activity has more than round ideas that are repetitive can be ruled out leaving more creative and innovative answers to the challenge.

22. Improved Solutions

After a team has successfully identified a problem and come up with a few solutions, it can be tempting to call the work of the problem-solving process complete. That said, the first solution is not necessarily the best, and by including a further review and reflection activity into your problem-solving model, you can ensure your group reaches the best possible result. 

One of a number of problem-solving games from Thiagi Group, Improved Solutions helps you go the extra mile and develop suggested solutions with close consideration and peer review. By supporting the discussion of several problems at once and by shifting team roles throughout, this problem-solving technique is a dynamic way of finding the best solution. 

Improved Solutions   #creativity   #thiagi   #problem solving   #action   #team   You can improve any solution by objectively reviewing its strengths and weaknesses and making suitable adjustments. In this creativity framegame, you improve the solutions to several problems. To maintain objective detachment, you deal with a different problem during each of six rounds and assume different roles (problem owner, consultant, basher, booster, enhancer, and evaluator) during each round. At the conclusion of the activity, each player ends up with two solutions to her problem.

23. Four Step Sketch

Creative thinking and visual ideation does not need to be confined to the opening stages of your problem-solving strategies. Exercises that include sketching and prototyping on paper can be effective at the solution finding and development stage of the process, and can be great for keeping a team engaged. 

By going from simple notes to a crazy 8s round that involves rapidly sketching 8 variations on their ideas before then producing a final solution sketch, the group is able to iterate quickly and visually. Problem-solving techniques like Four-Step Sketch are great if you have a group of different thinkers and want to change things up from a more textual or discussion-based approach.

Four-Step Sketch   #design sprint   #innovation   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   The four-step sketch is an exercise that helps people to create well-formed concepts through a structured process that includes: Review key information Start design work on paper,  Consider multiple variations , Create a detailed solution . This exercise is preceded by a set of other activities allowing the group to clarify the challenge they want to solve. See how the Four Step Sketch exercise fits into a Design Sprint

24. 15% Solutions

Some problems are simpler than others and with the right problem-solving activities, you can empower people to take immediate actions that can help create organizational change. 

Part of the liberating structures toolkit, 15% solutions is a problem-solving technique that focuses on finding and implementing solutions quickly. A process of iterating and making small changes quickly can help generate momentum and an appetite for solving complex problems.

Problem-solving strategies can live and die on whether people are onboard. Getting some quick wins is a great way of getting people behind the process.   

It can be extremely empowering for a team to realize that problem-solving techniques can be deployed quickly and easily and delineate between things they can positively impact and those things they cannot change. 

15% Solutions   #action   #liberating structures   #remote-friendly   You can reveal the actions, however small, that everyone can do immediately. At a minimum, these will create momentum, and that may make a BIG difference.  15% Solutions show that there is no reason to wait around, feel powerless, or fearful. They help people pick it up a level. They get individuals and the group to focus on what is within their discretion instead of what they cannot change.  With a very simple question, you can flip the conversation to what can be done and find solutions to big problems that are often distributed widely in places not known in advance. Shifting a few grains of sand may trigger a landslide and change the whole landscape.

25. How-Now-Wow Matrix

The problem-solving process is often creative, as complex problems usually require a change of thinking and creative response in order to find the best solutions. While it’s common for the first stages to encourage creative thinking, groups can often gravitate to familiar solutions when it comes to the end of the process. 

When selecting solutions, you don’t want to lose your creative energy! The How-Now-Wow Matrix from Gamestorming is a great problem-solving activity that enables a group to stay creative and think out of the box when it comes to selecting the right solution for a given problem.

Problem-solving techniques that encourage creative thinking and the ideation and selection of new solutions can be the most effective in organisational change. Give the How-Now-Wow Matrix a go, and not just for how pleasant it is to say out loud. 

How-Now-Wow Matrix   #gamestorming   #idea generation   #remote-friendly   When people want to develop new ideas, they most often think out of the box in the brainstorming or divergent phase. However, when it comes to convergence, people often end up picking ideas that are most familiar to them. This is called a ‘creative paradox’ or a ‘creadox’. The How-Now-Wow matrix is an idea selection tool that breaks the creadox by forcing people to weigh each idea on 2 parameters.

26. Impact and Effort Matrix

All problem-solving techniques hope to not only find solutions to a given problem or challenge but to find the best solution. When it comes to finding a solution, groups are invited to put on their decision-making hats and really think about how a proposed idea would work in practice. 

The Impact and Effort Matrix is one of the problem-solving techniques that fall into this camp, empowering participants to first generate ideas and then categorize them into a 2×2 matrix based on impact and effort.

Activities that invite critical thinking while remaining simple are invaluable. Use the Impact and Effort Matrix to move from ideation and towards evaluating potential solutions before then committing to them. 

Impact and Effort Matrix   #gamestorming   #decision making   #action   #remote-friendly   In this decision-making exercise, possible actions are mapped based on two factors: effort required to implement and potential impact. Categorizing ideas along these lines is a useful technique in decision making, as it obliges contributors to balance and evaluate suggested actions before committing to them.

27. Dotmocracy

If you’ve followed each of the problem-solving steps with your group successfully, you should move towards the end of your process with heaps of possible solutions developed with a specific problem in mind. But how do you help a group go from ideation to putting a solution into action? 

Dotmocracy – or Dot Voting -is a tried and tested method of helping a team in the problem-solving process make decisions and put actions in place with a degree of oversight and consensus. 

One of the problem-solving techniques that should be in every facilitator’s toolbox, Dot Voting is fast and effective and can help identify the most popular and best solutions and help bring a group to a decision effectively. 

Dotmocracy   #action   #decision making   #group prioritization   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Dotmocracy is a simple method for group prioritization or decision-making. It is not an activity on its own, but a method to use in processes where prioritization or decision-making is the aim. The method supports a group to quickly see which options are most popular or relevant. The options or ideas are written on post-its and stuck up on a wall for the whole group to see. Each person votes for the options they think are the strongest, and that information is used to inform a decision.

All facilitators know that warm-ups and icebreakers are useful for any workshop or group process. Problem-solving workshops are no different.

Use these problem-solving techniques to warm up a group and prepare them for the rest of the process. Activating your group by tapping into some of the top problem-solving skills can be one of the best ways to see great outcomes from your session.

• Check-in/Check-out
• Doodling Together
• Show and Tell
• Constellations
• Draw a Tree

28. Check-in / Check-out

Solid processes are planned from beginning to end, and the best facilitators know that setting the tone and establishing a safe, open environment can be integral to a successful problem-solving process.

Check-in / Check-out is a great way to begin and/or bookend a problem-solving workshop. Checking in to a session emphasizes that everyone will be seen, heard, and expected to contribute. 

If you are running a series of meetings, setting a consistent pattern of checking in and checking out can really help your team get into a groove. We recommend this opening-closing activity for small to medium-sized groups though it can work with large groups if they’re disciplined!

Check-in / Check-out   #team   #opening   #closing   #hyperisland   #remote-friendly   Either checking-in or checking-out is a simple way for a team to open or close a process, symbolically and in a collaborative way. Checking-in/out invites each member in a group to be present, seen and heard, and to express a reflection or a feeling. Checking-in emphasizes presence, focus and group commitment; checking-out emphasizes reflection and symbolic closure.

29. Doodling Together  

Thinking creatively and not being afraid to make suggestions are important problem-solving skills for any group or team, and warming up by encouraging these behaviors is a great way to start. 

Doodling Together is one of our favorite creative ice breaker games – it’s quick, effective, and fun and can make all following problem-solving steps easier by encouraging a group to collaborate visually. By passing cards and adding additional items as they go, the workshop group gets into a groove of co-creation and idea development that is crucial to finding solutions to problems. 

