routine problem solving strategies

How it works

Transform your enterprise with the scalable mindsets, skills, & behavior change that drive performance.

Explore how BetterUp connects to your core business systems.

We pair AI with the latest in human-centered coaching to drive powerful, lasting learning and behavior change.

Build leaders that accelerate team performance and engagement.

Unlock performance potential at scale with AI-powered curated growth journeys.

Build resilience, well-being and agility to drive performance across your entire enterprise.

Transform your business, starting with your sales leaders.

Unlock business impact from the top with executive coaching.

Foster a culture of inclusion and belonging.

Accelerate the performance and potential of your agencies and employees.

See how innovative organizations use BetterUp to build a thriving workforce.

Discover how BetterUp measurably impacts key business outcomes for organizations like yours.

A demo is the first step to transforming your business. Meet with us to develop a plan for attaining your goals.

• What is coaching?

Learn how 1:1 coaching works, who its for, and if it's right for you.

Accelerate your personal and professional growth with the expert guidance of a BetterUp Coach.

Types of Coaching

Navigate career transitions, accelerate your professional growth, and achieve your career goals with expert coaching.

Enhance your communication skills for better personal and professional relationships, with tailored coaching that focuses on your needs.

Find balance, resilience, and well-being in all areas of your life with holistic coaching designed to empower you.

Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.

Research, expert insights, and resources to develop courageous leaders within your organization.

Best practices, research, and tools to fuel individual and business growth.

View on-demand BetterUp events and learn about upcoming live discussions.

The latest insights and ideas for building a high-performing workplace.

• BetterUp Briefing

The online magazine that helps you understand tomorrow's workforce trends, today.

Innovative research featured in peer-reviewed journals, press, and more.

Founded in 2022 to deepen the understanding of the intersection of well-being, purpose, and performance

We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.

Join us and create impactful change.

Read the buzz about BetterUp.

Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.

For Business

For Individuals

10 Problem-solving strategies to turn challenges on their head

Jump to section

What is an example of problem-solving?

What are the 5 steps to problem-solving, 10 effective problem-solving strategies, what skills do efficient problem solvers have, how to improve your problem-solving skills.

Problems come in all shapes and sizes — from workplace conflict to budget cuts.

Creative problem-solving is one of the most in-demand skills in all roles and industries. It can boost an organization’s human capital and give it a competitive edge. 

Problem-solving strategies are ways of approaching problems that can help you look beyond the obvious answers and find the best solution to your problem . 

Let’s take a look at a five-step problem-solving process and how to combine it with proven problem-solving strategies. This will give you the tools and skills to solve even your most complex problems.

Good problem-solving is an essential part of the decision-making process . To see what a problem-solving process might look like in real life, let’s take a common problem for SaaS brands — decreasing customer churn rates.

To solve this problem, the company must first identify it. In this case, the problem is that the churn rate is too high. 

Next, they need to identify the root causes of the problem. This could be anything from their customer service experience to their email marketing campaigns. If there are several problems, they will need a separate problem-solving process for each one. 

Let’s say the problem is with email marketing — they’re not nurturing existing customers. Now that they’ve identified the problem, they can start using problem-solving strategies to look for solutions. 

This might look like coming up with special offers, discounts, or bonuses for existing customers. They need to find ways to remind them to use their products and services while providing added value. This will encourage customers to keep paying their monthly subscriptions.

They might also want to add incentives, such as access to a premium service at no extra cost after 12 months of membership. They could publish blog posts that help their customers solve common problems and share them as an email newsletter.

The company should set targets and a time frame in which to achieve them. This will allow leaders to measure progress and identify which actions yield the best results.

Perhaps you’ve got a problem you need to tackle. Or maybe you want to be prepared the next time one arises. Either way, it’s a good idea to get familiar with the five steps of problem-solving. 

Use this step-by-step problem-solving method with the strategies in the following section to find possible solutions to your problem.

1. Identify the problem

The first step is to know which problem you need to solve. Then, you need to find the root cause of the problem. 

The best course of action is to gather as much data as possible, speak to the people involved, and separate facts from opinions. 

Once this is done, formulate a statement that describes the problem. Use rational persuasion to make sure your team agrees .

2. Break the problem down 

Identifying the problem allows you to see which steps need to be taken to solve it. 

First, break the problem down into achievable blocks. Then, use strategic planning to set a time frame in which to solve the problem and establish a timeline for the completion of each stage.

3. Generate potential solutions

At this stage, the aim isn’t to evaluate possible solutions but to generate as many ideas as possible. 

Encourage your team to use creative thinking and be patient — the best solution may not be the first or most obvious one.

Use one or more of the different strategies in the following section to help come up with solutions — the more creative, the better.

4. Evaluate the possible solutions

Once you’ve generated potential solutions, narrow them down to a shortlist. Then, evaluate the options on your shortlist. 

There are usually many factors to consider. So when evaluating a solution, ask yourself the following questions:

• Will my team be on board with the proposition?
• Does the solution align with organizational goals ?
• Is the solution likely to achieve the desired outcomes?
• Is the solution realistic and possible with current resources and constraints?
• Will the solution solve the problem without causing additional unintended problems?

5. Implement and monitor the solutions

Once you’ve identified your solution and got buy-in from your team, it’s time to implement it. 

But the work doesn’t stop there. You need to monitor your solution to see whether it actually solves your problem. 

Request regular feedback from the team members involved and have a monitoring and evaluation plan in place to measure progress.

If the solution doesn’t achieve your desired results, start this step-by-step process again.

There are many different ways to approach problem-solving. Each is suitable for different types of problems. 

The most appropriate problem-solving techniques will depend on your specific problem. You may need to experiment with several strategies before you find a workable solution.

Here are 10 effective problem-solving strategies for you to try:

• Use a solution that worked before
• Brainstorming
• Work backward
• Use the Kipling method
• Draw the problem
• Use trial and error
• Sleep on it
• Get advice from your peers
• Use the Pareto principle
• Add successful solutions to your toolkit

Let’s break each of these down.

1. Use a solution that worked before

It might seem obvious, but if you’ve faced similar problems in the past, look back to what worked then. See if any of the solutions could apply to your current situation and, if so, replicate them.

2. Brainstorming

The more people you enlist to help solve the problem, the more potential solutions you can come up with.

Use different brainstorming techniques to workshop potential solutions with your team. They’ll likely bring something you haven’t thought of to the table.

3. Work backward

Working backward is a way to reverse engineer your problem. Imagine your problem has been solved, and make that the starting point.

Then, retrace your steps back to where you are now. This can help you see which course of action may be most effective.

4. Use the Kipling method

This is a method that poses six questions based on Rudyard Kipling’s poem, “ I Keep Six Honest Serving Men .” 

• What is the problem?
• Why is the problem important?
• When did the problem arise, and when does it need to be solved?
• How did the problem happen?
• Where is the problem occurring?
• Who does the problem affect?

Answering these questions can help you identify possible solutions.

5. Draw the problem

Sometimes it can be difficult to visualize all the components and moving parts of a problem and its solution. Drawing a diagram can help.

This technique is particularly helpful for solving process-related problems. For example, a product development team might want to decrease the time they take to fix bugs and create new iterations. Drawing the processes involved can help you see where improvements can be made.

6. Use trial-and-error

A trial-and-error approach can be useful when you have several possible solutions and want to test them to see which one works best.

7. Sleep on it

Finding the best solution to a problem is a process. Remember to take breaks and get enough rest . Sometimes, a walk around the block can bring inspiration, but you should sleep on it if possible.

A good night’s sleep helps us find creative solutions to problems. This is because when you sleep, your brain sorts through the day’s events and stores them as memories. This enables you to process your ideas at a subconscious level. 

If possible, give yourself a few days to develop and analyze possible solutions. You may find you have greater clarity after sleeping on it. Your mind will also be fresh, so you’ll be able to make better decisions.

8. Get advice from your peers

Getting input from a group of people can help you find solutions you may not have thought of on your own. 

For solo entrepreneurs or freelancers, this might look like hiring a coach or mentor or joining a mastermind group. 

