Hypothesis-driven problem solving - Chalmers · – Concept formulated by McKinsey & Co ... 2006-01-30 Hypothesis-driven problem solving Slide 39 of 39 ... Problem solving, Soft Systems

1

Hypothesis-driven problem solving

define & refine

strategy consulting

business integration

tangible results

2006-01-30 Hypothesis-driven problem solving Slide 2 of 39

The Labyrinth Problem

• Most effective way to solve a labyrinthproblem?

• Usually to start from the goal...

• ...this is the main ideabehind hypothesis-drivenproblem solving

Start

Goal


Agenda

• Part 1: About Monator– Core business, clients...

• Part 2: Our approach to problem solving– General framework, problem solving tools, how can you use

this for your paper...

• Part 3: Our approach to HCI– Usability value context, Soft System Methodology,

Excercises...

• Part 4: Conclusions

2


Key issues

• Understand the big picture• Careful problem formulation• Starting from the end will save time


What does Monator do?

• Gothenburg-based Management and IT Consultancy firm

• Core business– Help our clients define and refine their businesses

• Areas of work1) Strategy consulting2) Business integration


Our Clients

• Growth-oriented small and midsized companies• Examples:

3

Part 2

Our approach to problem solving


A general framework

Hypothesis-driven & fact-based problem solving

1. What’s the problem?

2. What’s probably a solution?

3. Analyze facts and data behind the problem

4. Present the solution

primary focus today


1. What’s the problem?

• Identify and isolate the core problem

• MECE approach– Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive– Concept formulated by McKinsey & Co– Helps you identify non-overlapping boundaries of the

problem

• MECE for crossing a river– Mutually Exclusive: taking the bridge or the boat– Collectively Exhaustive: all valid options for crossing the river

4


Tools: Logic trees (1)

• Logic tree break down– Shows the relations between the components of

the problem

Profits

Revenues

Costs

Customers

Prices

Products

Fixed

Variable

...

...

...

...

...


Tools: Logic trees (2)

• Turn to the person next to you.

• Use the Logic trees approach to identify the components of the following problem:– Your car has stopped due to an engine failure

• Take notes of your discussions


2. What’s probably a solution?

• Suggest a hypothesis for a solution – Will help your data gathering and analysis

• Disaggregate the issues – What issues have to be fulfilled in order for the

hypothesis to be valid?

– Visualize with logic tree break downs

5


Tools: The 5 Whys method (1)

• Made popular by Toyota in the 1970s

• Helps to quickly determine the root cause of a problem

• Easy to learn and apply

• Start at the end result and work backward (toward the rootcause) continually asking ”Why?”



Problem: Unsatisfied client

1. Why is our client unhappy?- Because we did not deliver our services on time.

2. Why were we unable to meet the agreed-upon timeline?- The job took much longer than we thought.

3. Why did the job take longer?- Because we underestimated the complexity of the job.

4. Why did we underestimate the complexity of the job?- We made a quick estimate of the time needed to complete it, and did not list the individual stagesneeded to complete the project.

5. Why did we not do this?- Because we were running behind on other projects

Root cause: We need to review our time estimation and specification procedures



• Turn to the person next to you.

• Use the 5 Whys method to find the root causeto the following problem:– One of you has failed your HCI exam

• Take notes of your discussions

6


Tools: Reverse brainstorming

• Traditional brainstorming: – “How do I solve or prevent this problem”

• Reverse brainstorming: – “How can I possibly cause this problem”

• Surprisingly powerful technique

• Be sure to follow the basic “rules” of brainstorming – Allow ideas to flow freely, don’t reject anything…


3. Analyze facts and data behind the problem

• Data gathering– First decide what data is needed to prove the

hypothesis– AND what is not needed!

• Analysis– Analyze the data to prove or disprove the

hypothesis– If the facts disprove your hypothesis, change your

hypothesis


4. Present the solution

• In many cases your presentation is your solution– The value in your solution will only be extracted if

you are able to explain/sell your ideas to your client

• Tailor your presentation to your audience– What issues are critical for reaching client buy-in?

7


How can you use this for your paper?

• Choose a topic and get familiarized with the domain

• Carefully formulate your research question– Will save you time

• Find an initial hypothesis from the start– Start from the goal and disaggregate all issues– Try to build your case from start to finish before beginning to

work on your report (i.e. before splitting up the work)

• Conduct your analysis and present your ideas in your paper

Part 3

Our approach to HCI


Usability Value Contexts

8


Traditional methodology (1)

Systems Engineering

• A well-defined world

• Technology-oriented

• (Hard) Problems havedefinite solutions

• One can define specificgoals to be achieved

• But?