Doodling Together   #collaboration   #creativity   #teamwork   #fun   #team   #visual methods   #energiser   #icebreaker   #remote-friendly   Create wild, weird and often funny postcards together & establish a group’s creative confidence.

30. Show and Tell

You might remember some version of Show and Tell from being a kid in school and it’s a great problem-solving activity to kick off a session.

Asking participants to prepare a little something before a workshop by bringing an object for show and tell can help them warm up before the session has even begun! Games that include a physical object can also help encourage early engagement before moving onto more big-picture thinking.

By asking your participants to tell stories about why they chose to bring a particular item to the group, you can help teams see things from new perspectives and see both differences and similarities in the way they approach a topic. Great groundwork for approaching a problem-solving process as a team! 

Show and Tell   #gamestorming   #action   #opening   #meeting facilitation   Show and Tell taps into the power of metaphors to reveal players’ underlying assumptions and associations around a topic The aim of the game is to get a deeper understanding of stakeholders’ perspectives on anything—a new project, an organizational restructuring, a shift in the company’s vision or team dynamic.

31. Constellations

Who doesn’t love stars? Constellations is a great warm-up activity for any workshop as it gets people up off their feet, energized, and ready to engage in new ways with established topics. It’s also great for showing existing beliefs, biases, and patterns that can come into play as part of your session.

Using warm-up games that help build trust and connection while also allowing for non-verbal responses can be great for easing people into the problem-solving process and encouraging engagement from everyone in the group. Constellations is great in large spaces that allow for movement and is definitely a practical exercise to allow the group to see patterns that are otherwise invisible. 

Constellations   #trust   #connection   #opening   #coaching   #patterns   #system   Individuals express their response to a statement or idea by standing closer or further from a central object. Used with teams to reveal system, hidden patterns, perspectives.

32. Draw a Tree

Problem-solving games that help raise group awareness through a central, unifying metaphor can be effective ways to warm-up a group in any problem-solving model.

Draw a Tree is a simple warm-up activity you can use in any group and which can provide a quick jolt of energy. Start by asking your participants to draw a tree in just 45 seconds – they can choose whether it will be abstract or realistic. 

Once the timer is up, ask the group how many people included the roots of the tree and use this as a means to discuss how we can ignore important parts of any system simply because they are not visible.

All problem-solving strategies are made more effective by thinking of problems critically and by exposing things that may not normally come to light. Warm-up games like Draw a Tree are great in that they quickly demonstrate some key problem-solving skills in an accessible and effective way.

Draw a Tree   #thiagi   #opening   #perspectives   #remote-friendly   With this game you can raise awarness about being more mindful, and aware of the environment we live in.

Each step of the problem-solving workshop benefits from an intelligent deployment of activities, games, and techniques. Bringing your session to an effective close helps ensure that solutions are followed through on and that you also celebrate what has been achieved.

Here are some problem-solving activities you can use to effectively close a workshop or meeting and ensure the great work you’ve done can continue afterward.

• One Breath Feedback
• Who What When Matrix
• Response Cards

How do I conclude a problem-solving process?

All good things must come to an end. With the bulk of the work done, it can be tempting to conclude your workshop swiftly and without a moment to debrief and align. This can be problematic in that it doesn’t allow your team to fully process the results or reflect on the process.

At the end of an effective session, your team will have gone through a process that, while productive, can be exhausting. It’s important to give your group a moment to take a breath, ensure that they are clear on future actions, and provide short feedback before leaving the space. 

The primary purpose of any problem-solving method is to generate solutions and then implement them. Be sure to take the opportunity to ensure everyone is aligned and ready to effectively implement the solutions you produced in the workshop.

Remember that every process can be improved and by giving a short moment to collect feedback in the session, you can further refine your problem-solving methods and see further success in the future too.

33. One Breath Feedback

Maintaining attention and focus during the closing stages of a problem-solving workshop can be tricky and so being concise when giving feedback can be important. It’s easy to incur “death by feedback” should some team members go on for too long sharing their perspectives in a quick feedback round. 

One Breath Feedback is a great closing activity for workshops. You give everyone an opportunity to provide feedback on what they’ve done but only in the space of a single breath. This keeps feedback short and to the point and means that everyone is encouraged to provide the most important piece of feedback to them. 

One breath feedback   #closing   #feedback   #action   This is a feedback round in just one breath that excels in maintaining attention: each participants is able to speak during just one breath … for most people that’s around 20 to 25 seconds … unless of course you’ve been a deep sea diver in which case you’ll be able to do it for longer.

34. Who What When Matrix 

Matrices feature as part of many effective problem-solving strategies and with good reason. They are easily recognizable, simple to use, and generate results.

The Who What When Matrix is a great tool to use when closing your problem-solving session by attributing a who, what and when to the actions and solutions you have decided upon. The resulting matrix is a simple, easy-to-follow way of ensuring your team can move forward. 

Great solutions can’t be enacted without action and ownership. Your problem-solving process should include a stage for allocating tasks to individuals or teams and creating a realistic timeframe for those solutions to be implemented or checked out. Use this method to keep the solution implementation process clear and simple for all involved. 

Who/What/When Matrix   #gamestorming   #action   #project planning   With Who/What/When matrix, you can connect people with clear actions they have defined and have committed to.

35. Response cards

Group discussion can comprise the bulk of most problem-solving activities and by the end of the process, you might find that your team is talked out! 

Providing a means for your team to give feedback with short written notes can ensure everyone is head and can contribute without the need to stand up and talk. Depending on the needs of the group, giving an alternative can help ensure everyone can contribute to your problem-solving model in the way that makes the most sense for them.

Response Cards is a great way to close a workshop if you are looking for a gentle warm-down and want to get some swift discussion around some of the feedback that is raised. 

Response Cards   #debriefing   #closing   #structured sharing   #questions and answers   #thiagi   #action   It can be hard to involve everyone during a closing of a session. Some might stay in the background or get unheard because of louder participants. However, with the use of Response Cards, everyone will be involved in providing feedback or clarify questions at the end of a session.

Save time and effort discovering the right solutions

A structured problem solving process is a surefire way of solving tough problems, discovering creative solutions and driving organizational change. But how can you design for successful outcomes?

With SessionLab, it’s easy to design engaging workshops that deliver results. Drag, drop and reorder blocks  to build your agenda. When you make changes or update your agenda, your session  timing   adjusts automatically , saving you time on manual adjustments.

Collaborating with stakeholders or clients? Share your agenda with a single click and collaborate in real-time. No more sending documents back and forth over email.

Explore  how to use SessionLab  to design effective problem solving workshops or  watch this five minute video  to see the planner in action!

Over to you

The problem-solving process can often be as complicated and multifaceted as the problems they are set-up to solve. With the right problem-solving techniques and a mix of creative exercises designed to guide discussion and generate purposeful ideas, we hope we’ve given you the tools to find the best solutions as simply and easily as possible.

Is there a problem-solving technique that you are missing here? Do you have a favorite activity or method you use when facilitating? Let us know in the comments below, we’d love to hear from you! 

thank you very much for these excellent techniques

Certainly wonderful article, very detailed. Shared!