For leaders , it might be consulting other members of the leadership team or working with a business coach .

It’s important to recognize you might not have all the skills, experience, or knowledge necessary to find a solution alone. 

9. Use the Pareto principle

The Pareto principle — also known as the 80/20 rule — can help you identify possible root causes and potential solutions for your problems.

Although it’s not a mathematical law, it’s a principle found throughout many aspects of business and life. For example, 20% of the sales reps in a company might close 80% of the sales. 

You may be able to narrow down the causes of your problem by applying the Pareto principle. This can also help you identify the most appropriate solutions.

10. Add successful solutions to your toolkit

Every situation is different, and the same solutions might not always work. But by keeping a record of successful problem-solving strategies, you can build up a solutions toolkit. 

These solutions may be applicable to future problems. Even if not, they may save you some of the time and work needed to come up with a new solution.

Improving problem-solving skills is essential for professional development — both yours and your team’s. Here are some of the key skills of effective problem solvers:

• Critical thinking and analytical skills
• Communication skills , including active listening
• Decision-making
• Planning and prioritization
• Emotional intelligence , including empathy and emotional regulation
• Time management
• Data analysis
• Research skills
• Project management

And they see problems as opportunities. Everyone is born with problem-solving skills. But accessing these abilities depends on how we view problems. Effective problem-solvers see problems as opportunities to learn and improve.

Ready to work on your problem-solving abilities? Get started with these seven tips.

1. Build your problem-solving skills

One of the best ways to improve your problem-solving skills is to learn from experts. Consider enrolling in organizational training , shadowing a mentor , or working with a coach .

2. Practice

Practice using your new problem-solving skills by applying them to smaller problems you might encounter in your daily life. 

Alternatively, imagine problematic scenarios that might arise at work and use problem-solving strategies to find hypothetical solutions.

3. Don’t try to find a solution right away

Often, the first solution you think of to solve a problem isn’t the most appropriate or effective.

Instead of thinking on the spot, give yourself time and use one or more of the problem-solving strategies above to activate your creative thinking. 

4. Ask for feedback

Receiving feedback is always important for learning and growth. Your perception of your problem-solving skills may be different from that of your colleagues. They can provide insights that help you improve. 

5. Learn new approaches and methodologies

There are entire books written about problem-solving methodologies if you want to take a deep dive into the subject. 

We recommend starting with “ Fixed — How to Perfect the Fine Art of Problem Solving ” by Amy E. Herman. 

6. Experiment

Tried-and-tested problem-solving techniques can be useful. However, they don’t teach you how to innovate and develop your own problem-solving approaches. 

Sometimes, an unconventional approach can lead to the development of a brilliant new idea or strategy. So don’t be afraid to suggest your most “out there” ideas.

7. Analyze the success of your competitors

Do you have competitors who have already solved the problem you’re facing? Look at what they did, and work backward to solve your own problem. 

For example, Netflix started in the 1990s as a DVD mail-rental company. Its main competitor at the time was Blockbuster. 

But when streaming became the norm in the early 2000s, both companies faced a crisis. Netflix innovated, unveiling its streaming service in 2007. 

If Blockbuster had followed Netflix’s example, it might have survived. Instead, it declared bankruptcy in 2010.

Use problem-solving strategies to uplevel your business

When facing a problem, it’s worth taking the time to find the right solution. 

Otherwise, we risk either running away from our problems or headlong into solutions. When we do this, we might miss out on other, better options.

Use the problem-solving strategies outlined above to find innovative solutions to your business’ most perplexing problems.

If you’re ready to take problem-solving to the next level, request a demo with BetterUp . Our expert coaches specialize in helping teams develop and implement strategies that work.

Boost your productivity

Maximize your time and productivity with strategies from our expert coaches.

Elizabeth Perry, ACC

Elizabeth Perry is a Coach Community Manager at BetterUp. She uses strategic engagement strategies to cultivate a learning community across a global network of Coaches through in-person and virtual experiences, technology-enabled platforms, and strategic coaching industry partnerships. With over 3 years of coaching experience and a certification in transformative leadership and life coaching from Sofia University, Elizabeth leverages transpersonal psychology expertise to help coaches and clients gain awareness of their behavioral and thought patterns, discover their purpose and passions, and elevate their potential. She is a lifelong student of psychology, personal growth, and human potential as well as an ICF-certified ACC transpersonal life and leadership Coach.

8 creative solutions to your most challenging problems

5 problem-solving questions to prepare you for your next interview, what are metacognitive skills examples in everyday life, what is lateral thinking 7 techniques to encourage creative ideas, 31 examples of problem solving performance review phrases, learn what process mapping is and how to create one (+ examples), leadership activities that encourage employee engagement, how much do distractions cost 8 effects of lack of focus, can dreams help you solve problems 6 ways to try, similar articles, the pareto principle: how the 80/20 rule can help you do more with less, thinking outside the box: 8 ways to become a creative problem solver, experimentation brings innovation: create an experimental workplace, effective problem statements have these 5 components, contingency planning: 4 steps to prepare for the unexpected, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..

3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702

• Platform Overview
• Integrations
• Powered by AI
• BetterUp Lead
• BetterUp Manage™
• BetterUp Care™
• Sales Performance
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Case Studies
• Why BetterUp?
• About Coaching
• Find your Coach
• Career Coaching
• Communication Coaching
• Life Coaching
• News and Press
• Leadership Team
• Become a BetterUp Coach
• BetterUp Labs
• Center for Purpose & Performance
• Leadership Training
• Business Coaching
• Contact Support
• Contact Sales
• Privacy Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Trust & Security
• Cookie Preferences

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Problem-Solving Strategies and Obstacles

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Sean is a fact-checker and researcher with experience in sociology, field research, and data analytics.

JGI / Jamie Grill / Getty Images

• Application
• Improvement

From deciding what to eat for dinner to considering whether it's the right time to buy a house, problem-solving is a large part of our daily lives. Learn some of the problem-solving strategies that exist and how to use them in real life, along with ways to overcome obstacles that are making it harder to resolve the issues you face.

What Is Problem-Solving?

In cognitive psychology , the term 'problem-solving' refers to the mental process that people go through to discover, analyze, and solve problems.

A problem exists when there is a goal that we want to achieve but the process by which we will achieve it is not obvious to us. Put another way, there is something that we want to occur in our life, yet we are not immediately certain how to make it happen.

Maybe you want a better relationship with your spouse or another family member but you're not sure how to improve it. Or you want to start a business but are unsure what steps to take. Problem-solving helps you figure out how to achieve these desires.

The problem-solving process involves:

• Discovery of the problem
• Deciding to tackle the issue
• Seeking to understand the problem more fully
• Researching available options or solutions
• Taking action to resolve the issue

Before problem-solving can occur, it is important to first understand the exact nature of the problem itself. If your understanding of the issue is faulty, your attempts to resolve it will also be incorrect or flawed.

Problem-Solving Mental Processes

Several mental processes are at work during problem-solving. Among them are:

• Perceptually recognizing the problem
• Representing the problem in memory
• Considering relevant information that applies to the problem
• Identifying different aspects of the problem
• Labeling and describing the problem

Problem-Solving Strategies

There are many ways to go about solving a problem. Some of these strategies might be used on their own, or you may decide to employ multiple approaches when working to figure out and fix a problem.

An algorithm is a step-by-step procedure that, by following certain "rules" produces a solution. Algorithms are commonly used in mathematics to solve division or multiplication problems. But they can be used in other fields as well.

In psychology, algorithms can be used to help identify individuals with a greater risk of mental health issues. For instance, research suggests that certain algorithms might help us recognize children with an elevated risk of suicide or self-harm.

One benefit of algorithms is that they guarantee an accurate answer. However, they aren't always the best approach to problem-solving, in part because detecting patterns can be incredibly time-consuming.

There are also concerns when machine learning is involved—also known as artificial intelligence (AI)—such as whether they can accurately predict human behaviors.

Heuristics are shortcut strategies that people can use to solve a problem at hand. These "rule of thumb" approaches allow you to simplify complex problems, reducing the total number of possible solutions to a more manageable set.

