How Do You Know if You Have Added Enough Drying Agent
Reprint: R1209F The rigor with which a problem is defined is the most important cistron in finding a good solution. Many organizations, withal, are not proficient at articulating their bug and identifying which ones are crucial to their strategies. They may even be trying to solve the wrong bug—missing opportunities and wasting resources in the process. The central is to ask the right questions. The author describes a process that his house, InnoCentive, has used to aid clients ascertain and clear concern, technical, social, and policy challenges and so present them to an online customs of more than 250,000 solvers. The iv-stride process consists of asking a series of questions and using the answers to create a problem statement that volition elicit novel ideas from an array of experts. EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a nonprofit arrangement, used this process to find a low-price, lightweight, and convenient production that expands access to make clean drinking water in the developing globe.
"If I were given one hour to salvage the planet, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and ane minute resolving it," Albert Einstein said.
Those were wise words, but from what I have observed, most organizations don't listen them when tackling innovation projects. Indeed, when developing new products, processes, or even businesses, most companies aren't sufficiently rigorous in defining the problems they're attempting to solve and articulating why those issues are important. Without that rigor, organizations miss opportunities, waste material resources, and terminate up pursuing innovation initiatives that aren't aligned with their strategies. How many times have y'all seen a project go downwardly i path only to realize in hindsight that it should have gone down another? How many times have you lot seen an innovation programme deliver a seemingly breakthrough result only to notice that it can't be implemented or it addresses the wrong trouble? Many organizations demand to become meliorate at asking the correct questions so that they tackle the right issues.
I offer hither a process for defining problems that any organisation can employ on its own. My firm, InnoCentive, has used it to help more than than 100 corporations, government agencies, and foundations improve the quality and efficiency of their innovation efforts and, every bit a upshot, their overall functioning. Through this process, which nosotros phone call challenge-driven innovation, clients define and articulate their business, technical, social, and policy issues and present them every bit challenges to a community of more than 250,000 solvers—scientists, engineers, and other experts who hail from 200 countries—on InnoCentive.com, our innovation market. Successful solvers take earned awards of $5,000 to $1 one thousand thousand.
Since our launch, more 10 years agone, we take managed more than two,000 problems and solved more half of them—a much college proportion than most organizations achieve on their own. Indeed, our success rates accept improved dramatically over the years (34% in 2006, 39% in 2009, and 57% in 2011), which is a function of the increasing quality of the questions we pose and of our solver customs. Interestingly, even unsolved bug have been tremendously valuable to many clients, allowing them to cancel sick-fated programs much earlier than they otherwise would accept and so redeploy their resources.
In our early years, we focused on highly specific technical problems, but we accept since expanded, taking on everything from basic R&D and product evolution to the health and safety of astronauts to banking services in developing countries. We now know that the rigor with which a problem is defined is the nigh important cistron in finding a suitable solution. Merely we've seen that most organizations are not proficient at articulating their bug clearly and concisely. Many have considerable difficulty even identifying which problems are crucial to their missions and strategies.
In fact, many clients have realized while working with the states that they may not exist tackling the correct issues. Consider a company that engages InnoCentive to find a lubricant for its manufacturing mechanism. This commutation ensues:
InnoCentive staffer: "Why practice y'all demand the lubricant?"
Client's engineer: "Because we're now expecting our mechanism to do things it was non designed to do, and it needs a particular lubricant to operate."
InnoCentive staffer: "Why don't you supervene upon the machinery?"
Client'due south engineer: "Because no one makes equipment that exactly fits our needs."
This raises a deeper question: Does the visitor need the lubricant, or does it need a new mode to make its product? It could be that rethinking the manufacturing process would give the firm a new basis for competitive advantage. (Asking questions until you go to the root cause of a problem draws from the famous V Whys problem-solving technique developed at Toyota and employed in Six Sigma.)
The example is similar many we've seen: Someone in the bowels of the system is assigned to fix a very specific, virtually-term problem. Simply because the firm doesn't employ a rigorous process for understanding the dimensions of the problem, leaders miss an opportunity to address underlying strategic issues. The situation is exacerbated past what Stefan Thomke and Donald Reinertsen accept identified as the fallacy of "The sooner the project is started, the sooner it will be finished." (Encounter "Half dozen Myths of Product Development," HBR May 2012.) Organizational teams speed toward a solution, fearing that if they spend too much time defining the problem, their superiors will punish them for taking then long to get to the starting line.