Your list of techniques for problem solving can be helpfully extended by adding TRIZ to the list of techniques. TRIZ has 40 problem solving techniques derived from methods inventros and patent holders used to get new patents. About 10-12 are general approaches. many organization sponsor classes in TRIZ that are used to solve business problems or general organiztational problems. You can take a look at TRIZ and dwonload a free internet booklet to see if you feel it shound be included per your selection process.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Going from a mere idea to a workshop that delivers results for your clients can feel like a daunting task. In this piece, we will shine a light on all the work behind the scenes and help you learn how to plan a workshop from start to finish. On a good day, facilitation can feel like effortless magic, but that is mostly the result of backstage work, foresight, and a lot of careful planning. Read on to learn a step-by-step approach to breaking the process of planning a workshop into small, manageable chunks.  The flow starts with the first meeting with a client to define the purposes of a workshop.…

How does learning work? A clever 9-year-old once told me: “I know I am learning something new when I am surprised.” The science of adult learning tells us that, in order to learn new skills (which, unsurprisingly, is harder for adults to do than kids) grown-ups need to first get into a specific headspace.  In a business, this approach is often employed in a training session where employees learn new skills or work on professional development. But how do you ensure your training is effective? In this guide, we'll explore how to create an effective training session plan and run engaging training sessions. As team leader, project manager, or consultant,…

Facilitation is more and more recognized as a key component of work, as employers and society are faced with bigger and more complex problems and ideas. From facilitating meetings to big, multi-stakeholder strategy development workshops, the facilitator's skillset is more and more in demand. In this article, we will go through a list of the best online facilitation resources, including newsletters, podcasts, communities, and 10 free toolkits you can bookmark and read to upskill and improve your facilitation practice. When designing activities and workshops, you'll probably start by using templates and methods you are familiar with. Soon enough, you'll need to expand your range and look for facilitation methods and…

Design your next workshop with SessionLab

Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab

Sign up for free

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

14.3 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups

Learning objectives.

• Discuss the common components and characteristics of problems.
• Explain the five steps of the group problem-solving process.
• Describe the brainstorming and discussion that should take place before the group makes a decision.
• Compare and contrast the different decision-making techniques.
• Discuss the various influences on decision making.

Although the steps of problem solving and decision making that we will discuss next may seem obvious, we often don’t think to or choose not to use them. Instead, we start working on a problem and later realize we are lost and have to backtrack. I’m sure we’ve all reached a point in a project or task and had the “OK, now what?” moment. I’ve recently taken up some carpentry projects as a functional hobby, and I have developed a great respect for the importance of advanced planning. It’s frustrating to get to a crucial point in building or fixing something only to realize that you have to unscrew a support board that you already screwed in, have to drive back to the hardware store to get something that you didn’t think to get earlier, or have to completely start over. In this section, we will discuss the group problem-solving process, methods of decision making, and influences on these processes.

Group Problem Solving

The problem-solving process involves thoughts, discussions, actions, and decisions that occur from the first consideration of a problematic situation to the goal. The problems that groups face are varied, but some common problems include budgeting funds, raising funds, planning events, addressing customer or citizen complaints, creating or adapting products or services to fit needs, supporting members, and raising awareness about issues or causes.

Problems of all sorts have three common components (Adams & Galanes, 2009):

• An undesirable situation. When conditions are desirable, there isn’t a problem.
• A desired situation. Even though it may only be a vague idea, there is a drive to better the undesirable situation. The vague idea may develop into a more precise goal that can be achieved, although solutions are not yet generated.
• Obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation. These are things that stand in the way between the current situation and the group’s goal of addressing it. This component of a problem requires the most work, and it is the part where decision making occurs. Some examples of obstacles include limited funding, resources, personnel, time, or information. Obstacles can also take the form of people who are working against the group, including people resistant to change or people who disagree.

Discussion of these three elements of a problem helps the group tailor its problem-solving process, as each problem will vary. While these three general elements are present in each problem, the group should also address specific characteristics of the problem. Five common and important characteristics to consider are task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in problem, group member familiarity with problem, and the need for solution acceptance (Adams & Galanes, 2009).

• Task difficulty. Difficult tasks are also typically more complex. Groups should be prepared to spend time researching and discussing a difficult and complex task in order to develop a shared foundational knowledge. This typically requires individual work outside of the group and frequent group meetings to share information.
• Number of possible solutions. There are usually multiple ways to solve a problem or complete a task, but some problems have more potential solutions than others. Figuring out how to prepare a beach house for an approaching hurricane is fairly complex and difficult, but there are still a limited number of things to do—for example, taping and boarding up windows; turning off water, electricity, and gas; trimming trees; and securing loose outside objects. Other problems may be more creatively based. For example, designing a new restaurant may entail using some standard solutions but could also entail many different types of innovation with layout and design.
• Group member interest in problem. When group members are interested in the problem, they will be more engaged with the problem-solving process and invested in finding a quality solution. Groups with high interest in and knowledge about the problem may want more freedom to develop and implement solutions, while groups with low interest may prefer a leader who provides structure and direction.
• Group familiarity with problem. Some groups encounter a problem regularly, while other problems are more unique or unexpected. A family who has lived in hurricane alley for decades probably has a better idea of how to prepare its house for a hurricane than does a family that just recently moved from the Midwest. Many groups that rely on funding have to revisit a budget every year, and in recent years, groups have had to get more creative with budgets as funding has been cut in nearly every sector. When group members aren’t familiar with a problem, they will need to do background research on what similar groups have done and may also need to bring in outside experts.
• Need for solution acceptance. In this step, groups must consider how many people the decision will affect and how much “buy-in” from others the group needs in order for their solution to be successfully implemented. Some small groups have many stakeholders on whom the success of a solution depends. Other groups are answerable only to themselves. When a small group is planning on building a new park in a crowded neighborhood or implementing a new policy in a large business, it can be very difficult to develop solutions that will be accepted by all. In such cases, groups will want to poll those who will be affected by the solution and may want to do a pilot implementation to see how people react. Imposing an excellent solution that doesn’t have buy-in from stakeholders can still lead to failure.

Group problem solving can be a confusing puzzle unless it is approached systematically.

Muness Castle – Problem Solving – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Group Problem-Solving Process

There are several variations of similar problem-solving models based on US American scholar John Dewey’s reflective thinking process (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). As you read through the steps in the process, think about how you can apply what we learned regarding the general and specific elements of problems. Some of the following steps are straightforward, and they are things we would logically do when faced with a problem. However, taking a deliberate and systematic approach to problem solving has been shown to benefit group functioning and performance. A deliberate approach is especially beneficial for groups that do not have an established history of working together and will only be able to meet occasionally. Although a group should attend to each step of the process, group leaders or other group members who facilitate problem solving should be cautious not to dogmatically follow each element of the process or force a group along. Such a lack of flexibility could limit group member input and negatively affect the group’s cohesion and climate.

Step 1: Define the Problem

Define the problem by considering the three elements shared by every problem: the current undesirable situation, the goal or more desirable situation, and obstacles in the way (Adams & Galanes, 2009). At this stage, group members share what they know about the current situation, without proposing solutions or evaluating the information. Here are some good questions to ask during this stage: What is the current difficulty? How did we come to know that the difficulty exists? Who/what is involved? Why is it meaningful/urgent/important? What have the effects been so far? What, if any, elements of the difficulty require clarification? At the end of this stage, the group should be able to compose a single sentence that summarizes the problem called a problem statement . Avoid wording in the problem statement or question that hints at potential solutions. A small group formed to investigate ethical violations of city officials could use the following problem statement: “Our state does not currently have a mechanism for citizens to report suspected ethical violations by city officials.”

Step 2: Analyze the Problem

During this step a group should analyze the problem and the group’s relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the “what” related to the problem, this step focuses on the “why.” At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty. Group members may also want to begin setting out an agenda or timeline for the group’s problem-solving process, looking forward to the other steps. To fully analyze the problem, the group can discuss the five common problem variables discussed before. Here are two examples of questions that the group formed to address ethics violations might ask: Why doesn’t our city have an ethics reporting mechanism? Do cities of similar size have such a mechanism? Once the problem has been analyzed, the group can pose a problem question that will guide the group as it generates possible solutions. “How can citizens report suspected ethical violations of city officials and how will such reports be processed and addressed?” As you can see, the problem question is more complex than the problem statement, since the group has moved on to more in-depth discussion of the problem during step 2.

