Structured Problem Solving

What is the difference between Structured Problem Solving and traditional problem solving methods?

The difference is basically a difference in focus

In traditional problem solving, the focus is on the symptoms.

Traditional problem solving is a series of events:

Develop a hypothesis or theory that will explain the symptoms Develop a fix that addresses this theory Execute a small PER with this fix in place Make a design change

Structured Problem Solving focuses on the performance, specifically the difference between the best and worst performers.

In Structured Problem Solving, evidence and clues are collected in a systematic manner to ‘drill-down’ to the variable or variables that are responsible for the difference in performance. This is the RED X, the variable(s) that control the performance. In Structured Problem Solving, problem solving is a process, not an event.

Once that variable or variables have been identified, the focus changes and becomes finding methods to control the variable(s) that control performance at the level that yields the best performance.

How do we implement Structured Problem Solving?

Structured Problem Solving is a process, a journey.

There are two keys to any successful journey – a compass and a road map.

1. Your measurement system is your compass.

If your measurement system is not reliable, you will inevitably make incorrect conclusions based on your data.

2. Your strategy is your roadmap.

The strongest strategy is one that maximizes both performance differences and similarity between the best and worst performer.

Contrast is the difference between the best and worst performers Leverage is the degree of similarity between the best and worst performers

Traditional problem solving does not generally employ a strategy and does not spend much time on the measurement system.

Prepared by Mike Wicker May 23, 2014