Ironically, that approach is more probable to waste product time and money and reduce the odds of success than 1 that strives at the outset to achieve an in-depth understanding of the trouble and its importance to the firm. With this in mind, we developed a four-footstep process for defining and articulating bug, which we have honed with our clients. It consists of asking a serial of questions and using the answers to create a thorough problem statement. This procedure is important for two reasons. Start, information technology rallies the organization around a shared understanding of the problem, why the firm should tackle it, and the level of resources it should receive. Firms that don't appoint in this procedure frequently allocate too few resources to solving major problems or too many to solving low-priority or wrongly defined ones. It's useful to assign a value to the solution: An system will be more willing to devote considerable time and resources to an endeavour that is shown to represent a $100 million marketplace opportunity than to an initiative whose value is much less or is unclear. 2d, the process helps an organization cast the widest possible net for potential solutions, giving internal and external experts in disparate fields the information they demand to cleft the problem.
This article also appears in:
To illustrate how the process works, we'll describe an initiative to expand access to clean drinking water undertaken by the nonprofit EnterpriseWorks/VITA, a division of Relief International. EWV'due south mission is to foster economical growth and enhance the standard of living in developing countries by expanding access to technologies and helping entrepreneurs build sustainable businesses.
The organization chose Jon Naugle, its technical managing director, as the initiative's "problem champion." Individuals in this office should have a deep agreement of the field or domain and be capable program administrators. Because problem champions may also be charged with implementing solutions, a proven leader with the authority, responsibility, and resource to see the project through can be invaluable in this role, particularly for a larger and more strategic undertaking. Naugle, an engineer with more than 25 years of agronomical and rural-development experience in East and West Africa and the Caribbean, fit the pecker. He was supported by specialists who understood local marketplace conditions, available materials, and other critical issues related to the delivery of drinking water.
Step one: Constitute the Demand for a Solution
The purpose of this step is to clear the trouble in the simplest terms possible: "We are looking for 10 in social club to achieve Z as measured by Due west." Such a statement, alike to an elevator pitch, is a call to arms that clarifies the importance of the issue and helps secure resources to accost it. This initial framing answers three questions:
What is the basic demand?
This is the essential trouble, stated conspicuously and concisely. It is important at this stage to focus on the need that's at the heart of the trouble instead of jumping to a solution. Defining the telescopic is as well important. Clearly, looking for lubricant for a slice of machinery is dissimilar from seeking a radically new manufacturing process.
The bones need EWV identified was admission to clean drinking water for the estimated 1.1 billion people in the world who lack it. This is a pressing event fifty-fifty in areas that have plenty of rainfall, because the water is not effectively captured, stored, and distributed.
What is the desired outcome?
Answering this question requires agreement the perspectives of customers and other beneficiaries. (The V Whys approach can be very helpful.) Again, avoid the temptation to favor a detail solution or approach. This question should be addressed qualitatively and quantitatively whenever possible. A high-level just specific goal, such as "improving fuel efficiency to 100 mpg past 2020," can be helpful at this phase.
In answering this question, Naugle and his team realized that the outcome had to be more than than admission to water; the access had to be convenient. Women and children in countries such every bit Republic of uganda often must walk long distances to fetch h2o from valleys then comport information technology uphill to their villages. The desired upshot EWV divers was to provide water for daily family unit needs without requiring enormous expenditures of time and energy.
Who stands to do good and why?
Answering this question compels an organization to identify all potential customers and beneficiaries. It is at this stage that you lot empathise whether, say, you are solving a lubricant problem for the engineer or for the head of manufacturing—whose definitions of success may vary considerably.
If the problem you want to solve is industrywide, it's crucial to understand why the market has failed to address information technology.
By pondering this question, EWV came to run across that the benefits would accumulate to individuals and families as well as to regions and countries. Women would spend less time walking to retrieve water, giving them more time for working in the field or in exterior employment that would bring their families needed income. Children would be able to attend school. And over the longer term, regions and countries would benefit from the improved education and productivity of the population.
Step 2: Justify the Need
The purpose of answering the questions in this step is to explicate why your arrangement should endeavor to solve the problem.
Is the effort aligned with our strategy?
In other words, will satisfying the need serve the system's strategic goals? It is not unusual for an organization to be working on bug that are no longer in sync with its strategy or mission. In that case, the effort (and perhaps the whole initiative) should be reconsidered.
In the example of EWV, just improving access to clean drinking water wouldn't exist plenty; to fit the organization'southward mission, the solution should generate economic development and opportunities for local businesses. It needed to involve something that people would buy.
In addition, you lot should consider whether the problem fits with your firm's priorities. Since EWV's other projects included providing admission to affordable products such as cookstoves and treadle pumps, the drinking water projection was advisable.