Step 3: Generate Possible Solutions

During this step, group members generate possible solutions to the problem. Again, solutions should not be evaluated at this point, only proposed and clarified. The question should be what could we do to address this problem, not what should we do to address it. It is perfectly OK for a group member to question another person’s idea by asking something like “What do you mean?” or “Could you explain your reasoning more?” Discussions at this stage may reveal a need to return to previous steps to better define or more fully analyze a problem. Since many problems are multifaceted, it is necessary for group members to generate solutions for each part of the problem separately, making sure to have multiple solutions for each part. Stopping the solution-generating process prematurely can lead to groupthink. For the problem question previously posed, the group would need to generate solutions for all three parts of the problem included in the question. Possible solutions for the first part of the problem (How can citizens report ethical violations?) may include “online reporting system, e-mail, in-person, anonymously, on-the-record,” and so on. Possible solutions for the second part of the problem (How will reports be processed?) may include “daily by a newly appointed ethics officer, weekly by a nonpartisan nongovernment employee,” and so on. Possible solutions for the third part of the problem (How will reports be addressed?) may include “by a newly appointed ethics commission, by the accused’s supervisor, by the city manager,” and so on.

Step 4: Evaluate Solutions

During this step, solutions can be critically evaluated based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Once the potential solutions have been narrowed based on more obvious differences in relevance and/or merit, the group should analyze each solution based on its potential effects—especially negative effects. Groups that are required to report the rationale for their decision or whose decisions may be subject to public scrutiny would be wise to make a set list of criteria for evaluating each solution. Additionally, solutions can be evaluated based on how well they fit with the group’s charge and the abilities of the group. To do this, group members may ask, “Does this solution live up to the original purpose or mission of the group?” and “Can the solution actually be implemented with our current resources and connections?” and “How will this solution be supported, funded, enforced, and assessed?” Secondary tensions and substantive conflict, two concepts discussed earlier, emerge during this step of problem solving, and group members will need to employ effective critical thinking and listening skills.

Decision making is part of the larger process of problem solving and it plays a prominent role in this step. While there are several fairly similar models for problem solving, there are many varied decision-making techniques that groups can use. For example, to narrow the list of proposed solutions, group members may decide by majority vote, by weighing the pros and cons, or by discussing them until a consensus is reached. There are also more complex decision-making models like the “six hats method,” which we will discuss later. Once the final decision is reached, the group leader or facilitator should confirm that the group is in agreement. It may be beneficial to let the group break for a while or even to delay the final decision until a later meeting to allow people time to evaluate it outside of the group context.

Step 5: Implement and Assess the Solution

Implementing the solution requires some advanced planning, and it should not be rushed unless the group is operating under strict time restraints or delay may lead to some kind of harm. Although some solutions can be implemented immediately, others may take days, months, or years. As was noted earlier, it may be beneficial for groups to poll those who will be affected by the solution as to their opinion of it or even to do a pilot test to observe the effectiveness of the solution and how people react to it. Before implementation, groups should also determine how and when they would assess the effectiveness of the solution by asking, “How will we know if the solution is working or not?” Since solution assessment will vary based on whether or not the group is disbanded, groups should also consider the following questions: If the group disbands after implementation, who will be responsible for assessing the solution? If the solution fails, will the same group reconvene or will a new group be formed?

Once a solution has been reached and the group has the “green light” to implement it, it should proceed deliberately and cautiously, making sure to consider possible consequences and address them as needed.

Jocko Benoit – Prodigal Light – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Certain elements of the solution may need to be delegated out to various people inside and outside the group. Group members may also be assigned to implement a particular part of the solution based on their role in the decision making or because it connects to their area of expertise. Likewise, group members may be tasked with publicizing the solution or “selling” it to a particular group of stakeholders. Last, the group should consider its future. In some cases, the group will get to decide if it will stay together and continue working on other tasks or if it will disband. In other cases, outside forces determine the group’s fate.

“Getting Competent”

Problem Solving and Group Presentations

Giving a group presentation requires that individual group members and the group as a whole solve many problems and make many decisions. Although having more people involved in a presentation increases logistical difficulties and has the potential to create more conflict, a well-prepared and well-delivered group presentation can be more engaging and effective than a typical presentation. The main problems facing a group giving a presentation are (1) dividing responsibilities, (2) coordinating schedules and time management, and (3) working out the logistics of the presentation delivery.

In terms of dividing responsibilities, assigning individual work at the first meeting and then trying to fit it all together before the presentation (which is what many college students do when faced with a group project) is not the recommended method. Integrating content and visual aids created by several different people into a seamless final product takes time and effort, and the person “stuck” with this job at the end usually ends up developing some resentment toward his or her group members. While it’s OK for group members to do work independently outside of group meetings, spend time working together to help set up some standards for content and formatting expectations that will help make later integration of work easier. Taking the time to complete one part of the presentation together can help set those standards for later individual work. Discuss the roles that various group members will play openly so there isn’t role confusion. There could be one point person for keeping track of the group’s progress and schedule, one point person for communication, one point person for content integration, one point person for visual aids, and so on. Each person shouldn’t do all that work on his or her own but help focus the group’s attention on his or her specific area during group meetings (Stanton, 2009).

Scheduling group meetings is one of the most challenging problems groups face, given people’s busy lives. From the beginning, it should be clearly communicated that the group needs to spend considerable time in face-to-face meetings, and group members should know that they may have to make an occasional sacrifice to attend. Especially important is the commitment to scheduling time to rehearse the presentation. Consider creating a contract of group guidelines that includes expectations for meeting attendance to increase group members’ commitment.

Group presentations require members to navigate many logistics of their presentation. While it may be easier for a group to assign each member to create a five-minute segment and then transition from one person to the next, this is definitely not the most engaging method. Creating a master presentation and then assigning individual speakers creates a more fluid and dynamic presentation and allows everyone to become familiar with the content, which can help if a person doesn’t show up to present and during the question-and-answer section. Once the content of the presentation is complete, figure out introductions, transitions, visual aids, and the use of time and space (Stanton, 2012). In terms of introductions, figure out if one person will introduce all the speakers at the beginning, if speakers will introduce themselves at the beginning, or if introductions will occur as the presentation progresses. In terms of transitions, make sure each person has included in his or her speaking notes when presentation duties switch from one person to the next. Visual aids have the potential to cause hiccups in a group presentation if they aren’t fluidly integrated. Practicing with visual aids and having one person control them may help prevent this. Know how long your presentation is and know how you’re going to use the space. Presenters should know how long the whole presentation should be and how long each of their segments should be so that everyone can share the responsibility of keeping time. Also consider the size and layout of the presentation space. You don’t want presenters huddled in a corner until it’s their turn to speak or trapped behind furniture when their turn comes around.

• Of the three main problems facing group presenters, which do you think is the most challenging and why?
• Why do you think people tasked with a group presentation (especially students) prefer to divide the parts up and have members work on them independently before coming back together and integrating each part? What problems emerge from this method? In what ways might developing a master presentation and then assigning parts to different speakers be better than the more divided method? What are the drawbacks to the master presentation method?

Decision Making in Groups

We all engage in personal decision making daily, and we all know that some decisions are more difficult than others. When we make decisions in groups, we face some challenges that we do not face in our personal decision making, but we also stand to benefit from some advantages of group decision making (Napier & Gershenfeld, 2004). Group decision making can appear fair and democratic but really only be a gesture that covers up the fact that certain group members or the group leader have already decided. Group decision making also takes more time than individual decisions and can be burdensome if some group members do not do their assigned work, divert the group with self-centered or unproductive role behaviors, or miss meetings. Conversely, though, group decisions are often more informed, since all group members develop a shared understanding of a problem through discussion and debate. The shared understanding may also be more complex and deep than what an individual would develop, because the group members are exposed to a variety of viewpoints that can broaden their own perspectives. Group decisions also benefit from synergy, one of the key advantages of group communication that we discussed earlier. Most groups do not use a specific method of decision making, perhaps thinking that they’ll work things out as they go. This can lead to unequal participation, social loafing, premature decisions, prolonged discussion, and a host of other negative consequences. So in this section we will learn some practices that will prepare us for good decision making and some specific techniques we can use to help us reach a final decision.

