Recognizing You Have an Opportunity

Some time ago, I wrote a post about “Admitting You Have a Problem” in which I pointed to a number of flaws with mischaracterizing problems as opportunities.   From the feedback I’ve received, it seems that the opposite (mischaracterizing opportunities as problems) is far more pervasive.  While I mentioned this issue in the original post, it was in the nature of an afterthought and the matter deserves a bit more attention.

I do think that the same litmus test can be applied – i.e., if the current situation can perpetuate, then it is an opportunity rather than a problem.   And in either case, the solution is to properly identify whether a situation is a problem or an opportunity, prioritize it appropriately, and use the correct decision-making process to solve or pursue it.   But because the panic-mongers and manipulators can be so tenacious in attempting to mislead others into treating opportunities as if they were problems, some thinking on countermeasures is in order.

The first countermeasure is to apply that litmus test.   Ask “and what happens if we don’t take action?”   If the answer is “nothing” or “nothing serious” then the problem can justly be reframed as an opportunity and a more leisurely and broad-minded approach to pursuing it can be taken.

Naturally, the panic-monger will heap on additional conditions that would cause the situation to degrade – “What if [x] also occurs?”  The solution to that is simply to make them do their homework.  Refuse to consider the disaster scenario until they provide solid evidence that it will occur, and return to a more sane approach to addressing the actual issues.  (Of course, if they can provide evidence of a high probability that the additional conditions will exist, then accept the notion that it should be treated as a problem – though in that instance the answer is to address the condition.)

A second countermeasure is to insist that the panic-monger do some homework.   As them to find out what the root cause of the problem is, and back their analysis with solid information. People who are obsessed with problems are often merely complaining and don’t have a sense of what their desired outcome will be, other than seeing a reaction to their panic.   They also tend to be quite intellectually lazy: they want to get others to take action to solve the problem they have pointed out.    They may need assistance to discover the cause of the problem, but very often the investigation process will result in discovering that the scope of the problem is much less than claimed.

This leads to the third countermeasure, which is to understand the scope and impact of the problem.   Again, the irrationality and laziness of the panic-monger is such that they have failed to consider whether the problem is worth solving.  At any moment, there are innumerable problems and opportunities – why should this one take precedence over others?   Serious problems must be addressed, but trivial ones can be abided.

Finally, it must be said that these measures should not be undertaken to discourage people from mentioning problems – that would be dangerous and inadvisable.  But those who constantly seek to interrupt operations and spin up panic must be coached to be more deliberate in the identification and analysis of situations so that the problems can be understood and prioritized appropriately.

Ultimately, the goal is the same: to correctly distinguish problems from opportunities, prioritize them appropriately, and apply the proper tools and techniques to acting upon them.

Admitting You Have a Problem

I have a problem with people who have problems admitting that there is a problem.  Specifically, these sorts attempt to foster false optimism by reframing every problem as an opportunity.   I have some understanding of the psychologyof self-deception, and can appreciate that fear and panic can be paralytic, but thinking clearly requires seeing things as they are.  The practice of reframing every problem as an opportunity is dysfunctional, as it leads to clouded judgment, misguided thinking, and ultimately to poor performance.

The litmus test for whether something is a problem or an opportunity is simply this: is the situation acceptable as it is?    If the situation is acceptable, then there is an opportunity for improvement.    If the situation is unacceptable, then you have a problem and solving it is critical.   A company that is taking a loss on its daily operations does not have an opportunity to improve its profitability – it has a problem that, if left unchecked, will lead inexorably to bankruptcy.

Another dysfunction of the “everything is an opportunity” mindset is that opportunities do not have a specific solution.  A company with an opportunity to improve profitability may pursue this goal in many ways: expand markets to gain economies of scale, increase the price of its products, automate to decrease labor costs, and so on.   A problem can be diagnosed more specifically, to discover that the reason the company is not profitable is because of the high volume of returns due to product defects – and the cause of those defects can be investigated to discover a specific course of action that can be taken to remedy the problem.

If the problem is reframed as an opportunity and another course of action is undertaken, the problem does not go away – and it may in fact become worse.  If there is a problem with product defects, then expanding markets is not going to solve it: the number of returns will scale in proportion to the volume of sales, and the losses will increase.  The only way to solve the problem is to attack its cause, and so long as the cause is ignored it will remain.   In this sense, doing the wrong thing is even worse than doing nothing at all.

That’s not to say that this misidentification is always optimistic.  Manipulative people often portray opportunities as problems to panic others to take action where no action is necessary, or to make their desires seem more critical than they are.   In the same example, a company that is operating profitably, or even at break-even, does not have a problem because it can persist indefinitely with its present practices – so any change with the potential to improve profitability is an opportunity, not a problem, and may be pursued at leisure in any number of ways.

So in the end, whether it’s misidentifying problems as opportunities or opportunities as problems, the remedy is to know the difference and act accordingly.

Critical Thinking and Creativity

I've been reading a primer on critical thinking, which has been both edifying and frustrating.  It's been enlightening in taking as a structured approach to a habitual process, and getting back to basics has helped to identify some of the steps I've routinely skipped and unproductive patterns I've fallen into as a matter of convenience.

It's also been frustrating in the realization of how seldom rational thought actually factors into decisions: how often reason is abandoned or patterns of thought follow obvious fallacies, based on superficial (if any) consideration - to take, sometimes after great deliberation, a route that is more convenient, more familiar, and more efficient rather than seeking an effective solution to a problem.

Likely this is immediately heading in the direction of a cranky disillusioned rant about how decisions that consume obscene amounts of resources and affect untold lives are made with very little valid thought, which was not my original intent, but if it were not so there would be little point in suggesting that a structured approach to decision-making was at all beneficial.

Yet the more I try to approach the topic for a positive angle, the more I find myself reminded of instances in which a rational process of thought was not merely neglected, but intentionally rejected in favor of gut-feel instinct, emotionalism, or social pressure.

It's particularly problematic in user experience, where the suggestion of presenting the customer with a straightforward and logical process is overwhelmed by knee-jerk reaction, the whim of a silverback, or the sense that reason is inapplicable because "people don't think," only to be replaced by a sloppy and obviously flawed alternative that is in the long-term best interest of neither the customer nor the firm.

I'm not having much luck at the moment in silencing my inner pessimist, and apathy is setting in with a vengeance, so I'll need to end this rumination, likely before it's started in earnest, and make a note to return to it when I'm in a better frame of mind.    Ironic, is it not?