What are the desired benefits for the company, and how volition we mensurate them?
In for-profit companies, the desired benefit could be to achieve a revenue target, reach a sure market share, or achieve specific cycle-time improvements. EWV hoped to further its goal of existence a recognized leader in helping the earth's poor by transferring technology through the individual sector. That benefit would be measured past market affect: How many families are paying for the solution? How is information technology affecting their lives? Are sales and installation creating jobs? Given the potential benefits, EWV deemed the priority to exist loftier.
How volition we ensure that a solution is implemented?
Assume that a solution is institute. Someone in the organization must be responsible for carrying it out—whether that means installing a new manufacturing technology, launching a new business concern, or commercializing a product innovation. That person could be the trouble champion, simply he or she could also exist the manager of an existing division, a cross-functional squad, or a new department.
At EWV, Jon Naugle was also put in charge of carrying out the solution. In add-on to his technical groundwork, Naugle had a track record of successfully implementing like projects. For instance, he had served equally EWV'southward land director in Niger, where he oversaw a component of a World Bank pilot project to promote pocket-size-scale private irrigation. His part of the projection involved getting the private sector to manufacture treadle pumps and manually drill wells.
It is important at this stage to initiate a high-level conversation in the organization nigh the resources a solution might crave. This can seem premature—after all, you're still defining the problem, and the field of possible solutions could exist very large—but it's actually not too early to begin exploring what resources your organization is willing and able to devote to evaluating solutions then implementing the best one. Even at the outset, y'all may have an inkling that implementing a solution will be much more than expensive than others in the organization realize. In that example, it'southward important to communicate a rough judge of the money and people that will exist required and to make sure that the organisation is willing to go on down this path. The outcome of such a discussion might exist that some constraints on resourcing must be built into the problem statement. Early on in its drinking water project, EWV ready a cap on how much it would devote to initial research and the testing of possible solutions.
At present that you have laid out the need for a solution and its importance to the organization, you must define the problem in particular. This involves applying a rigorous method to ensure that you lot have captured all the data that someone—including people in fields far removed from your industry—might need to solve the trouble.
Footstep 3: Contextualize the Problem
Examining by efforts to find a solution tin relieve time and resource and generate highly innovative thinking. If the problem is industrywide, it'south crucial to sympathize why the market has failed to accost it.
What approaches accept we tried?
The aim here is to find solutions that might already exist in your organization and identify those that it has disproved. By answering this question, yous can avoid reinventing the wheel or going downwards a expressionless stop.
In previous efforts to expand access to make clean water, EWV had offered products and services ranging from manually drilled wells for irrigation to filters for household water treatment. As with all its projects, EWV identified products that low-income consumers could beget and, if possible, that local entrepreneurs could industry or service. As Naugle and his team revisited those efforts, they realized that both solutions worked only if a water source, such as surface water or a shallow aquifer, was close to the household. As a upshot, they decided to focus on rainwater—which falls everywhere in the world to a greater or bottom extent—as a source that could reach many more people. More specifically, the team turned its attention to the concept of rainwater harvesting. "Rainwater is delivered direct to the end user," Naugle says. "Information technology's as close as you can become to a piped water system without having a piped water supply."
What have others tried?
EWV's investigation of previous attempts at rainwater harvesting involved reviewing research on the topic, conducting five field studies, and surveying 20 countries to ask what technology was being used, what was and was not working, what prevented or encouraged the use of diverse solutions, how much the solutions cost, and what function government played.
"One of the key things nosotros learned from the surveys," Naugle says, "was that once you have a difficult roof—which many people practise—to use equally a drove surface, the about expensive thing is storage."
Hither was the trouble that needed to exist solved. EWV found that existing solutions for storing rainwater, such as concrete tanks, were also expensive for low-income families in developing countries, so households were sharing storage tanks. But because no ane took ownership of the communal facilities, they oft fell into busted. Consequently, Naugle and his team homed in on the concept of a depression-cost household rainwater-storage device.
Their research into prior solutions surfaced what seemed initially like a promising approach: storing rainwater in a 525-gallon jar that was nearly equally alpine as an developed and iii times as wide. In Thailand, they learned, 5 million of those jars had been deployed over 5 years. Subsequently farther investigation, however, they found that the jars were fabricated of cement, which was available in Thailand at a low price. More of import, the country's practiced roads made it possible to manufacture the jars in one location and transport them in trucks around the state. That solution wouldn't work in areas that had neither cement nor loftier-quality roads. Indeed, through interviews with villagers in Uganda, EWV plant that even empty polyethylene barrels large enough to agree only l gallons of water were difficult to carry along a path. It became clear that a viable storage solution had to exist light enough to be carried some distance in areas without roads.
