Stories

Tag: problem-solving

  • What is the difference between a wicked problem and a grand challenge?

    What is the difference between a wicked problem and a grand challenge?

    The management concepts of wicked problems and grand challenges are closely related but have some key distinctions:

    Similarities

    Both wicked problems and grand challenges refer to complex, systemic issues that are difficult to solve and have far-reaching societal impacts. They share several characteristics:

    • Complexity and interconnectedness with other problems
    • No clear or definitive solutions
    • Require collaborative efforts from diverse stakeholders
    • Often global or multi-regional in scope
    • Involve uncertainty and changing requirements

    Distinctions

    While closely related, there are some nuanced differences:

    Scope and framing

    • Wicked problems tend to be framed more negatively as intractable issues
    • Grand challenges are often framed more positively as ambitious goals to be tackled

    Solution approach

    • Wicked problems are seen as having no definitive solution, only better or worse approaches
    • Grand challenges imply the possibility of significant progress or breakthroughs, even if not fully “solved”

    Origin and usage

    • Wicked problems originated in social planning literature in the 1960s-70s
    • Grand challenges gained prominence more recently, especially in management literature since the 2010s

    Relationship

    Many scholars view grand challenges as a subset or reframing of wicked problems. Grand challenges can be seen as large-scale wicked problems that have been formulated into more actionable goals. The grand challenges framing aims to mobilize collaborative efforts to make progress on wicked problems, even if they cannot be fully solved.

    Both concepts highlight the need for:

    • Interdisciplinary and collaborative approaches
    • Adaptive and flexible strategies
    • Consideration of diverse stakeholder perspectives
    • Acceptance of uncertainty and continuous learning

    Understanding both wicked problems and grand challenges can help managers and policymakers develop more effective approaches to complex societal issues. The grand challenges framing, in particular, may help motivate action and innovation in addressing wicked problems that might otherwise seem insurmountable.

    References

    Daar, A.S. et al. (2018) ‘Grand challenges in humanitarian aid’, Nature, 559(7713), pp. 169–173. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05642-8.

    Gariel, C. and Bartel-Radic, A. (2024) ‘Tidying Up the Concept of Grand Challenges: A Bibliometric Analysis’, M@n@gement, 27(S1), pp. 58–79. Available at: https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.2024.8884.

    Rittel, H.W. and Webber, M.M. (1973) ‘Dilemmas in a general theory of planning’, Policy sciences, 4(2), pp. 155–169. Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/01v4t1c9.

    Image: The Geneva Learning Foundation Collection © 2025

  • Learning is in the network

    Learning is in the network

    “I knew them very well. That’s why it worked. Because we do work together.”

    We take responsibility for our own learning, yet keenly aware of the value for learning of engaging with others. It is when we find ourselves alone or isolated that we may best perceive the value of connecting with others for learning.

    One of the justifications for working in a silo is a very high level of specialization that requires being fully-focused on one’s own area of work – to the exclusion of others.

    We form networks of informal learning and collaboration in our team, with other departments in the headquarters, with the field, and with people and organizations outside the organization.

    Asking people is often faster than sifting through information.

    Technology facilitates building and sustaining small networks of trusted colleagues, large formal working groups, and more anonymous forms (mailing lists, discussion forums, etc.) that keep us connected.

    In our volatile working environment, what we know (usually thought of as content-based knowledge) is replaced with how we are connected to others. That is how we stay current and informed.

    Networks are a powerful problem-solving resource that people naturally turn to when they need help. We rely on small, trusted networks to accelerate problem-solving (learning).

    Photo: Door at base of silo (Astrid Westvang/flickr.com)

  • How do we solve problems in work?

    How do we solve problems in work?

    What do we do when we are confronted with a problem?  Problem solving begins when we encounter a new experience. We do this out of necessity, but also because we enjoy it. We also need to be able to solve problems fast. We develop our ability and willingness (including on a political level) to identify, analyze, and solve problems. We accept that tackling problems is painful. It involves risk-taking that may not be supported by the organization. Yet so much of how we learn and grow stems from such experiences.

    We know that our organization does not necessarily recognize – much less reward – uncovering problems. We need our line management and leadership to support this willingness to tackle problems. Even with supportive management and great colleagues, in many cases we are alone in confronting a problem, if only due to resource and time constraints. Yet we know that our ability to solve problems depends on the quality, depth and meaning of our connections to others.