Brainstorming before Decision Making

Before groups can make a decision, they need to generate possible solutions to their problem. The most commonly used method is brainstorming, although most people don’t follow the recommended steps of brainstorming. As you’ll recall, brainstorming refers to the quick generation of ideas free of evaluation. The originator of the term brainstorming said the following four rules must be followed for the technique to be effective (Osborn, 1959):

• Evaluation of ideas is forbidden.
• Wild and crazy ideas are encouraged.
• Quantity of ideas, not quality, is the goal.
• New combinations of ideas presented are encouraged.

To make brainstorming more of a decision-making method rather than an idea-generating method, group communication scholars have suggested additional steps that precede and follow brainstorming (Cragan & Wright, 1991).

• Do a warm-up brainstorming session. Some people are more apprehensive about publicly communicating their ideas than others are, and a warm-up session can help ease apprehension and prime group members for task-related idea generation. The warm-up can be initiated by anyone in the group and should only go on for a few minutes. To get things started, a person could ask, “If our group formed a band, what would we be called?” or “What other purposes could a mailbox serve?” In the previous examples, the first warm up gets the group’s more abstract creative juices flowing, while the second focuses more on practical and concrete ideas.
• Do the actual brainstorming session. This session shouldn’t last more than thirty minutes and should follow the four rules of brainstorming mentioned previously. To ensure that the fourth rule is realized, the facilitator could encourage people to piggyback off each other’s ideas.
• Eliminate duplicate ideas. After the brainstorming session is over, group members can eliminate (without evaluating) ideas that are the same or very similar.
• Clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. Before evaluation, see if any ideas need clarification. Then try to theme or group ideas together in some orderly fashion. Since “wild and crazy” ideas are encouraged, some suggestions may need clarification. If it becomes clear that there isn’t really a foundation to an idea and that it is too vague or abstract and can’t be clarified, it may be eliminated. As a caution though, it may be wise to not throw out off-the-wall ideas that are hard to categorize and to instead put them in a miscellaneous or “wild and crazy” category.

Discussion before Decision Making

The nominal group technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members (Delbecq & Ven de Ven, 1971). This method is useful because the procedure involves all group members systematically, which fixes the problem of uneven participation during discussions. Since everyone contributes to the discussion, this method can also help reduce instances of social loafing. To use the nominal group technique, do the following:

• Silently and individually list ideas.
• Create a master list of ideas.
• Clarify ideas as needed.
• Take a secret vote to rank group members’ acceptance of ideas.

During the first step, have group members work quietly, in the same space, to write down every idea they have to address the task or problem they face. This shouldn’t take more than twenty minutes. Whoever is facilitating the discussion should remind group members to use brainstorming techniques, which means they shouldn’t evaluate ideas as they are generated. Ask group members to remain silent once they’ve finished their list so they do not distract others.

During the second step, the facilitator goes around the group in a consistent order asking each person to share one idea at a time. As the idea is shared, the facilitator records it on a master list that everyone can see. Keep track of how many times each idea comes up, as that could be an idea that warrants more discussion. Continue this process until all the ideas have been shared. As a note to facilitators, some group members may begin to edit their list or self-censor when asked to provide one of their ideas. To limit a person’s apprehension with sharing his or her ideas and to ensure that each idea is shared, I have asked group members to exchange lists with someone else so they can share ideas from the list they receive without fear of being personally judged.

During step three, the facilitator should note that group members can now ask for clarification on ideas on the master list. Do not let this discussion stray into evaluation of ideas. To help avoid an unnecessarily long discussion, it may be useful to go from one person to the next to ask which ideas need clarifying and then go to the originator(s) of the idea in question for clarification.

During the fourth step, members use a voting ballot to rank the acceptability of the ideas on the master list. If the list is long, you may ask group members to rank only their top five or so choices. The facilitator then takes up the secret ballots and reviews them in a random order, noting the rankings of each idea. Ideally, the highest ranked idea can then be discussed and decided on. The nominal group technique does not carry a group all the way through to the point of decision; rather, it sets the group up for a roundtable discussion or use of some other method to evaluate the merits of the top ideas.

Specific Decision-Making Techniques

Some decision-making techniques involve determining a course of action based on the level of agreement among the group members. These methods include majority, expert, authority, and consensus rule. Table 14.1 “Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques” reviews the pros and cons of each of these methods.

Majority rule is a simple method of decision making based on voting. In most cases a majority is considered half plus one.

Becky McCray – Voting – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Majority rule is a commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before a decision is made. A show-of-hands vote, a paper ballot, or an electronic voting system can determine the majority choice. Many decision-making bodies, including the US House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court, use majority rule to make decisions, which shows that it is often associated with democratic decision making, since each person gets one vote and each vote counts equally. Of course, other individuals and mediated messages can influence a person’s vote, but since the voting power is spread out over all group members, it is not easy for one person or party to take control of the decision-making process. In some cases—for example, to override a presidential veto or to amend the constitution—a super majority of two-thirds may be required to make a decision.

Minority rule is a decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members. When a designated expert makes a decision by minority rule, there may be buy-in from others in the group, especially if the members of the group didn’t have relevant knowledge or expertise. When a designated authority makes decisions, buy-in will vary based on group members’ level of respect for the authority. For example, decisions made by an elected authority may be more accepted by those who elected him or her than by those who didn’t. As with majority rule, this technique can be time saving. Unlike majority rule, one person or party can have control over the decision-making process. This type of decision making is more similar to that used by monarchs and dictators. An obvious negative consequence of this method is that the needs or wants of one person can override the needs and wants of the majority. A minority deciding for the majority has led to negative consequences throughout history. The white Afrikaner minority that ruled South Africa for decades instituted apartheid, which was a system of racial segregation that disenfranchised and oppressed the majority population. The quality of the decision and its fairness really depends on the designated expert or authority.

Consensus rule is a decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision. On rare occasions, a decision may be ideal for all group members, which can lead to unanimous agreement without further debate and discussion. Although this can be positive, be cautious that this isn’t a sign of groupthink. More typically, consensus is reached only after lengthy discussion. On the plus side, consensus often leads to high-quality decisions due to the time and effort it takes to get everyone in agreement. Group members are also more likely to be committed to the decision because of their investment in reaching it. On the negative side, the ultimate decision is often one that all group members can live with but not one that’s ideal for all members. Additionally, the process of arriving at consensus also includes conflict, as people debate ideas and negotiate the interpersonal tensions that may result.

Table 14.1 Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques

“Getting Critical”

Six Hats Method of Decision Making

Edward de Bono developed the Six Hats method of thinking in the late 1980s, and it has since become a regular feature in decision-making training in business and professional contexts (de Bono, 1985). The method’s popularity lies in its ability to help people get out of habitual ways of thinking and to allow group members to play different roles and see a problem or decision from multiple points of view. The basic idea is that each of the six hats represents a different way of thinking, and when we figuratively switch hats, we switch the way we think. The hats and their style of thinking are as follows:

• White hat. Objective—focuses on seeking information such as data and facts and then processes that information in a neutral way.
• Red hat. Emotional—uses intuition, gut reactions, and feelings to judge information and suggestions.
• Black hat. Negative—focuses on potential risks, points out possibilities for failure, and evaluates information cautiously and defensively.
• Yellow hat. Positive—is optimistic about suggestions and future outcomes, gives constructive and positive feedback, points out benefits and advantages.
• Green hat. Creative—tries to generate new ideas and solutions, thinks “outside the box.”
• Blue hat. Philosophical—uses metacommunication to organize and reflect on the thinking and communication taking place in the group, facilitates who wears what hat and when group members change hats.