What are the internal and external constraints on implementing a solution?
Now that y'all accept a better idea of what you want to reach, it's time to revisit the issue of resource and organizational commitment: Do you have the necessary support for soliciting and so evaluating possible solutions? Are you sure that you can obtain the money and the people to implement the most promising one?
External constraints are merely every bit of import to evaluate: Are there issues concerning patents or intellectual-property rights? Are at that place laws and regulations to be considered? Answering these questions may crave consultation with various stakeholders and experts.
Do you accept the necessary back up for soliciting and evaluating possible solutions? Exercise you have the money and the people to implement the most promising ane?
EWV'due south exploration of possible external constraints included examining government policies regarding rainwater storage. Naugle and his team plant that the governments of Republic of kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam supported the idea, merely the strongest proponent was Uganda'south minister of water and the environment, Maria Mutagamba. Consequently, EWV decided to exam the storage solution in Uganda.
Pace iv: Write the Trouble Statement
Now it'due south time to write a full description of the problem you're seeking to solve and the requirements the solution must run into. The problem statement, which captures all that the organization has learned through answering the questions in the previous steps, helps establish a consensus on what a feasible solution would be and what resources would exist required to achieve it.
A total, clear description also helps people both within and exterior the organization chop-chop grasp the issue. This is particularly important because solutions to circuitous problems in an industry or bailiwick often come from experts in other fields (encounter "Getting Unusual Suspects to Solve R&D Puzzles," HBR May 2007). For case, the method for moving sticky oil from spills in Arctic and subarctic waters from collection barges to disposal tanks came from a chemist in the cement industry, who responded to the Oil Spill Recovery Establish's description of the problem in terms that were precise but not specific to the petroleum industry. Thus the institute was able to solve in a affair of months a challenge that had stumped petroleum engineers for years. (To read the institute's full trouble statement, visit hbr.org/trouble-statement1.)
Hither are some questions that can aid you develop a thorough trouble argument:
Is the trouble actually many problems?
The aim hither is to drill down to root causes. Complex, seemingly insoluble problems are much more than approachable when broken into discrete elements.
For EWV, this meant making it clear that the solution needed to be a storage product that individual households could afford, that was lite enough to exist easily transported on poor-quality roads or paths, and that could exist easily maintained.
What requirements must a solution meet?
EWV conducted extensive on-the-ground surveys with potential customers in Republic of uganda to identify the must-have versus the prissy-to-have elements of a solution. (See the sidebar "Elements of a Successful Solution.") It didn't matter to EWV whether the solution was a new device or an adaptation of an existing i. As well, the solution didn't need to exist i that could be mass-produced. That is, it could exist something that local small-calibration entrepreneurs could industry.
Experts in rainwater harvesting told Naugle and his team that their target toll of $xx was unachievable, which meant that subsidies would be required. But a subsidized product was against EWV's strategy and philosophy.
Which problem solvers should nosotros engage?
The dead end EWV hit in seeking a $20 solution from those experts led the organization to conclude that it needed to enlist as many experts exterior the field as possible. That is when EWV decided to engage InnoCentive and its network of 250,000 solvers.
What data and linguistic communication should the trouble statement include?
To engage the largest number of solvers from the widest diversity of fields, a problem statement must run into the twin goals of existence extremely specific but not unnecessarily technical. It shouldn't contain industry or discipline jargon or presuppose knowledge of a particular field. Information technology may (and probably should) include a summary of previous solution attempts and detailed requirements.
With those criteria in mind, Naugle and his squad crafted a problem argument. (The following is the abstruse; for the total problem statement, visit hbr.org/problem-statement2.) "EnterpriseWorks is seeking design ideas for a low-cost rainwater storage system that can be installed in households in developing countries. The solution is expected to facilitate admission to clean water at a household level, addressing a problem that affects millions of people worldwide who are living in impoverished communities or rural areas where access to clean water is limited. Domestic rainwater harvesting is a proven technology that can be a valuable selection for accessing and storing h2o year round. Nevertheless, the loftier price of available rainwater storage systems makes them well across the accomplish of low-income families to install in their homes. A solution to this trouble would non only provide convenient and affordable access to scarce water resources but would also allow families, particularly the women and children who are unremarkably tasked with water collection, to spend less fourth dimension walking distances to collect h2o and more than time on activities that can bring in income and improve the quality of life."