If you find yourself sitting in a traffic jam, for example, you may quickly consider other routes, taking one to get moving once again. When shopping for a new car, you might think back to a prior experience when negotiating got you a lower price, then employ the same tactics.

While heuristics may be helpful when facing smaller issues, major decisions shouldn't necessarily be made using a shortcut approach. Heuristics also don't guarantee an effective solution, such as when trying to drive around a traffic jam only to find yourself on an equally crowded route.

Trial and Error

A trial-and-error approach to problem-solving involves trying a number of potential solutions to a particular issue, then ruling out those that do not work. If you're not sure whether to buy a shirt in blue or green, for instance, you may try on each before deciding which one to purchase.

This can be a good strategy to use if you have a limited number of solutions available. But if there are many different choices available, narrowing down the possible options using another problem-solving technique can be helpful before attempting trial and error.

In some cases, the solution to a problem can appear as a sudden insight. You are facing an issue in a relationship or your career when, out of nowhere, the solution appears in your mind and you know exactly what to do.

Insight can occur when the problem in front of you is similar to an issue that you've dealt with in the past. Although, you may not recognize what is occurring since the underlying mental processes that lead to insight often happen outside of conscious awareness .

Research indicates that insight is most likely to occur during times when you are alone—such as when going on a walk by yourself, when you're in the shower, or when lying in bed after waking up.

How to Apply Problem-Solving Strategies in Real Life

If you're facing a problem, you can implement one or more of these strategies to find a potential solution. Here's how to use them in real life:

• Create a flow chart . If you have time, you can take advantage of the algorithm approach to problem-solving by sitting down and making a flow chart of each potential solution, its consequences, and what happens next.
• Recall your past experiences . When a problem needs to be solved fairly quickly, heuristics may be a better approach. Think back to when you faced a similar issue, then use your knowledge and experience to choose the best option possible.
• Start trying potential solutions . If your options are limited, start trying them one by one to see which solution is best for achieving your desired goal. If a particular solution doesn't work, move on to the next.
• Take some time alone . Since insight is often achieved when you're alone, carve out time to be by yourself for a while. The answer to your problem may come to you, seemingly out of the blue, if you spend some time away from others.

Obstacles to Problem-Solving

Problem-solving is not a flawless process as there are a number of obstacles that can interfere with our ability to solve a problem quickly and efficiently. These obstacles include:

• Assumptions: When dealing with a problem, people can make assumptions about the constraints and obstacles that prevent certain solutions. Thus, they may not even try some potential options.
• Functional fixedness : This term refers to the tendency to view problems only in their customary manner. Functional fixedness prevents people from fully seeing all of the different options that might be available to find a solution.
• Irrelevant or misleading information: When trying to solve a problem, it's important to distinguish between information that is relevant to the issue and irrelevant data that can lead to faulty solutions. The more complex the problem, the easier it is to focus on misleading or irrelevant information.
• Mental set: A mental set is a tendency to only use solutions that have worked in the past rather than looking for alternative ideas. A mental set can work as a heuristic, making it a useful problem-solving tool. However, mental sets can also lead to inflexibility, making it more difficult to find effective solutions.

How to Improve Your Problem-Solving Skills

In the end, if your goal is to become a better problem-solver, it's helpful to remember that this is a process. Thus, if you want to improve your problem-solving skills, following these steps can help lead you to your solution:

• Recognize that a problem exists . If you are facing a problem, there are generally signs. For instance, if you have a mental illness , you may experience excessive fear or sadness, mood changes, and changes in sleeping or eating habits. Recognizing these signs can help you realize that an issue exists.
• Decide to solve the problem . Make a conscious decision to solve the issue at hand. Commit to yourself that you will go through the steps necessary to find a solution.
• Seek to fully understand the issue . Analyze the problem you face, looking at it from all sides. If your problem is relationship-related, for instance, ask yourself how the other person may be interpreting the issue. You might also consider how your actions might be contributing to the situation.
• Research potential options . Using the problem-solving strategies mentioned, research potential solutions. Make a list of options, then consider each one individually. What are some pros and cons of taking the available routes? What would you need to do to make them happen?
• Take action . Select the best solution possible and take action. Action is one of the steps required for change . So, go through the motions needed to resolve the issue.
• Try another option, if needed . If the solution you chose didn't work, don't give up. Either go through the problem-solving process again or simply try another option.

You can find a way to solve your problems as long as you keep working toward this goal—even if the best solution is simply to let go because no other good solution exists.

Sarathy V. Real world problem-solving .  Front Hum Neurosci . 2018;12:261. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

Dunbar K. Problem solving . A Companion to Cognitive Science . 2017. doi:10.1002/9781405164535.ch20

Stewart SL, Celebre A, Hirdes JP, Poss JW. Risk of suicide and self-harm in kids: The development of an algorithm to identify high-risk individuals within the children's mental health system . Child Psychiat Human Develop . 2020;51:913-924. doi:10.1007/s10578-020-00968-9

Rosenbusch H, Soldner F, Evans AM, Zeelenberg M. Supervised machine learning methods in psychology: A practical introduction with annotated R code . Soc Personal Psychol Compass . 2021;15(2):e12579. doi:10.1111/spc3.12579

Mishra S. Decision-making under risk: Integrating perspectives from biology, economics, and psychology . Personal Soc Psychol Rev . 2014;18(3):280-307. doi:10.1177/1088868314530517

Csikszentmihalyi M, Sawyer K. Creative insight: The social dimension of a solitary moment . In: The Systems Model of Creativity . 2015:73-98. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9085-7_7

Chrysikou EG, Motyka K, Nigro C, Yang SI, Thompson-Schill SL. Functional fixedness in creative thinking tasks depends on stimulus modality .  Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts . 2016;10(4):425‐435. doi:10.1037/aca0000050

Huang F, Tang S, Hu Z. Unconditional perseveration of the short-term mental set in chunk decomposition .  Front Psychol . 2018;9:2568. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02568

National Alliance on Mental Illness. Warning signs and symptoms .

Mayer RE. Thinking, problem solving, cognition, 2nd ed .

Schooler JW, Ohlsson S, Brooks K. Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. J Experiment Psychol: General . 1993;122:166-183. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.2.166

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

• Book a Demo

Struggling to overcome challenges in your life? We all face problems, big and small, on a regular basis.

So how do you tackle them effectively? What are some key problem-solving strategies and skills that can guide you?

Effective problem-solving requires breaking issues down logically, generating solutions creatively, weighing choices critically, and adapting plans flexibly based on outcomes. Useful strategies range from leveraging past solutions that have worked to visualizing problems through diagrams. Core skills include analytical abilities, innovative thinking, and collaboration.

Want to improve your problem-solving skills? Keep reading to find out 17 effective problem-solving strategies, key skills, common obstacles to watch for, and tips on improving your overall problem-solving skills.

Key Takeaways:

• Effective problem-solving requires breaking down issues logically, generating multiple solutions creatively, weighing choices critically, and adapting plans based on outcomes.
• Useful problem-solving strategies range from leveraging past solutions to brainstorming with groups to visualizing problems through diagrams and models.
• Core skills include analytical abilities, innovative thinking, decision-making, and team collaboration to solve problems.
• Common obstacles include fear of failure, information gaps, fixed mindsets, confirmation bias, and groupthink.
• Boosting problem-solving skills involves learning from experts, actively practicing, soliciting feedback, and analyzing others’ success.
• Onethread’s project management capabilities align with effective problem-solving tenets – facilitating structured solutions, tracking progress, and capturing lessons learned.

What Is Problem-Solving?

Problem-solving is the process of understanding an issue, situation, or challenge that needs to be addressed and then systematically working through possible solutions to arrive at the best outcome.

It involves critical thinking, analysis, logic, creativity, research, planning, reflection, and patience in order to overcome obstacles and find effective answers to complex questions or problems.

The ultimate goal is to implement the chosen solution successfully.

What Are Problem-Solving Strategies?

Problem-solving strategies are like frameworks or methodologies that help us solve tricky puzzles or problems we face in the workplace, at home, or with friends.

