Ralph Bana, credited with many innovations in the travel and leisure industry, was quoted during an interview with the industry magazine Tour & Travel: "I just don't come in and say "ah-hah" ! The answer relates to clearly defining what the problem is, forcing yourself to write it down, researching the alternatives, picking one that will ring the bell and then going out and selling it". This is great advice that could be used by any industry, government, or organisation.
When a problem is written down on a piece of paper the sentences can be analysed in a way that fuzzy concepts, wild ideas, and general waffle can be removed. So how would this work ? Let’s take an example, the National Health Service ( NHS ) in the UK are often criticised about the speed of innovation. This is a complex problem and there maybe many underlying factors but it is often heard that there is a lack of money to help speed up innovation. One attempt at writing out the problem could be:
“The NHS is slow at innovation because it doesn’t have enough money.”
The first thing to observe about the statement is that it identifies a problem: “The NHS is slow at innovation” and a solution: “it doesn’t have enough money”. Digging deeper there are three concepts that are at best unclear: “slow”, “innovation” and “enough”. Starting with “slow” it is unclear how slow is slow - is it a perception or are there some hard facts ? ( a quick web search produces no hard facts about the speed of innovation in the NHS ). Next “innovation”; another search on the web shows that there are many definitions of innovation ( around 1,980,000,000 hits ! ) and therefore scope for many experts and management consultant to debate its definition for many years ahead. Finally “enough” - how much is “enough” ? - twice the current amount, three times the current amount ? Therefore we can conclude that the stated problem, and solution, is loaded with confusion and can only lead to further confusion, and result in wasting time and money.
A better example of analysing a problem when it is written down is:
“One of the highest priorities for the NHS is the reduction of obesity which is estimated to cost £6bn per year”.
The description of the problem is clearly defined and quantified. However, it could be criticised for being at too high a level - too abstract. It could be broken down into factors that are contributing to obesity, for example: education, economic, social context, life style, public health etc. which could be quantified, and then alternative solutions explored.
Ralph Bahna was always looking for competitive advantage, which had to be “neither short-term nor flimsily opportunistic”. The technique of writing the problem out and critically analysing its content is an effective way to clear out muddled thinking. With a clear problem definition then there is a greater chance of finding a successful solution.