Assumption Mapping

In the story about the aspiring Dutch musician, it is clear that questioning  assumptions is a key part of dealing with difficult problems.  One way to analyse assumptions is 'Assumption Mapping', which is one of a number of ‘qualitative mapping’ techniques that can be used for dealing with difficult problems.  Its purpose is to;

1. Make you vocalize your assumptions, and hence communicate them with others.  This may create a discussion about the assumption, or prompt other less obvious assumptions to be stated.

2. Sometimes, useful information can be gained from observing the relationship between assumptions, for example certain types of assumptions may be grouped together or separated from others - why?

Knowledge about the problem can be gained by exploring the background.

Assumption Mapping begins by asking the stakeholders concerned to identify as many assumptions about the problem as they can (this may be helped by identifying the needs/conclusions/outcomes and asking  'on what assumptions are these based?').  We then map these assumptions according to;

1. The certainty of belief in the assumption.
2. The relative importance to the problem.

We then look to see what ideas or conclusions can be drawn from the mapping of the assumptions.  Usually, the most interesting quadrant is where the assumptions are thought to be important, but there is some uncertainty in this belief. 

Another approach is to think about how you could change the criteria that define the axes of the matrix (eg. how you could make it more or less important) -  and how that would affect the problem? 

A different approach may be to ask why certain stakeholders make similar (or dissimilar) assumptions.

The goal of this is to gain an insight into the problem by questioning your assumptions, and it is NOT about being logical, it is about asking unexpected questions that give you a new perspective on the problem.

New perspectives give you new insights into the problem and hence ideas about possible solutions.

Wag Dodge

In 1949, 13 fire-fighters tragically lost their lives in the Mann Gulf fire disaster.

Wag Dodge, was one of three survivors.  The story of his survival is illustrative – and not without controversy*

The fire fighters were in a blind gully when the wind changed direction and swept the fire towards them.  The flames were 20 feet high and moving faster than they could run.  They had nowhere to go, the walls of the gully were too steep.

Think about it, trapped by a fire racing towards you with nowhere to go, what would you do? An impossible problem! How would you survive?

Wag's solution was to light a fire downwind of him!!  The wind blew the flames ahead of him and left a burnt patch.  He crouched down in the burnt patch and was saved.  This practice is now included in fire fighting techniques.

I cannot say how he came to the solution, but it can be seen as a dramatic example of reframing a problem.  It seems as if, instead of thinking about how he could keep away from the fire, he thought about how to keep the fire away from himself.

Reframing a problem is to think about it in a new way, or from a new perspective in order to see something new. 

When you have a difficult problem, reframing is an essential step.


*The report of the incident can be found at http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_int/int_gtr299.pdf