Imagine you have a big jigsaw puzzle. One strategy might be to start with the corner pieces. Another could be looking for pieces with the same colors. 

Just like in puzzles, in real life, we use different plans or steps to find solutions to problems. These strategies help us think clearly, make good choices, and find the best answers without getting too stressed or giving up.

Why Is It Important To Know Different Problem-Solving Strategies?

Knowing different problem-solving strategies is important because different types of problems often require different approaches to solve them effectively. Having a variety of strategies to choose from allows you to select the best method for the specific problem you are trying to solve.

This improves your ability to analyze issues thoroughly, develop solutions creatively, and tackle problems from multiple angles. Knowing multiple strategies also aids in overcoming roadblocks if your initial approach is not working.

Here are some reasons why you need to know different problem-solving strategies:

• Different Problems Require Different Tools: Just like you can’t use a hammer to fix everything, some problems need specific strategies to solve them.
• Improves Creativity: Knowing various strategies helps you think outside the box and come up with creative solutions.
• Saves Time: With the right strategy, you can solve problems faster instead of trying things that don’t work.
• Reduces Stress: When you know how to tackle a problem, it feels less scary and you feel more confident.
• Better Outcomes: Using the right strategy can lead to better solutions, making things work out better in the end.
• Learning and Growth: Each time you solve a problem, you learn something new, which makes you smarter and better at solving future problems.

Knowing different ways to solve problems helps you tackle anything that comes your way, making life a bit easier and more fun!

17 Effective Problem-Solving Strategies

Effective problem-solving strategies include breaking the problem into smaller parts, brainstorming multiple solutions, evaluating the pros and cons of each, and choosing the most viable option. 

Critical thinking and creativity are essential in developing innovative solutions. Collaboration with others can also provide diverse perspectives and ideas. 

By applying these strategies, you can tackle complex issues more effectively.

Now, consider a challenge you’re dealing with. Which strategy could help you find a solution? Here we will discuss key problem strategies in detail.

1. Use a Past Solution That Worked

This strategy involves looking back at previous similar problems you have faced and the solutions that were effective in solving them.

It is useful when you are facing a problem that is very similar to something you have already solved. The main benefit is that you don’t have to come up with a brand new solution – you already know the method that worked before will likely work again.

However, the limitation is that the current problem may have some unique aspects or differences that mean your old solution is not fully applicable.

The ideal process is to thoroughly analyze the new challenge, identify the key similarities and differences versus the past case, adapt the old solution as needed to align with the current context, and then pilot it carefully before full implementation.

An example is using the same negotiation tactics from purchasing your previous home when putting in an offer on a new house. Key terms would be adjusted but overall it can save significant time versus developing a brand new strategy.

2. Brainstorm Solutions

This involves gathering a group of people together to generate as many potential solutions to a problem as possible.

It is effective when you need creative ideas to solve a complex or challenging issue. By getting input from multiple people with diverse perspectives, you increase the likelihood of finding an innovative solution.

The main limitation is that brainstorming sessions can sometimes turn into unproductive gripe sessions or discussions rather than focusing on productive ideation —so they need to be properly facilitated.

The key to an effective brainstorming session is setting some basic ground rules upfront and having an experienced facilitator guide the discussion. Rules often include encouraging wild ideas, avoiding criticism of ideas during the ideation phase, and building on others’ ideas.

For instance, a struggling startup might hold a session where ideas for turnaround plans are generated and then formalized with financials and metrics.

3. Work Backward from the Solution

This technique involves envisioning that the problem has already been solved and then working step-by-step backward toward the current state.

This strategy is particularly helpful for long-term, multi-step problems. By starting from the imagined solution and identifying all the steps required to reach it, you can systematically determine the actions needed. It lets you tackle a big hairy problem through smaller, reversible steps.

A limitation is that this approach may not be possible if you cannot accurately envision the solution state to start with.

The approach helps drive logical systematic thinking for complex problem-solving, but should still be combined with creative brainstorming of alternative scenarios and solutions.

An example is planning for an event – you would imagine the successful event occurring, then determine the tasks needed the week before, two weeks before, etc. all the way back to the present.

4. Use the Kipling Method

This method, named after author Rudyard Kipling, provides a framework for thoroughly analyzing a problem before jumping into solutions.

It consists of answering six fundamental questions: What, Where, When, How, Who, and Why about the challenge. Clearly defining these core elements of the problem sets the stage for generating targeted solutions.

The Kipling method enables a deep understanding of problem parameters and root causes before solution identification. By jumping to brainstorm solutions too early, critical information can be missed or the problem is loosely defined, reducing solution quality.

Answering the six fundamental questions illuminates all angles of the issue. This takes time but pays dividends in generating optimal solutions later tuned precisely to the true underlying problem.

The limitation is that meticulously working through numerous questions before addressing solutions can slow progress.

The best approach blends structured problem decomposition techniques like the Kipling method with spurring innovative solution ideation from a diverse team. 

An example is using this technique after a technical process failure – the team would systematically detail What failed, Where/When did it fail, How it failed (sequence of events), Who was involved, and Why it likely failed before exploring preventative solutions.

5. Try Different Solutions Until One Works (Trial and Error)

This technique involves attempting various potential solutions sequentially until finding one that successfully solves the problem.

Trial and error works best when facing a concrete, bounded challenge with clear solution criteria and a small number of discrete options to try. By methodically testing solutions, you can determine the faulty component.

A limitation is that it can be time-intensive if the working solution set is large.

The key is limiting the variable set first. For technical problems, this boundary is inherent and each element can be iteratively tested. But for business issues, artificial constraints may be required – setting decision rules upfront to reduce options before testing.

Furthermore, hypothesis-driven experimentation is far superior to blind trial and error – have logic for why Option A may outperform Option B.

Examples include fixing printer jams by testing different paper tray and cable configurations or resolving website errors by tweaking CSS/HTML line-by-line until the code functions properly.

6. Use Proven Formulas or Frameworks (Heuristics)

Heuristics refers to applying existing problem-solving formulas or frameworks rather than addressing issues completely from scratch.

This allows leveraging established best practices rather than reinventing the wheel each time.

It is effective when facing recurrent, common challenges where proven structured approaches exist.

However, heuristics may force-fit solutions to non-standard problems.

For example, a cost-benefit analysis can be used instead of custom weighting schemes to analyze potential process improvements.

Onethread allows teams to define, save, and replicate configurable project templates so proven workflows can be reliably applied across problems with some consistency rather than fully custom one-off approaches each time.

Try One thread

Experience One thread full potential, with all its features unlocked. Sign up now to start your 14-day free trial!

7. Trust Your Instincts (Insight Problem-Solving)

Insight is a problem-solving technique that involves waiting patiently for an unexpected “aha moment” when the solution pops into your mind.

It works well for personal challenges that require intuitive realizations over calculated logic. The unconscious mind makes connections leading to flashes of insight when relaxing or doing mundane tasks unrelated to the actual problem.

Benefits include out-of-the-box creative solutions. However, the limitations are that insights can’t be forced and may never come at all if too complex. Critical analysis is still required after initial insights.

A real-life example would be a writer struggling with how to end a novel. Despite extensive brainstorming, they feel stuck. Eventually while gardening one day, a perfect unexpected plot twist sparks an ideal conclusion. However, once written they still carefully review if the ending flows logically from the rest of the story.

8. Reverse Engineer the Problem

This approach involves deconstructing a problem in reverse sequential order from the current undesirable outcome back to the initial root causes.

By mapping the chain of events backward, you can identify the origin of where things went wrong and establish the critical junctures for solving it moving ahead. Reverse engineering provides diagnostic clarity on multi-step problems.

However, the limitation is that it focuses heavily on autopsying the past versus innovating improved future solutions.

An example is tracing back from a server outage, through the cascade of infrastructure failures that led to it finally terminating at the initial script error that triggered the crisis. This root cause would then inform the preventative measure.

9. Break Down Obstacles Between Current and Goal State (Means-End Analysis)

This technique defines the current problem state and the desired end goal state, then systematically identifies obstacles in the way of getting from one to the other.