Specific sequences or combinations of hats can be used to encourage strategic thinking. For example, the group leader may start off wearing the Blue Hat and suggest that the group start their decision-making process with some “White Hat thinking” in order to process through facts and other available information. During this stage, the group could also process through what other groups have done when faced with a similar problem. Then the leader could begin an evaluation sequence starting with two minutes of “Yellow Hat thinking” to identify potential positive outcomes, then “Black Hat thinking” to allow group members to express reservations about ideas and point out potential problems, then “Red Hat thinking” to get people’s gut reactions to the previous discussion, then “Green Hat thinking” to identify other possible solutions that are more tailored to the group’s situation or completely new approaches. At the end of a sequence, the Blue Hat would want to summarize what was said and begin a new sequence. To successfully use this method, the person wearing the Blue Hat should be familiar with different sequences and plan some of the thinking patterns ahead of time based on the problem and the group members. Each round of thinking should be limited to a certain time frame (two to five minutes) to keep the discussion moving.

• This decision-making method has been praised because it allows group members to “switch gears” in their thinking and allows for role playing, which lets people express ideas more freely. How can this help enhance critical thinking? Which combination of hats do you think would be best for a critical thinking sequence?
• What combinations of hats might be useful if the leader wanted to break the larger group up into pairs and why? For example, what kind of thinking would result from putting Yellow and Red together, Black and White together, or Red and White together, and so on?
• Based on your preferred ways of thinking and your personality, which hat would be the best fit for you? Which would be the most challenging? Why?

Influences on Decision Making

Many factors influence the decision-making process. For example, how might a group’s independence or access to resources affect the decisions they make? What potential advantages and disadvantages come with decisions made by groups that are more or less similar in terms of personality and cultural identities? In this section, we will explore how situational, personality, and cultural influences affect decision making in groups.

Situational Influences on Decision Making

A group’s situational context affects decision making. One key situational element is the degree of freedom that the group has to make its own decisions, secure its own resources, and initiate its own actions. Some groups have to go through multiple approval processes before they can do anything, while others are self-directed, self-governing, and self-sustaining. Another situational influence is uncertainty. In general, groups deal with more uncertainty in decision making than do individuals because of the increased number of variables that comes with adding more people to a situation. Individual group members can’t know what other group members are thinking, whether or not they are doing their work, and how committed they are to the group. So the size of a group is a powerful situational influence, as it adds to uncertainty and complicates communication.

Access to information also influences a group. First, the nature of the group’s task or problem affects its ability to get information. Group members can more easily make decisions about a problem when other groups have similarly experienced it. Even if the problem is complex and serious, the group can learn from other situations and apply what it learns. Second, the group must have access to flows of information. Access to archives, electronic databases, and individuals with relevant experience is necessary to obtain any relevant information about similar problems or to do research on a new or unique problem. In this regard, group members’ formal and information network connections also become important situational influences.

The urgency of a decision can have a major influence on the decision-making process. As a situation becomes more urgent, it requires more specific decision-making methods and types of communication.

Judith E. Bell – Urgent – CC BY-SA 2.0.

The origin and urgency of a problem are also situational factors that influence decision making. In terms of origin, problems usually occur in one of four ways:

• Something goes wrong. Group members must decide how to fix or stop something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that half of the building is contaminated with mold and must be closed down.
• Expectations change or increase. Group members must innovate more efficient or effective ways of doing something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that the district they are responsible for is being expanded.
• Something goes wrong and expectations change or increase. Group members must fix/stop and become more efficient/effective. Example—the firehouse crew has to close half the building and must start responding to more calls due to the expanding district.
• The problem existed from the beginning. Group members must go back to the origins of the situation and walk through and analyze the steps again to decide what can be done differently. Example—a firehouse crew has consistently had to work with minimal resources in terms of building space and firefighting tools.

In each of the cases, the need for a decision may be more or less urgent depending on how badly something is going wrong, how high the expectations have been raised, or the degree to which people are fed up with a broken system. Decisions must be made in situations ranging from crisis level to mundane.

Personality Influences on Decision Making

A long-studied typology of value orientations that affect decision making consists of the following types of decision maker: the economic, the aesthetic, the theoretical, the social, the political, and the religious (Spranger, 1928).

• The economic decision maker makes decisions based on what is practical and useful.
• The aesthetic decision maker makes decisions based on form and harmony, desiring a solution that is elegant and in sync with the surroundings.
• The theoretical decision maker wants to discover the truth through rationality.
• The social decision maker emphasizes the personal impact of a decision and sympathizes with those who may be affected by it.
• The political decision maker is interested in power and influence and views people and/or property as divided into groups that have different value.
• The religious decision maker seeks to identify with a larger purpose, works to unify others under that goal, and commits to a viewpoint, often denying one side and being dedicated to the other.

In the United States, economic, political, and theoretical decision making tend to be more prevalent decision-making orientations, which likely corresponds to the individualistic cultural orientation with its emphasis on competition and efficiency. But situational context, as we discussed before, can also influence our decision making.

Personality affects decision making. For example, “economic” decision makers decide based on what is practical and useful.

One Way Stock – Tough Decisions Ahead – CC BY-ND 2.0.

The personalities of group members, especially leaders and other active members, affect the climate of the group. Group member personalities can be categorized based on where they fall on a continuum anchored by the following descriptors: dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional (Cragan & Wright, 1999). The more group members there are in any extreme of these categories, the more likely that the group climate will also shift to resemble those characteristics.

• Dominant versus submissive. Group members that are more dominant act more independently and directly, initiate conversations, take up more space, make more direct eye contact, seek leadership positions, and take control over decision-making processes. More submissive members are reserved, contribute to the group only when asked to, avoid eye contact, and leave their personal needs and thoughts unvoiced or give into the suggestions of others.
• Friendly versus unfriendly. Group members on the friendly side of the continuum find a balance between talking and listening, don’t try to win at the expense of other group members, are flexible but not weak, and value democratic decision making. Unfriendly group members are disagreeable, indifferent, withdrawn, and selfish, which leads them to either not invest in decision making or direct it in their own interest rather than in the interest of the group.
• Instrumental versus emotional. Instrumental group members are emotionally neutral, objective, analytical, task-oriented, and committed followers, which leads them to work hard and contribute to the group’s decision making as long as it is orderly and follows agreed-on rules. Emotional group members are creative, playful, independent, unpredictable, and expressive, which leads them to make rash decisions, resist group norms or decision-making structures, and switch often from relational to task focus.

Cultural Context and Decision Making

Just like neighborhoods, schools, and countries, small groups vary in terms of their degree of similarity and difference. Demographic changes in the United States and increases in technology that can bring different people together make it more likely that we will be interacting in more and more heterogeneous groups (Allen, 2011). Some small groups are more homogenous, meaning the members are more similar, and some are more heterogeneous, meaning the members are more different. Diversity and difference within groups has advantages and disadvantages. In terms of advantages, research finds that, in general, groups that are culturally heterogeneous have better overall performance than more homogenous groups (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999). Additionally, when group members have time to get to know each other and competently communicate across their differences, the advantages of diversity include better decision making due to different perspectives (Thomas, 1999). Unfortunately, groups often operate under time constraints and other pressures that make the possibility for intercultural dialogue and understanding difficult. The main disadvantage of heterogeneous groups is the possibility for conflict, but given that all groups experience conflict, this isn’t solely due to the presence of diversity. We will now look more specifically at how some of the cultural value orientations we’ve learned about already in this book can play out in groups with international diversity and how domestic diversity in terms of demographics can also influence group decision making.

International Diversity in Group Interactions

Cultural value orientations such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles all manifest on a continuum of communication behaviors and can influence group decision making. Group members from individualistic cultures are more likely to value task-oriented, efficient, and direct communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as dividing up tasks into individual projects before collaboration begins and then openly debating ideas during discussion and decision making. Additionally, people from cultures that value individualism are more likely to openly express dissent from a decision, essentially expressing their disagreement with the group. Group members from collectivistic cultures are more likely to value relationships over the task at hand. Because of this, they also tend to value conformity and face-saving (often indirect) communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as establishing norms that include periods of socializing to build relationships before task-oriented communication like negotiations begin or norms that limit public disagreement in favor of more indirect communication that doesn’t challenge the face of other group members or the group’s leader. In a group composed of people from a collectivistic culture, each member would likely play harmonizing roles, looking for signs of conflict and resolving them before they become public.

