How Can Binary Decision Making Improve Your Problem Solving Effectiveness?
We challenge our problem solving classes to play “20 questions” – can we guess a randomly selected word using just 20 yes/no questions? Engineers often say it’s impossible. But, 99 out of 100 times, we find the word! How? There’s no magic: what’s on display is the power of binary decision making, what we call “splitting the dictionary”. And you can apply it to all sorts of real-world problem-solving scenarios.
“Splitting the dictionary” is a problem scoping technique of asking the right questions to eliminate as many incorrect possibilities as you can, thus focusing your root cause search in the right area. In the case of guessing a random word, it’s a binary search: “Does the word start with any of the letters A through M?” If yes, then, “Does the word start with any of the letters A through G?, etc. The quantity of possible starting letters is halved with each question. It’s certain to get the starting letter in 5 guesses (26 letters narrowed to 13, to 7, to 4,…). The word’s 2nd and 3rd letters are made easier to guess by supplementing the binary search with knowledge of the language (e.g., some letter combinations are never used, like bx).
Far too often, we’ve encountered issue resolution teams mired in complex testing or analysis. Do yourself a favor, before heading down a complicated, expensive route (e.g., a DOE, Monte Carlo Simulation, etc.) consider “What question could eliminate half (or at least a large percentage) of the potential causes?” “Is there a quick document review, analysis, or simple test that can reduce the scope of where we need to look?”
We have used this technique many times analyzing failed electrical assemblies. Consider an assembly that can be physically split between “input” and “output” sides. By taking the “input” side of the failed device and pairing it with a known-good “output” side (and vice versa), we can see in which mix-and-matched assembly the symptom persists and then focus attention there.
It’s worked for us in scoping the origination of defective parts in a manufacturing setting too, by asking, “Are there defective components coming in from our supplier?” A simple inspection can check the supply chain integrity. This separates supply chain concerns from internal manufacturing issues and allows the team to focus on one area and not both.
Effective scoping is key to efficient problem-solving. Once the problem is clearly defined, think of the root cause as a needle in a haystack. Before you start examining hay, first ask “Am I on the right farm?”, then, “Which haystack should I search?”, then “Which portion of the chosen haystack is most likely to contain the needle?” Scoping out the possibilities with a simple tool or test can radically accelerate progress toward identifying the root cause by eliminating complex, time-wasting activity.
I was struggling to get updates from my regional project management directors. Sensing my frustration at having to constantly repeat my (apparently futile) requests to the team to provide their updates consistently, my boss suggested, “If you want something done, schedule it.” He meant that if updates are needed at a specific time, actually schedule them directly on people's calendars, making the expectation and reminder "automatic" each month, and emphasizing the importance of the updates by turning them into meetings – people tend not to show up empty handed to meetings where they're expected to present. Scheduling removed a bit of "friction" and created a sense of urgency that resulted in real progress. Amazingly, they didn’t miss any updates after that point!
One of the best bits of advice I received when I first became a manager was to “delegate a task when your team member is 70% as good at it as you are, not 99%.” Many times, people are promoted to management positions because of their strong performance as individual contributors, but then they’re shocked to learn that a whole separate set of skills is required to succeed in their new role. Delegation is high on this list of new skills. Delegation means handing off tasks for someone else to do them. A common mistake is to only hand off a task when the team member is as good as you are at it. This is a trap! While it may seem like a good idea to protect the quality of the task, it doesn’t work in practice.
Don’t be fooled by the latest fad in project management, Agile. Agile is pitched as a revolutionary method, but the fact is, it simply DOES NOT GET THE RESULTS that visual waterfall approaches do. Period.
We see team after team fail using Agile methods, for very specific reasons. Let’s look at the 6 painful TRUTHs of using Agile methods. You don't need the latest fad, you need to use the best practices to manage a project to completion.
Problem-solving methods haven’t changed in over 20 years, and some methods have been around for 30-50 years without significant improvement. CAEDENCE has released a novel improvement to problem-solving that overcomes shortfalls in existing methods.
Applicable to all structured problem-solving approaches, Visual 8D™ enables teams to execute the familiar problem-solving steps (with no additional effort), while capturing plans and progress in easy-to-follow diagrams. Visual 8D™ puts teams in the position of providing answers to management and customer questions before being asked, resulting in improved control of the situation and minimizing time wasted on extraneous actions.
Being action-oriented is a good thing, right? Well, yes and no. There's a big difference between learning and adjusting quickly ("failing fast") and wasting time and resources by "rushing off half cocked".
Executives and teams alike are eager to be (and be seen) "doing something", but they often fail to recognize the distinction between 'activity' and 'progress'. As a result, they act upon the first reasonable idea that comes along. The trouble with acting on the first reasonable idea is twofold. First, there might have been much better ideas, and second, once you start working on the first idea, you stop looking for the better ones. Outcomes are often sub-optimal – problems not solved, product not launched, etc.
Want to dramatically improve your team's odds of achieving consistently strong outcomes? Next time everyone's ready to run with the first reasonable idea, set aside just 30 minutes and challenge the group with this 3-step process.
I was asked to take over the redesign project as lead engineer after a team from another site had struggled and failed to meet the financial target. The assignment came with one condition (which, in hindsight, should have been a big red flag): “Don’t let the original leader know he’s not in charge anymore, we need to keep him engaged.” If I had it to do over again, I’m quite certain we could have delivered on the goal in half the time if team leadership had been clearly defined.
Management made several fundamental errors with this team: (1) They should have recognized the original project was not on track and intervened to course-correct much sooner. (2) They should have trusted the original team leader to act professionally and contribute despite being displaced, rather than feel it necessary to deceive him. (3) They should have made the leadership responsibilities unambiguous to everyone involved.
Some years ago, a bright young engineer was assigned to my group. He was very capable, energetic, and technically sharp, but a bit “rough around the edges” when it came to dealing with people. My job was to “polish the diamond-in-the-rough”, to teach him the soft skills he would need to succeed. I provided one-on-one feedback after attending his meetings to help him see how his abrasive style was holding him back, and to offer some alternative ways of communicating that would not only get the tasks done but also nurture long-term allies who would want to help him again in the future.
While there are a lot of great leadership techniques and tips out there, it turns out there is no magic bullet that works every time for every situation. You have to apply the best practices with consistency and integrity. You have to build environments of trust and common purpose. You have to measure and check. Doing so will not guarantee success, but it will stack the deck in your favor, maximizing your chances of succeeding.
Continuous improvement in a business is not a one-time action. It comes from a series of smaller actions taken over a long period of time. Driving improvement requires steadfast attention and a drive to achieve excellence. It can take months or years to make permanent improvements and change a culture. In your projects and initiatives, are you keeping your ‘foot on the gas’ to change the long-term outcomes?
Executing an effective cost reduction initiative goes beyond simply identifying a need, communicating a dollar value, and holding workshops. Cost reduction initiatives must start with a broader review of gap areas across the entire enterprise (considering existing and acquired sites) and definition of the future state goals. Buy-in must be secured among the key stakeholders and participants. The steps and metrics needed to ensure engagement before, and accountability beyond, the initiative kickoff must be planned.