By mapping the barriers or gaps, you can then develop solutions to address each one. This methodically connects the problem to solutions.

A limitation is that some obstacles may be unknown upfront and only emerge later.

For example, you can list down all the steps required for a new product launch – current state through production, marketing, sales, distribution, etc. to full launch (goal state) – to highlight where resource constraints or other blocks exist so they can be addressed.

Onethread allows dividing big-picture projects into discrete, manageable phases, milestones, and tasks to simplify execution just as problems can be decomposed into more achievable components. Features like dependency mapping further reinforce interconnections.

Using Onethread’s issues and subtasks feature, messy problems can be decomposed into manageable chunks.

10. Ask “Why” Five Times to Identify the Root Cause (The 5 Whys)

This technique involves asking “Why did this problem occur?” and then responding with an answer that is again met with asking “Why?” This process repeats five times until the root cause is revealed.

Continually asking why digs deeper from surface symptoms to underlying systemic issues.

It is effective for getting to the source of problems originating from human error or process breakdowns.

However, some complex issues may have multiple tangled root causes not solvable through this approach alone.

An example is a retail store experiencing a sudden decline in customers. Successively asking why five times may trace an initial drop to parking challenges, stemming from a city construction project – the true starting point to address.

11. Evaluate Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT Analysis)

This involves analyzing a problem or proposed solution by categorizing internal and external factors into a 2×2 matrix: Strengths, Weaknesses as the internal rows; Opportunities and Threats as the external columns.

Systematically identifying these elements provides balanced insight to evaluate options and risks. It is impactful when evaluating alternative solutions or developing strategy amid complexity or uncertainty.

The key benefit of SWOT analysis is enabling multi-dimensional thinking when rationally evaluating options. Rather than getting anchored on just the upsides or the existing way of operating, it urges a systematic assessment through four different lenses:

• Internal Strengths: Our core competencies/advantages able to deliver success
• Internal Weaknesses: Gaps/vulnerabilities we need to manage
• External Opportunities: Ways we can differentiate/drive additional value
• External Threats: Risks we must navigate or mitigate

Multiperspective analysis provides the needed holistic view of the balanced risk vs. reward equation for strategic decision making amid uncertainty.

However, SWOT can feel restrictive if not tailored and evolved for different issue types.

Teams should view SWOT analysis as a starting point, augmenting it further for distinct scenarios.

An example is performing a SWOT analysis on whether a small business should expand into a new market – evaluating internal capabilities to execute vs. risks in the external competitive and demand environment to inform the growth decision with eyes wide open.

12. Compare Current vs Expected Performance (Gap Analysis)

This technique involves comparing the current state of performance, output, or results to the desired or expected levels to highlight shortfalls.

By quantifying the gaps, you can identify problem areas and prioritize address solutions.

Gap analysis is based on the simple principle – “you can’t improve what you don’t measure.” It enables facts-driven problem diagnosis by highlighting delta to goals, not just vague dissatisfaction that something seems wrong. And measurement immediately suggests improvement opportunities – address the biggest gaps first.

This data orientation also supports ROI analysis on fixing issues – the return from closing larger gaps outweighs narrowly targeting smaller performance deficiencies.

However, the approach is only effective if robust standards and metrics exist as the benchmark to evaluate against. Organizations should invest upfront in establishing performance frameworks.

Furthermore, while numbers are invaluable, the human context behind problems should not be ignored – quantitative versus qualitative gap assessment is optimally blended.

For example, if usage declines are noted during software gap analysis, this could be used as a signal to improve user experience through design.

13. Observe Processes from the Frontline (Gemba Walk)

A Gemba walk involves going to the actual place where work is done, directly observing the process, engaging with employees, and finding areas for improvement.

By experiencing firsthand rather than solely reviewing abstract reports, practical problems and ideas emerge.

The limitation is Gemba walks provide anecdotes not statistically significant data. It complements but does not replace comprehensive performance measurement.

An example is a factory manager inspecting the production line to spot jam areas based on direct reality rather than relying on throughput dashboards alone back in her office. Frontline insights prove invaluable.

14. Analyze Competitive Forces (Porter’s Five Forces)

This involves assessing the marketplace around a problem or business situation via five key factors: competitors, new entrants, substitute offerings, suppliers, and customer power.

Evaluating these forces illuminates risks and opportunities for strategy development and issue resolution. It is effective for understanding dynamic external threats and opportunities when operating in a contested space.

However, over-indexing on only external factors can overlook the internal capabilities needed to execute solutions.

A startup CEO, for example, may analyze market entry barriers, whitespace opportunities, and disruption risks across these five forces to shape new product rollout strategies and marketing approaches.

15. Think from Different Perspectives (Six Thinking Hats)

The Six Thinking Hats is a technique developed by Edward de Bono that encourages people to think about a problem from six different perspectives, each represented by a colored “thinking hat.”

The key benefit of this strategy is that it pushes team members to move outside their usual thinking style and consider new angles. This brings more diverse ideas and solutions to the table.

It works best for complex problems that require innovative solutions and when a team is stuck in an unproductive debate. The structured framework keeps the conversation flowing in a positive direction.

Limitations are that it requires training on the method itself and may feel unnatural at first. Team dynamics can also influence success – some members may dominate certain “hats” while others remain quiet.

A real-life example is a software company debating whether to build a new feature. The white hat focuses on facts, red on gut feelings, black on potential risks, yellow on benefits, green on new ideas, and blue on process. This exposes more balanced perspectives before deciding.

Onethread centralizes diverse stakeholder communication onto one platform, ensuring all voices are incorporated when evaluating project tradeoffs, just as problem-solving should consider multifaceted solutions.

16. Visualize the Problem (Draw it Out)

Drawing out a problem involves creating visual representations like diagrams, flowcharts, and maps to work through challenging issues.

This strategy is helpful when dealing with complex situations with lots of interconnected components. The visuals simplify the complexity so you can thoroughly understand the problem and all its nuances.

Key benefits are that it allows more stakeholders to get on the same page regarding root causes and it sparks new creative solutions as connections are made visually.

However, simple problems with few variables don’t require extensive diagrams. Additionally, some challenges are so multidimensional that fully capturing every aspect is difficult.

A real-life example would be mapping out all the possible causes leading to decreased client satisfaction at a law firm. An intricate fishbone diagram with branches for issues like service delivery, technology, facilities, culture, and vendor partnerships allows the team to trace problems back to their origins and brainstorm targeted fixes.

17. Follow a Step-by-Step Procedure (Algorithms)

An algorithm is a predefined step-by-step process that is guaranteed to produce the correct solution if implemented properly.

Using algorithms is effective when facing problems that have clear, binary right and wrong answers. Algorithms work for mathematical calculations, computer code, manufacturing assembly lines, and scientific experiments.

Key benefits are consistency, accuracy, and efficiency. However, they require extensive upfront development and only apply to scenarios with strict parameters. Additionally, human error can lead to mistakes.

For example, crew members of fast food chains like McDonald’s follow specific algorithms for food prep – from grill times to ingredient amounts in sandwiches, to order fulfillment procedures. This ensures uniform quality and service across all locations. However, if a step is missed, errors occur.

The Problem-Solving Process

The problem-solving process typically includes defining the issue, analyzing details, creating solutions, weighing choices, acting, and reviewing results.

In the above, we have discussed several problem-solving strategies. For every problem-solving strategy, you have to follow these processes. Here’s a detailed step-by-step process of effective problem-solving:

Step 1: Identify the Problem

The problem-solving process starts with identifying the problem. This step involves understanding the issue’s nature, its scope, and its impact. Once the problem is clearly defined, it sets the foundation for finding effective solutions.

Identifying the problem is crucial. It means figuring out exactly what needs fixing. This involves looking at the situation closely, understanding what’s wrong, and knowing how it affects things. It’s about asking the right questions to get a clear picture of the issue. 

This step is important because it guides the rest of the problem-solving process. Without a clear understanding of the problem, finding a solution is much harder. It’s like diagnosing an illness before treating it. Once the problem is identified accurately, you can move on to exploring possible solutions and deciding on the best course of action.