Power distance can also affect group interactions. Some cultures rank higher on power-distance scales, meaning they value hierarchy, make decisions based on status, and believe that people have a set place in society that is fairly unchangeable. Group members from high-power-distance cultures would likely appreciate a strong designated leader who exhibits a more directive leadership style and prefer groups in which members have clear and assigned roles. In a group that is homogenous in terms of having a high-power-distance orientation, members with higher status would be able to openly provide information, and those with lower status may not provide information unless a higher status member explicitly seeks it from them. Low-power-distance cultures do not place as much value and meaning on status and believe that all group members can participate in decision making. Group members from low-power-distance cultures would likely freely speak their mind during a group meeting and prefer a participative leadership style.

How much meaning is conveyed through the context surrounding verbal communication can also affect group communication. Some cultures have a high-context communication style in which much of the meaning in an interaction is conveyed through context such as nonverbal cues and silence. Group members from high-context cultures may avoid saying something directly, assuming that other group members will understand the intended meaning even if the message is indirect. So if someone disagrees with a proposed course of action, he or she may say, “Let’s discuss this tomorrow,” and mean, “I don’t think we should do this.” Such indirect communication is also a face-saving strategy that is common in collectivistic cultures. Other cultures have a low-context communication style that places more importance on the meaning conveyed through words than through context or nonverbal cues. Group members from low-context cultures often say what they mean and mean what they say. For example, if someone doesn’t like an idea, they might say, “I think we should consider more options. This one doesn’t seem like the best we can do.”

In any of these cases, an individual from one culture operating in a group with people of a different cultural orientation could adapt to the expectations of the host culture, especially if that person possesses a high degree of intercultural communication competence (ICC). Additionally, people with high ICC can also adapt to a group member with a different cultural orientation than the host culture. Even though these cultural orientations connect to values that affect our communication in fairly consistent ways, individuals may exhibit different communication behaviors depending on their own individual communication style and the situation.

Domestic Diversity and Group Communication

While it is becoming more likely that we will interact in small groups with international diversity, we are guaranteed to interact in groups that are diverse in terms of the cultural identities found within a single country or the subcultures found within a larger cultural group.

Gender stereotypes sometimes influence the roles that people play within a group. For example, the stereotype that women are more nurturing than men may lead group members (both male and female) to expect that women will play the role of supporters or harmonizers within the group. Since women have primarily performed secretarial work since the 1900s, it may also be expected that women will play the role of recorder. In both of these cases, stereotypical notions of gender place women in roles that are typically not as valued in group communication. The opposite is true for men. In terms of leadership, despite notable exceptions, research shows that men fill an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of leadership positions. We are socialized to see certain behaviors by men as indicative of leadership abilities, even though they may not be. For example, men are often perceived to contribute more to a group because they tend to speak first when asked a question or to fill a silence and are perceived to talk more about task-related matters than relationally oriented matters. Both of these tendencies create a perception that men are more engaged with the task. Men are also socialized to be more competitive and self-congratulatory, meaning that their communication may be seen as dedicated and their behaviors seen as powerful, and that when their work isn’t noticed they will be more likely to make it known to the group rather than take silent credit. Even though we know that the relational elements of a group are crucial for success, even in high-performance teams, that work is not as valued in our society as the task-related work.

Despite the fact that some communication patterns and behaviors related to our typical (and stereotypical) gender socialization affect how we interact in and form perceptions of others in groups, the differences in group communication that used to be attributed to gender in early group communication research seem to be diminishing. This is likely due to the changing organizational cultures from which much group work emerges, which have now had more than sixty years to adjust to women in the workplace. It is also due to a more nuanced understanding of gender-based research, which doesn’t take a stereotypical view from the beginning as many of the early male researchers did. Now, instead of biological sex being assumed as a factor that creates inherent communication differences, group communication scholars see that men and women both exhibit a range of behaviors that are more or less feminine or masculine. It is these gendered behaviors, and not a person’s gender, that seem to have more of an influence on perceptions of group communication. Interestingly, group interactions are still masculinist in that male and female group members prefer a more masculine communication style for task leaders and that both males and females in this role are more likely to adapt to a more masculine communication style. Conversely, men who take on social-emotional leadership behaviors adopt a more feminine communication style. In short, it seems that although masculine communication traits are more often associated with high status positions in groups, both men and women adapt to this expectation and are evaluated similarly (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

Other demographic categories are also influential in group communication and decision making. In general, group members have an easier time communicating when they are more similar than different in terms of race and age. This ease of communication can make group work more efficient, but the homogeneity may sacrifice some creativity. As we learned earlier, groups that are diverse (e.g., they have members of different races and generations) benefit from the diversity of perspectives in terms of the quality of decision making and creativity of output.

In terms of age, for the first time since industrialization began, it is common to have three generations of people (and sometimes four) working side by side in an organizational setting. Although four generations often worked together in early factories, they were segregated based on their age group, and a hierarchy existed with older workers at the top and younger workers at the bottom. Today, however, generations interact regularly, and it is not uncommon for an older person to have a leader or supervisor who is younger than him or her (Allen, 2011). The current generations in the US workplace and consequently in work-based groups include the following:

• The Silent Generation. Born between 1925 and 1942, currently in their midsixties to mideighties, this is the smallest generation in the workforce right now, as many have retired or left for other reasons. This generation includes people who were born during the Great Depression or the early part of World War II, many of whom later fought in the Korean War (Clarke, 1970).
• The Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, currently in their late forties to midsixties, this is the largest generation in the workforce right now. Baby boomers are the most populous generation born in US history, and they are working longer than previous generations, which means they will remain the predominant force in organizations for ten to twenty more years.
• Generation X. Born between 1965 and 1981, currently in their early thirties to midforties, this generation was the first to see technology like cell phones and the Internet make its way into classrooms and our daily lives. Compared to previous generations, “Gen-Xers” are more diverse in terms of race, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation and also have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity.
• Generation Y. Born between 1982 and 2000, “Millennials” as they are also called are currently in their late teens up to about thirty years old. This generation is not as likely to remember a time without technology such as computers and cell phones. They are just starting to enter into the workforce and have been greatly affected by the economic crisis of the late 2000s, experiencing significantly high unemployment rates.

The benefits and challenges that come with diversity of group members are important to consider. Since we will all work in diverse groups, we should be prepared to address potential challenges in order to reap the benefits. Diverse groups may be wise to coordinate social interactions outside of group time in order to find common ground that can help facilitate interaction and increase group cohesion. We should be sensitive but not let sensitivity create fear of “doing something wrong” that then prevents us from having meaningful interactions. Reviewing Chapter 8 “Culture and Communication” will give you useful knowledge to help you navigate both international and domestic diversity and increase your communication competence in small groups and elsewhere.

Key Takeaways

• Every problem has common components: an undesirable situation, a desired situation, and obstacles between the undesirable and desirable situations. Every problem also has a set of characteristics that vary among problems, including task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in the problem, group familiarity with the problem, and the need for solution acceptance.