To engage the largest number of solvers from the widest multifariousness of fields, a problem argument must meet the twin goals of being extremely specific but not unnecessarily technical.
What do solvers demand to submit?
What data about the proposed solution does your system need in order to invest in it? For example, would a well-founded hypothetical approach exist sufficient, or is a full-blown prototype needed? EWV decided that a solver had to submit a written explanation of the solution and detailed drawings.
What incentives practice solvers need?
The betoken of asking this question is to ensure that the right people are motivated to accost the trouble. For internal solvers, incentives can exist written into chore descriptions or offered equally promotions and bonuses. For external solvers, the incentive might exist a cash laurels. EWV offered to pay $15,000 to the solver who provided the best solution through the InnoCentive network.
How will solutions be evaluated and success measured?
Addressing this question forces a visitor to be explicit well-nigh how it will evaluate the solutions it receives. Clarity and transparency are crucial to arriving at viable solutions and to ensuring that the evaluation process is off-white and rigorous. In some cases a "we'll know it when we run into it" approach is reasonable—for example, when a company is looking for a new branding strategy. Most of the time, all the same, it is a sign that earlier steps in the process have non been approached with sufficient rigor.
EWV stipulated that it would evaluate solutions on their ability to meet the criteria of depression cost, high storage chapters, low weight, and easy maintenance. It added that it would prefer designs that were modular (so that the unit of measurement would be easier to transport) and adaptable or salvageable or had multiple functions (so that owners could reuse the materials after the product's lifetime or sell them to others for various applications). The overarching goal was to keep costs low and to help poor families justify the purchase.
The Winner
Ultimately, the solution to EWV's rainwater-storage problem came from someone outside the field: a German inventor whose company specialized in the design of tourist submarines. The solution he proposed required no elaborate machinery; in fact, it had no pumps or moving parts. Information technology was an established industrial applied science that had not been applied to water storage: a plastic bag within a plastic bag with a tube at the top. The outer bag (fabricated of less-expensive, woven polypropylene) provided the structure's forcefulness, while the inner bag (made of more-expensive, linear low-density polyethylene) was impermeable and could hold 125 gallons of water. The ii-bag arroyo immune the inner bag to be thinner, reducing the price of the product, while the outer bag was strong enough to incorporate a ton and a half of water.
The structure folded into a packet the size of a briefcase and weighed nearly 8 pounds. In short, the solution was affordable, commercially feasible, could be easily transported to remote areas, and could be sold and installed by local entrepreneurs. (Retailers brand from $4 to $8 per unit, depending on the volume they purchase. Installers of the gutters, downspout, and base earn nigh $6.)
EWV adult an initial version and tested information technology in Uganda, where the organization asked cease users such questions equally What do you think of its weight? Does information technology come across your needs? Even mundane issues like color came into play: The woven outer bags were white, which women pointed out would immediately await muddy. EWV modified the pattern on the ground of this input: For instance, information technology changed the color of the device to brown, expanded its size to 350 gallons (while keeping the target price of no more than $20 per 125 gallons of water storage), altered its shape to make it more stable, and replaced the original siphon with an outlet tap.
Later on fourteen months of field testing, EWV rolled out the commercial production in Republic of uganda in March 2011. By the terminate of May 2012, 50 to 60 shops, village sales agents, and cooperatives were selling the product; more than 80 entrepreneurs had been trained to install it; and ane,418 units had been deployed in 8 districts in southwestern Republic of uganda.
EWV deems this a success at this stage in the rollout. It hopes to make the units available in 10 countries—and have tens or hundreds of thousands of units installed—inside five years. Ultimately, it believes, millions of units will exist in use for a variety of applications, including household drinking water, irrigation, and construction. Interestingly, the main obstacle to getting people to purchase the device has been skepticism that something that comes in such a small-scale package (the size of a typical five-gallon jerrican) can hold the equivalent of 70 jerricans. Believing that the remedy is to show villagers the installed product, EWV is currently testing various promotion and marketing programs.As the EWV story illustrates, critically analyzing and conspicuously articulating a problem can yield highly innovative solutions. Organizations that apply these simple concepts and develop the skills and discipline to ask better questions and define their issues with more than rigor tin can create strategic reward, unlock truly groundbreaking innovation, and drive ameliorate business concern performance. Request meliorate questions delivers better results.
A version of this article appeared in the September 2012 issue of Harvard Business Review.
Source: https://hbr.org/2012/09/are-you-solving-the-right-problem
0 Response to "How Do You Know if You Have Added Enough Drying Agent"
Post a Comment