Step 2: Break Down the Problem

Breaking down the problem is a key step in the problem-solving process. It involves dividing the main issue into smaller, more manageable parts. This makes it easier to understand and tackle each component one by one.

After identifying the problem, the next step is to break it down. This means splitting the big issue into smaller pieces. It’s like solving a puzzle by handling one piece at a time. 

By doing this, you can focus on each part without feeling overwhelmed. It also helps in identifying the root causes of the problem. Breaking down the problem allows for a clearer analysis and makes finding solutions more straightforward. 

Each smaller problem can be addressed individually, leading to an effective resolution of the overall issue. This approach not only simplifies complex problems but also aids in developing a systematic plan to solve them.

Step 3: Come up with potential solutions

Coming up with potential solutions is the third step in the problem-solving process. It involves brainstorming various options to address the problem, considering creativity and feasibility to find the best approach.

After breaking down the problem, it’s time to think of ways to solve it. This stage is about brainstorming different solutions. You look at the smaller issues you’ve identified and start thinking of ways to fix them. This is where creativity comes in. 

You want to come up with as many ideas as possible, no matter how out-of-the-box they seem. It’s important to consider all options and evaluate their pros and cons. This process allows you to gather a range of possible solutions. 

Later, you can narrow these down to the most practical and effective ones. This step is crucial because it sets the stage for deciding on the best solution to implement. It’s about being open-minded and innovative to tackle the problem effectively.

Step 4: Analyze the possible solutions

Analyzing the possible solutions is the fourth step in the problem-solving process. It involves evaluating each proposed solution’s advantages and disadvantages to determine the most effective and feasible option.

After coming up with potential solutions, the next step is to analyze them. This means looking closely at each idea to see how well it solves the problem. You weigh the pros and cons of every solution.

Consider factors like cost, time, resources, and potential outcomes. This analysis helps in understanding the implications of each option. It’s about being critical and objective, ensuring that the chosen solution is not only effective but also practical.

This step is vital because it guides you towards making an informed decision. It involves comparing the solutions against each other and selecting the one that best addresses the problem.

By thoroughly analyzing the options, you can move forward with confidence, knowing you’ve chosen the best path to solve the issue.

Step 5: Implement and Monitor the Solutions

Implementing and monitoring the solutions is the final step in the problem-solving process. It involves putting the chosen solution into action and observing its effectiveness, making adjustments as necessary.

Once you’ve selected the best solution, it’s time to put it into practice. This step is about action. You implement the chosen solution and then keep an eye on how it works. Monitoring is crucial because it tells you if the solution is solving the problem as expected. 

If things don’t go as planned, you may need to make some changes. This could mean tweaking the current solution or trying a different one. The goal is to ensure the problem is fully resolved. 

This step is critical because it involves real-world application. It’s not just about planning; it’s about doing and adjusting based on results. By effectively implementing and monitoring the solutions, you can achieve the desired outcome and solve the problem successfully.

Why This Process is Important

Following a defined process to solve problems is important because it provides a systematic, structured approach instead of a haphazard one. Having clear steps guides logical thinking, analysis, and decision-making to increase effectiveness. Key reasons it helps are:

• Clear Direction: This process gives you a clear path to follow, which can make solving problems less overwhelming.
• Better Solutions: Thoughtful analysis of root causes, iterative testing of solutions, and learning orientation lead to addressing the heart of issues rather than just symptoms.
• Saves Time and Energy: Instead of guessing or trying random things, this process helps you find a solution more efficiently.
• Improves Skills: The more you use this process, the better you get at solving problems. It’s like practicing a sport. The more you practice, the better you play.
• Maximizes collaboration: Involving various stakeholders in the process enables broader inputs. Their communication and coordination are streamlined through organized brainstorming and evaluation.
• Provides consistency: Standard methodology across problems enables building institutional problem-solving capabilities over time. Patterns emerge on effective techniques to apply to different situations.

The problem-solving process is a powerful tool that can help us tackle any challenge we face. By following these steps, we can find solutions that work and learn important skills along the way.

Key Skills for Efficient Problem Solving

Efficient problem-solving requires breaking down issues logically, evaluating options, and implementing practical solutions.

Key skills include critical thinking to understand root causes, creativity to brainstorm innovative ideas, communication abilities to collaborate with others, and decision-making to select the best way forward. Staying adaptable, reflecting on outcomes, and applying lessons learned are also essential.

With practice, these capacities will lead to increased personal and team effectiveness in systematically addressing any problem.

 Let’s explore the powers you need to become a problem-solving hero!

Critical Thinking and Analytical Skills

Critical thinking and analytical skills are vital for efficient problem-solving as they enable individuals to objectively evaluate information, identify key issues, and generate effective solutions. 

These skills facilitate a deeper understanding of problems, leading to logical, well-reasoned decisions. By systematically breaking down complex issues and considering various perspectives, individuals can develop more innovative and practical solutions, enhancing their problem-solving effectiveness.

Communication Skills

Effective communication skills are essential for efficient problem-solving as they facilitate clear sharing of information, ensuring all team members understand the problem and proposed solutions. 

These skills enable individuals to articulate issues, listen actively, and collaborate effectively, fostering a productive environment where diverse ideas can be exchanged and refined. By enhancing mutual understanding, communication skills contribute significantly to identifying and implementing the most viable solutions.

Decision-Making

Strong decision-making skills are crucial for efficient problem-solving, as they enable individuals to choose the best course of action from multiple alternatives. 

These skills involve evaluating the potential outcomes of different solutions, considering the risks and benefits, and making informed choices. Effective decision-making leads to the implementation of solutions that are likely to resolve problems effectively, ensuring resources are used efficiently and goals are achieved.

Planning and Prioritization

Planning and prioritization are key for efficient problem-solving, ensuring resources are allocated effectively to address the most critical issues first. This approach helps in organizing tasks according to their urgency and impact, streamlining efforts towards achieving the desired outcome efficiently.

Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence enhances problem-solving by allowing individuals to manage emotions, understand others, and navigate social complexities. It fosters a positive, collaborative environment, essential for generating creative solutions and making informed, empathetic decisions.

Leadership skills drive efficient problem-solving by inspiring and guiding teams toward common goals. Effective leaders motivate their teams, foster innovation, and navigate challenges, ensuring collective efforts are focused and productive in addressing problems.

Time Management

Time management is crucial in problem-solving, enabling individuals to allocate appropriate time to each task. By efficiently managing time, one can ensure that critical problems are addressed promptly without neglecting other responsibilities.

Data Analysis

Data analysis skills are essential for problem-solving, as they enable individuals to sift through data, identify trends, and extract actionable insights. This analytical approach supports evidence-based decision-making, leading to more accurate and effective solutions.

Research Skills

Research skills are vital for efficient problem-solving, allowing individuals to gather relevant information, explore various solutions, and understand the problem’s context. This thorough exploration aids in developing well-informed, innovative solutions.

Becoming a great problem solver takes practice, but with these skills, you’re on your way to becoming a problem-solving hero. 

How to Improve Your Problem-Solving Skills?

Improving your problem-solving skills can make you a master at overcoming challenges. Learn from experts, practice regularly, welcome feedback, try new methods, experiment, and study others’ success to become better.

Learning from Experts

Improving problem-solving skills by learning from experts involves seeking mentorship, attending workshops, and studying case studies. Experts provide insights and techniques that refine your approach, enhancing your ability to tackle complex problems effectively.

To enhance your problem-solving skills, learning from experts can be incredibly beneficial. Engaging with mentors, participating in specialized workshops, and analyzing case studies from seasoned professionals can offer valuable perspectives and strategies. 

Experts share their experiences, mistakes, and successes, providing practical knowledge that can be applied to your own problem-solving process. This exposure not only broadens your understanding but also introduces you to diverse methods and approaches, enabling you to tackle challenges more efficiently and creatively.

Improving problem-solving skills through practice involves tackling a variety of challenges regularly. This hands-on approach helps in refining techniques and strategies, making you more adept at identifying and solving problems efficiently.