Where does it bite the dust?

• Soft Problems

• Hard to define

• Interaction: human(s) ↔technology


Traditional methodology (2)

Implementation brings about other problems to be solved

9. Implement option

Choice (politics, power, equity)8. Choose to implement the most relevant option

Are these feasible/achievable/within budget?7. Test these options

What would the options be like?6. Develop options

How will we know when we have achieved change?

5. Formulate measures of performance

How would we get there?4. Generate ways of meeting objectives

Where would we like to be?3. Identify objectives and constraints

Where are we now?2. Analyze existing situation and relevant systems

What needs to change?1. Define the problem

Questions to be answeredStages


Soft Systems Methodology (1)

• Focuses on planning• Incorporates people and technology• Not finding a solution to a specific problem

– Instead understanding the situation

• Several problems may exist– but we do not know which one we are interested in

until analysis has been made

• Different view per stakeholder– BUT! contradiction is not default per say

9


Soft Systems Methodology (2)

• Not for goal-oriented achievers– “goals” are seldom reached

• The objective of SSM– To provide a learning methodology to support

discussion on desirable and feasible changes of a system (and/or an organization)

• Applying SSM in HCI engineering– Establish purpose, people, constraints and

developing conceptual models of ideal system


Keywords of SSM

• Stakeholder analysis• Rich picture

– Visualizing problem expression

• Root definition (using CATWOE criteria)– Core of human activity to be modeled– Brief statement concerning an activity– Defining the “Whats”

• Conceptual model– Defining the “Hows”


Overview of SSMPossible generation of new SSM processes

(iterations)

10


SSM applied – CATWOE analysis

• Multiple uses– Consideration of elements applicable to root definition

• ”The letters”– Client (or Customer)

– Actor

– Transformation

– World view (Weltanschauung)

– Owner

– Environment

• GOAL: Find the Root Definition

Recall the definition of RD: “Core of human

activity to be modeled”


The C & A in CATWOE

Clients

• Who are the system beneficiaries

• Example (Ladok):– People taking classes at

Chalmers

Actor

• Who transform inputs to outputs

• Example:– Lecturer


The T & W in CATWOE

Transformation• The process from inputs

into outputs• Approach through the

5E’s criteria– Efficacy, Efficiency,

Effectiveness, Ethicality, Elegance

• Example:– Take exam records and

turn into knowledge of students of Chalmers

World view• The perspective from

which a root definition is formed

• Example:– Efficient management of

students info is vital for the success of the school

11


The O & E in CATWOE

Owner

• The person(s) who has commissioned the system (and with power of veto)

• Example:– The Head Master of

Chalmers

Environment

• The need(s) to be considered/factors affecting the environment.

• Example:– Applicable laws and

regulations on information storage and privacy


Concluding schematic example

• A system is owned by O

• To do W by A

• By means of T

• Given the contraints of E

• In order to achieve x for C

Optional home assignment: Develop critics of earlier shown example


Exercises – Problem Solving & SSM

First exercise– Objective:

• Using Hypothesis-based problem solving & CATWOE analysis to do a preliminary study of a system solution

– Preferable prerequisites:• Lecture notes

Second exercise– Objective:

• Using 1st exercise’s case to find parameters influencingsystem usability

– More info to come…

12

Part 4

Conclusions


What we have talked about today

• Understand the big picture• Careful problem formulation• Starting from the end will save time

Thanks for listening!

Good luck with your papers & exam

Questions?

For more information about Monator please visit http://www.monator.com

13


Extras – Example of a root definition: CRM

Organizational definition

A professionally manned system in a small or medium-sizedcompany which enables the company to manage and enhance customer relations in order to facilitate long-termbusiness success

CRM Software System definition

A software system which holdsrelevant information, supports the coordination of business processes and enables CRM performance management in order to company professionalswithin sales, support and general management to effciently perform activitiesrelated to customer relations.


Extras – The 5E’s framework

• Efficacy– Do the means work to justify the ends?

• Efficiency– Are essential resources being considered?

• Effectiveness– Does the T help the realization of longer term goals related

to the O’s potential?

• Ethicality– Is T a proper thing to do?

• Elegance– Is T aesthetically pleasing?


Extras – Conceptual model

• Describes and specifies– The major design metaphors and analogies

employed in the design, if any

– The concepts the system exposes to users

– The relationships between these concepts

– The mappings between the concept and the task-domain the system is designed to support

(Adapted from Johnson & Henderson)

Documents

Hypothesis-driven problem solving - Chalmers · – Concept formulated by McKinsey & Co ... 2006-01-30 Hypothesis-driven problem solving Slide 39 of 39 ... Problem solving, Soft Systems