The group problem-solving process has five steps:

• Define the problem by creating a problem statement that summarizes it.
• Analyze the problem and create a problem question that can guide solution generation.
• Generate possible solutions. Possible solutions should be offered and listed without stopping to evaluate each one.
• Evaluate the solutions based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Groups should also assess the potential effects of the narrowed list of solutions.
• Implement and assess the solution. Aside from enacting the solution, groups should determine how they will know the solution is working or not.
• Before a group makes a decision, it should brainstorm possible solutions. Group communication scholars suggest that groups (1) do a warm-up brainstorming session; (2) do an actual brainstorming session in which ideas are not evaluated, wild ideas are encouraged, quantity not quality of ideas is the goal, and new combinations of ideas are encouraged; (3) eliminate duplicate ideas; and (4) clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. In order to guide the idea-generation process and invite equal participation from group members, the group may also elect to use the nominal group technique.
• Common decision-making techniques include majority rule, minority rule, and consensus rule. With majority rule, only a majority, usually one-half plus one, must agree before a decision is made. With minority rule, a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision, and the input of group members may or may not be invited or considered. With consensus rule, all members of the group must agree on the same decision.

Several factors influence the decision-making process:

• Situational factors include the degree of freedom a group has to make its own decisions, the level of uncertainty facing the group and its task, the size of the group, the group’s access to information, and the origin and urgency of the problem.
• Personality influences on decision making include a person’s value orientation (economic, aesthetic, theoretical, political, or religious), and personality traits (dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional).
• Cultural influences on decision making include the heterogeneity or homogeneity of the group makeup; cultural values and characteristics such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles; and gender and age differences.
• Scenario 1. Task difficulty is high, number of possible solutions is high, group interest in problem is high, group familiarity with problem is low, and need for solution acceptance is high.
• Scenario 2. Task difficulty is low, number of possible solutions is low, group interest in problem is low, group familiarity with problem is high, and need for solution acceptance is low.
• Scenario 1: Academic. A professor asks his or her class to decide whether the final exam should be an in-class or take-home exam.
• Scenario 2: Professional. A group of coworkers must decide which person from their department to nominate for a company-wide award.
• Scenario 3: Personal. A family needs to decide how to divide the belongings and estate of a deceased family member who did not leave a will.
• Scenario 4: Civic. A local branch of a political party needs to decide what five key issues it wants to include in the national party’s platform.
• Group communication researchers have found that heterogeneous groups (composed of diverse members) have advantages over homogenous (more similar) groups. Discuss a group situation you have been in where diversity enhanced your and/or the group’s experience.

Adams, K., and Gloria G. Galanes, Communicating in Groups: Applications and Skills , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 220–21.

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 5.

Bormann, E. G., and Nancy C. Bormann, Effective Small Group Communication , 4th ed. (Santa Rosa, CA: Burgess CA, 1988), 112–13.

Clarke, G., “The Silent Generation Revisited,” Time, June 29, 1970, 46.

Cragan, J. F., and David W. Wright, Communication in Small Group Discussions: An Integrated Approach , 3rd ed. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1991), 77–78.

de Bono, E., Six Thinking Hats (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1985).

Delbecq, A. L., and Andrew H. Ven de Ven, “A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 7, no. 4 (1971): 466–92.

Haslett, B. B., and Jenn Ruebush, “What Differences Do Individual Differences in Groups Make?: The Effects of Individuals, Culture, and Group Composition,” in The Handbook of Group Communication Theory and Research , ed. Lawrence R. Frey (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999), 133.

Napier, R. W., and Matti K. Gershenfeld, Groups: Theory and Experience , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2004), 292.

Osborn, A. F., Applied Imagination (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959).

Spranger, E., Types of Men (New York: Steckert, 1928).

Stanton, C., “How to Deliver Group Presentations: The Unified Team Approach,” Six Minutes Speaking and Presentation Skills , November 3, 2009, accessed August 28, 2012, http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/group-presentations-unified-team-approach .

Thomas, D. C., “Cultural Diversity and Work Group Effectiveness: An Experimental Study,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 30, no. 2 (1999): 242–63.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, facilitating problem‐solving groups: facilitator competences.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal

ISSN : 0143-7739

Article publication date: 1 April 1998

Group and team meetings are important organisational processes. These teams, therefore, should be managed and supported appropriately in order to produce effective outcomes. One method of undertaking this is to use skilled and competent facilitators. Facilitators not only support the meeting process but they should also be actively involved before and after the meeting has taken place in order to help develop objectives, timescales, agendas and so on. It is important, therefore, that organisations either train their own facilitators or employ external facilitators with the necessary and appropriate competences. This paper describes what competences may be required by a facilitator and how these can be used effectively.

• Competences
• Facilitators
• Problem solving

Nelson, T. and McFadzean, E. (1998), "Facilitating problem‐solving groups: facilitator competences", Leadership & Organization Development Journal , Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 72-82. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739810208647

Copyright © 1998, MCB UP Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

4.2 Public Relations Roles

In general, public relations professionals can be communication managers who organize and integrate communication activities, or they can be communication technicians who primarily write and construct messages. Research in this area led to the identification of four specific roles: the technician role and three types of communication managers.

Most practitioners begin their careers as communication technicians Entry-level public relations professionals who are not generally involved in defining and solving problems. They manage communications through writing, placing, and producing communication messages such as news releases, Web site content, speeches, and social media messaging. . This role requires executing strategies with the communication tactics of news releases, employee newsletters, position papers, media placements, Web site content, speeches, blogs, and social media messaging. Practitioners in this role are usually not involved in defining problems and developing solutions, but base their tactics on the technical skill of writing. The expert prescriber A public relations professional expert in a particular industry, problem, or type of public relations. is similar to the role a doctor performs with a patient: He or she is an authority on a particular industry, problem, or type of public relations and is given the primary responsibility to handle this function as a consultant or with little input or participation by other senior management. The communication facilitator A public relations professional who listens to and brokers information between an organization and its key publics. is a boundary spanner who listens to and brokers information between the organization and its key publics. According to Cutlip, Center, and Broom, the goal of this role is “to provide both management and publics the information they need for making decisions of mutual interest.” Cutlip, Center, and Broom (2006). The problem-solving facilitator A public relations professional who collaborates with other managers to define and solve problems. This individual helps managers to work through problems from a public relations perspective. collaborates with other managers to define and solve problems. This role requires that the professional is a part of the dominant coalition of the organization and has access to other senior managers. The problem-solving facilitator helps other managers think through organizational problems using a public relations perspective.

Research on these four roles found that the communication technician role was distinct from the other three roles and that the latter three roles were highly correlated. Dozier and Broom (1995), pp. 3–26. In other words, an expert prescriber was also likely to fulfill the role of the communication facilitator and the problem-solving facilitator. To resolve the lack of mutual exclusiveness in the latter three roles, they were combined into one role: communication manager A public relations professional whose combined role is that of an expert prescriber, a communication facilitator, and a problem-solving facilitator. . The dichotomy between the communication technician and the communication manager more accurately explained the responsibilities of public relations practitioners within organizations.

Research indicates that practitioners in a predominantly technician role spend the majority of their time writing, producing, and placing communication messages. Broom and Dozier (1986), pp. 37–56. Typically, those in this role are creative and talented with language and images. Their capacity to create and produce messages with powerful imagery and evocative language is very important to the execution of public relations tactics. However, technicians rarely have a seat at the management table and do not have a voice in the strategy of the organization. Once the strategy is decided, the technician is brought in to execute the deliverables (or tactics) in the strategy.

The communication manager is involved in the strategic thinking of an organization and must be able to conduct research and measurement and share data that informs better decisions for managing relationships with key publics. The communications manager thinks strategically, which means he or she will be focused on the efforts of the organization that contribute to the mutually beneficial relationships that help an organization achieve its bottom-line goals. These efforts are not limited to communication strategies, but include monitoring an organization’s external environment, scanning for issues that might impact the organization, and helping an organization adapt to the needs of its stakeholders.

A study on excellence in the practice of public relations found that one of the major predictors of excellence was whether the role of the top public relations executive was a manager role or a technician role. Grunig, J. E. (1992). Those in the management role were much more likely to have a positive impact on the organization’s public relations practice. In order for corporate communication to function strategically, the executive in charge of the function must have a place at the decision-making table.