One of the most effective ways to enhance your problem-solving skills is through consistent practice. By engaging with different types of problems on a regular basis, you develop a deeper understanding of various strategies and how they can be applied. 

This hands-on experience allows you to experiment with different approaches, learn from mistakes, and build confidence in your ability to tackle challenges.

Regular practice not only sharpens your analytical and critical thinking skills but also encourages adaptability and innovation, key components of effective problem-solving.

Openness to Feedback

Being open to feedback is like unlocking a secret level in a game. It helps you boost your problem-solving skills. Improving problem-solving skills through openness to feedback involves actively seeking and constructively responding to critiques. 

This receptivity enables you to refine your strategies and approaches based on insights from others, leading to more effective solutions. 

Learning New Approaches and Methodologies

Learning new approaches and methodologies is like adding new tools to your toolbox. It makes you a smarter problem-solver. Enhancing problem-solving skills by learning new approaches and methodologies involves staying updated with the latest trends and techniques in your field. 

This continuous learning expands your toolkit, enabling innovative solutions and a fresh perspective on challenges.

Experimentation

Experimentation is like being a scientist of your own problems. It’s a powerful way to improve your problem-solving skills. Boosting problem-solving skills through experimentation means trying out different solutions to see what works best. This trial-and-error approach fosters creativity and can lead to unique solutions that wouldn’t have been considered otherwise.

Analyzing Competitors’ Success

Analyzing competitors’ success is like being a detective. It’s a smart way to boost your problem-solving skills. Improving problem-solving skills by analyzing competitors’ success involves studying their strategies and outcomes. Understanding what worked for them can provide valuable insights and inspire effective solutions for your own challenges. 

Challenges in Problem-Solving

Facing obstacles when solving problems is common. Recognizing these barriers, like fear of failure or lack of information, helps us find ways around them for better solutions.

Fear of Failure

Fear of failure is like a big, scary monster that stops us from solving problems. It’s a challenge many face. Because being afraid of making mistakes can make us too scared to try new solutions. 

How can we overcome this? First, understand that it’s okay to fail. Failure is not the opposite of success; it’s part of learning. Every time we fail, we discover one more way not to solve a problem, getting us closer to the right solution. Treat each attempt like an experiment. It’s not about failing; it’s about testing and learning.

Lack of Information

Lack of information is like trying to solve a puzzle with missing pieces. It’s a big challenge in problem-solving. Because without all the necessary details, finding a solution is much harder. 

How can we fix this? Start by gathering as much information as you can. Ask questions, do research, or talk to experts. Think of yourself as a detective looking for clues. The more information you collect, the clearer the picture becomes. Then, use what you’ve learned to think of solutions. 

Fixed Mindset

A fixed mindset is like being stuck in quicksand; it makes solving problems harder. It means thinking you can’t improve or learn new ways to solve issues. 

How can we change this? First, believe that you can grow and learn from challenges. Think of your brain as a muscle that gets stronger every time you use it. When you face a problem, instead of saying “I can’t do this,” try thinking, “I can’t do this yet.” Look for lessons in every challenge and celebrate small wins. 

Everyone starts somewhere, and mistakes are just steps on the path to getting better. By shifting to a growth mindset, you’ll see problems as opportunities to grow. Keep trying, keep learning, and your problem-solving skills will soar!

Jumping to Conclusions

Jumping to conclusions is like trying to finish a race before it starts. It’s a challenge in problem-solving. That means making a decision too quickly without looking at all the facts. 

How can we avoid this? First, take a deep breath and slow down. Think about the problem like a puzzle. You need to see all the pieces before you know where they go. Ask questions, gather information, and consider different possibilities. Don’t choose the first solution that comes to mind. Instead, compare a few options. 

Feeling Overwhelmed

Feeling overwhelmed is like being buried under a mountain of puzzles. It’s a big challenge in problem-solving. When we’re overwhelmed, everything seems too hard to handle. 

How can we deal with this? Start by taking a step back. Breathe deeply and focus on one thing at a time. Break the big problem into smaller pieces, like sorting puzzle pieces by color. Tackle each small piece one by one. It’s also okay to ask for help. Sometimes, talking to someone else can give you a new perspective. 

Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is like wearing glasses that only let you see what you want to see. It’s a challenge in problem-solving. Because it makes us focus only on information that agrees with what we already believe, ignoring anything that doesn’t. 

How can we overcome this? First, be aware that you might be doing it. It’s like checking if your glasses are on right. Then, purposely look for information that challenges your views. It’s like trying on a different pair of glasses to see a new perspective. Ask questions and listen to answers, even if they don’t fit what you thought before.

Groupthink is like everyone in a group deciding to wear the same outfit without asking why. It’s a challenge in problem-solving. It means making decisions just because everyone else agrees, without really thinking it through. 

How can we avoid this? First, encourage everyone in the group to share their ideas, even if they’re different. It’s like inviting everyone to show their unique style of clothes. 

Listen to all opinions and discuss them. It’s okay to disagree; it helps us think of better solutions. Also, sometimes, ask someone outside the group for their thoughts. They might see something everyone in the group missed.

Overcoming obstacles in problem-solving requires patience, openness, and a willingness to learn from mistakes. By recognizing these barriers, we can develop strategies to navigate around them, leading to more effective and creative solutions.

What are the most common problem-solving techniques?

The most common techniques include brainstorming, the 5 Whys, mind mapping, SWOT analysis, and using algorithms or heuristics. Each approach has its strengths, suitable for different types of problems.

What’s the best problem-solving strategy for every situation?

There’s no one-size-fits-all strategy. The best approach depends on the problem’s complexity, available resources, and time constraints. Combining multiple techniques often yields the best results.

How can I improve my problem-solving skills?

Improve your problem-solving skills by practicing regularly, learning from experts, staying open to feedback, and continuously updating your knowledge on new approaches and methodologies.

Are there any tools or resources to help with problem-solving?

Yes, tools like mind mapping software, online courses on critical thinking, and books on problem-solving techniques can be very helpful. Joining forums or groups focused on problem-solving can also provide support and insights.

What are some common mistakes people make when solving problems?

Common mistakes include jumping to conclusions without fully understanding the problem, ignoring valuable feedback, sticking to familiar solutions without considering alternatives, and not breaking down complex problems into manageable parts.

Final Words

Mastering problem-solving strategies equips us with the tools to tackle challenges across all areas of life. By understanding and applying these techniques, embracing a growth mindset, and learning from both successes and obstacles, we can transform problems into opportunities for growth. Continuously improving these skills ensures we’re prepared to face and solve future challenges more effectively.

Let's Get Started with Onethread

Onethread empowers you to plan, organise, and track projects with ease, ensuring you meet deadlines, allocate resources efficiently, and keep progress transparent.

By subscribing you agree to our  Privacy Policy .

Giving modern marketing teams superpowers with short links that stand out.

• Live Product Demo

© Copyright 2023 Onethread, Inc

Learn Creative Problem Solving Techniques to Stimulate Innovation in Your Organization

By Kate Eby | October 20, 2017 (updated August 27, 2021)

• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

Link copied

In today’s competitive business landscape, organizations need processes in place to make strong, well-informed, and innovative decisions. Problem solving - in particular creative problem solving (CPS) - is a key skill in learning how to accurately identify problems and their causes, generate potential solutions, and evaluate all the possibilities to arrive at a strong corrective course of action. Every team in any organization, regardless of department or industry, needs to be effective, creative, and quick when solving problems. 

In this article, we’ll discuss traditional and creative problem solving, and define the steps, best practices, and common barriers associated. After that, we’ll provide helpful methods and tools to identify the cause(s) of problematic situations, so you can get to the root of the issue and start to generate solutions. Then, we offer nearly 20 creative problem solving techniques to implement at your organization, or even in your personal life. Along the way, experts weigh in on the importance of problem solving, and offer tips and tricks. 

What Is Problem Solving and Decision Making?

Problem solving is the process of working through every aspect of an issue or challenge to reach a solution. Decision making is choosing one of multiple proposed solutions  — therefore, this process also includes defining and evaluating all potential options. Decision making is often one step of the problem solving process, but the two concepts are distinct. 

