Problem Solving - The Value of Uncertainty

Should organisations avoid uncertainty? 

Usually, organisations manage their affairs in order to minimise uncertainty.  Shareholders and potential investors dislike it as it leads to uncertain returns and uncertain returns mean lower value.  It is tempting to think that organisations would be more effective if they could avoid all risk and uncertainty, especially since people naturally dislike uncertainty.

Unfortunately, we have no control over events.

Military campaigns were often planned in minute detail; every contingency was taken into account in order to eliminate uncertainty.  But modern warfare no longer enables conflicts to be planned in such detail.  Campaigns have strategic objectives, but the nature of asymmetric warfare means that day to day events are impossible to predict.  So there is little point in training officers in standardized tactics, they need to be able to interpret events and react accordingly.

I read a story about an organisation that was planning a complex reorganisation.  A senior executive distributed a handout of his presentation, but the pages were in complete disorder.  Everybody was confused, “what order are these supposed to be in?” they asked.  His reply was that ‘he did not know’.  He knew roughly what needed to be done, but he could not predict every eventuality – they needed to be able to react to events as they went along.  They would only know the right order when the task was completed.

Not only should we not avoid uncertainty, we should embrace it. It makes us better at dealing with problems.

Intuitive Problem Solving

Are there situations where the deliberative, reasoned approach to problem solving fails?

Michael Yon wrote a blog that covered the US Army activities in Iraq.  In August 2005, he wrote an entry that described Lt Colonel Kurilla’s apparent extrasensory ability to spot insurgents from amongst the din and bustle of urban Mosul:

“Some months back, a new lieutenant named Brian Flynn was riding with the Kurilla for his first three weeks, when Kurilla spotted three men walking adjacent to where Major Mark Bieger and his Stryker had been hit with a car bomb a week prior. The three men looked suspicious to Kurilla, whose legendary sense about people is so keen that his soldiers call it the “Deuce Sixth-Sense.” His read on people and situations is so uncanny it borders the bizarre.
 
That day, Kurilla sensed “wrong” and told his soldiers to check the three men. As the Stryker dropped its ramp, one of the terrorists pulled a pistol from under his shirt.”

Did Lt Colonel Kurilla have a unique talent?   It seems not. 

US Army officer training has traditionally been based upon ‘rational analysis’.  Whereas in the field, they are engaged in volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environments and they need to be able to evaluate and respond to critical situations under extreme pressure.  These are situations where there isn’t time to deliberate or to ask for advice - they rely on their intuition.  The US Army has since instigated a programme to improve junior officer’s intuitive capability. (report)

Organisations tend to rely on ‘rational’ problem solving processes because it is ‘logical’ - but some problems are qualitative rather than quantitative, and need a different approach.  We have other problem solving capabilities apart from our reason. 

We need to be bold enough to trust in them.