    We strive to reframe our problems by questioning our assumptions and those of others. The way in which we frame our understanding of a problem and the degree to which we are open to re-framing that view depends on the context and the organization. Our organization’s culture and pressures, including time and resource constraints, may reinforce our reluctance to take time out to reframe, rethinking, and reconsider.

    Photo: Casse-tête (Frédérique Voisin-Demery/flickr.com)

  • What is a wicked problem?

    What is a wicked problem?

    In 1973, Horst W.J. Rittel and Melvin M. Webber, two Berkeley professors, published an article in Policy Sciences introducing the notion of “wicked” social problems. The article, “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning,” named 10 properties that distinguished wicked problems from hard but ordinary problems.

    1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem. It’s not possible to write a well-defined statement of the problem, as can be done with an ordinary problem.
    2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule. You can tell when you’ve reached a solution with an ordinary problem. With a wicked problem, the search for solutions never stops.
    3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad. Ordinary problems have solutions that can be objectively evaluated as right or wrong. Choosing a solution to a wicked problem is largely a matter of judgment.
    4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem. It’s possible to determine right away if a solution to an ordinary problem is working. But solutions to wicked problems generate unexpected consequences over time, making it difficult to measure their effectiveness.
    5. Every solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot” operation; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial and error, every attempt counts significantly. Solutions to ordinary problems can be easily tried and abandoned. With wicked problems, every implemented solution has consequences that cannot be undone.
    6. Wicked problems do not have an exhaustively describable set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan. Ordinary problems come with a limited set of potential solutions, by contrast.
    7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique. An ordinary problem belongs to a class of similar problems that are all solved in the same way. A wicked problem is substantially without precedent; experience does not help you address it.
    8. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem. While an ordinary problem is self-contained, a wicked problem is entwined with other problems. However, those problems don’t have one root cause.
    9. The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways.A wicked problem involves many stakeholders, who all will have different ideas about what the problem really is and what its causes are.
    10. The planner has no right to be wrong. Problem solvers dealing with a wicked issue are held liable for the consequences of any actions they take, because those actions will have such a large impact and are hard to justify.

    Source: Cited in HBR’s Strategy as a wicked problem (also worth a read). Rittel’s and Webber’s original paper can be found online. Photo credit: Wicked signs (Aukje Dekker/Flickr).

  • How to Solve It

    How to Solve It

    Understanding the problem

    First. You have to understand the problem.

    • What is the unknown? What are the data? What is the condition?
    • Is it possible to satisfy the condition? Is the condition sufficient to determine the unknown? Or is it insufficient? Or redundant? Or contradictory?
    • Draw a figure. Introduce suitable notation.
    • Separate the various parts of the condition. Can you write them down?

    Devising a plan

    Second. Find the connection between the data and the unknown. You may be obliged to consider auxiliary problems if an immediate connection cannot be found. You should obtain eventually a plan of the solution.

    • Have you seen it before? Or have you seen the same problem in a slightly different form?
    • Do you know a related problem? Do you know a theorem that could be useful?
    • Look at the unknown! And try to think of a familiar problem having the same or a similar unknown.
    • Here is a problem related to yours and solved before. Could you use it? Could you use its result? Could you use its method? Should you introduce some auxiliary element in order to make its use possible?
    • Could you restate the problem? Could you restate it still differently? Go back to definitions.
    • If you cannot solve the proposed problem try to solve first some related problem. Could you imagine a more accessible related problem? A more general problem? A more special problem? An analogous problem? Could you solve a part of the problem? Keep only a part of the condition, drop the other part; how far is the unknown then determined, how can it vary? Could you derive something useful from the data? Could you think of other data appropriate to determine the unknown? Could you change the unknown or data, or both if necessary, so that the new unknown and the new data are nearer to each other?
    • Did you use all the data? Did you use the whole condition? Have you taken into account all essential notions involved in the problem?

    Carrying out the plan

    Third. Carry out your plan.

    • Carrying out your plan of the solution, check each step.
    • Can you see clearly that the step is correct?
    • Can you prove that it is correct?

    Looking Back

    Fourth. Examine the solution obtained.

    • Can you check the result? Can you check the argument?
    • Can you derive the solution differently? Can you see it at a glance?
    • Can you use the result, or the method, for some other problem?

    Summary taken from G. Polya, “How to Solve It”, 2nd ed., Princeton University Press, 1957, ISBN 0–691–08097–6.