Collective problem solving is problem solving that includes many different parties and bridges the knowledge of different groups. Collective problem solving is common in business problem solving because workplace decisions typically affect more than one person. 

Problem solving, especially in business, is a complicated science. Not only are business conflicts multifaceted, but they often involve different personalities, levels of authority, and group dynamics. In recent years, however, there has been a rise in psychology-driven problem solving techniques, especially for the workplace. In fact, the psychology of how people solve problems is now studied formally in academic disciplines such as psychology and cognitive science.

Joe Carella is the Assistant Dean for Executive Education at the University of Arizona . Joe has over 20 years of experience in helping executives and corporations in managing change and developing successful business strategies. His doctoral research and executive education engagements have seen him focus on corporate strategy, decision making and business performance with a variety of corporate clients including Hershey’s, Chevron, Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, Intel, DP World, Essilor, BBVA Compass Bank.

He explains some of the basic psychology behind problem solving: “When our brain is engaged in the process of solving problems, it is engaged in a series of steps where it processes and organizes the information it receives while developing new knowledge it uses in future steps. Creativity is embedded in this process by incorporating diverse inputs and/or new ways of organizing the information received.”

Laura MacLeod is a Professor of Social Group Work at City University of New York, and the creator of From The Inside Out Project® , a program that coaches managers in team leadership for a variety of workplaces. She has a background in social work and over two decades of experience as a union worker, and currently leads talks on conflict resolution, problem solving, and listening skills at conferences across the country. 

MacLeod thinks of problem solving as an integral practice of successful organizations. “Problem solving is a collaborative process — all voices are heard and connected, and resolution is reached by the group,” she says. “Problems and conflicts occur in all groups and teams in the workplace, but if leaders involve everyone in working through, they will foster cohesion, engagement, and buy in. Everybody wins.”

10 tips that will make you more productive.

Uncover the top three factors that are killing your productivity and 10 tips to help you overcome them.

Download the free e-book to overcome my productivity killers

Project Management Guide

Your one-stop shop for everything project management

Ready to get more out of your project management efforts? Visit our comprehensive project management guide for tips, best practices, and free resources to manage your work more effectively.

View the guide

What Is the First Step in Solving a Problem?

Although problem solving techniques vary procedurally, experts agree that the first step in solving a problem is defining the problem. Without a clear articulation of the problem at stake, it is impossible to analyze all the key factors and actors, generate possible solutions, and then evaluate them to pick the best option. 

Dr. Elliott Jaffa is a behavioral and management psychologist with over 25 years of problem solving training and management experience. “Start with defining the problem you want to solve,” he says, “And then define where you want to be, what you want to come away with.” He emphasizes these are the first steps in creating an actionable, clear solution. 

Bryan Mattimore is Co-Founder of Growth Engine, an 18-year old innovation agency based in Norwalk, CT. Bryan has facilitated over 1,000 ideation sessions and managed over 200 successful innovation projects leading to over $3 billion in new sales. His newest book is 21 Days to a Big Idea . When asked about the first critical component to successful problem solving, Mattimore says, “Defining the challenge correctly, or ‘solving the right problem’ … The three creative techniques we use to help our clients ‘identify the right problem to be solved’ are questioning assumptions, 20 questions, and problem redefinition. A good example of this was a new product challenge from a client to help them ‘invent a new iron. We got them to redefine the challenge as first: a) inventing new anti-wrinkle devices, and then b) inventing new garment care devices.”

What Are Problem Solving Skills?

To understand the necessary skills in problem solving, you should first understand the types of thinking often associated with strong decision making. Most problem solving techniques look for a balance between the following binaries:

• Convergent vs. Divergent Thinking: Convergent thinking is bringing together disparate information or ideas to determine a single best answer or solution. This thinking style values logic, speed, and accuracy, and leaves no chance for ambiguity. Divergent thinking is focused on generating new ideas to identify and evaluate multiple possible solutions, often uniting ideas in unexpected combinations. Divergent thinking is characterized by creativity, complexity, curiosity, flexibility, originality, and risk-taking.
• Pragmatics vs. Semantics: Pragmatics refer to the logic of the problem at hand, and semantics is how you interpret the problem to solve it. Both are important to yield the best possible solution.
• Mathematical vs. Personal Problem Solving: Mathematical problem solving involves logic (usually leading to a single correct answer), and is useful for problems that involve numbers or require an objective, clear-cut solution. However, many workplace problems also require personal problem solving, which includes interpersonal, collaborative, and emotional intuition and skills. 

The following basic methods are fundamental problem solving concepts. Implement them to help balance the above thinking models.

• Reproductive Thinking: Reproductive thinking uses past experience to solve a problem. However, be careful not to rely too heavily on past solutions, and to evaluate current problems individually, with their own factors and parameters. 
• Idea Generation: The process of generating many possible courses of action to identify a solution. This is most commonly a team exercise because putting everyone’s ideas on the table will yield the greatest number of potential solutions. 

However, many of the most critical problem solving skills are “soft” skills: personal and interpersonal understanding, intuitiveness, and strong listening. 

Mattimore expands on this idea: “The seven key skills to be an effective creative problem solver that I detail in my book Idea Stormers: How to Lead and Inspire Creative Breakthroughs are: 1) curiosity 2) openness 3) a willingness to embrace ambiguity 4) the ability to identify and transfer principles across categories and disciplines 5) the desire to search for integrity in ideas, 6) the ability to trust and exercise “knowingness” and 7) the ability to envision new worlds (think Dr. Seuss, Star Wars, Hunger Games, Harry Potter, etc.).”

“As an individual contributor to problem solving it is important to exercise our curiosity, questioning, and visioning abilities,” advises Carella. “As a facilitator it is essential to allow for diverse ideas to emerge, be able to synthesize and ‘translate’ other people’s thinking, and build an extensive network of available resources.”

MacLeod says the following interpersonal skills are necessary to effectively facilitate group problem solving: “The abilities to invite participation (hear all voices, encourage silent members), not take sides, manage dynamics between the monopolizer, the scapegoat, and the bully, and deal with conflict (not avoiding it or shutting down).” 

Furthermore, Jaffa explains that the skills of a strong problem solver aren’t measurable. The best way to become a creative problem solver, he says, is to do regular creative exercises that keep you sharp and force you to think outside the box. Carella echoes this sentiment: “Neuroscience tells us that creativity comes from creating novel neural paths. Allow a few minutes each day to exercise your brain with novel techniques and brain ‘tricks’ – read something new, drive to work via a different route, count backwards, smell a new fragrance, etc.”

What Is Creative Problem Solving? History, Evolution, and Core Principles

Creative problem solving (CPS) is a method of problem solving in which you approach a problem or challenge in an imaginative, innovative way. The goal of CPS is to come up with innovative solutions, make a decision, and take action quickly. Sidney Parnes and Alex Osborn are credited with developing the creative problem solving process in the 1950s. The concept was further studied and developed at SUNY Buffalo State and the Creative Education Foundation. 

The core principles of CPS include the following:

• Balance divergent and convergent thinking
• Ask problems as questions
• Defer or suspend judgement
• Focus on “Yes, and…” rather than “No, but…”

According to Carella, “Creative problem solving is the mental process used for generating innovative and imaginative ideas as a solution to a problem or a challenge. Creative problem solving techniques can be pursued by individuals or groups.”

When asked to define CPS, Jaffa explains that it is, by nature, difficult to create boundaries for. “Creative problem solving is not cut and dry,” he says, “If you ask 100 different people the definition of creative problem solving, you’ll get 100 different responses - it’s a non-entity.”

Business presents a unique need for creative problem solving. Especially in today’s competitive landscape, organizations need to iterate quickly, innovate with intention, and constantly be at the cutting-edge of creativity and new ideas to succeed. Developing CPS skills among your workforce not only enables you to make faster, stronger in-the-moment decisions, but also inspires a culture of collaborative work and knowledge sharing. When people work together to generate multiple novel ideas and evaluate solutions, they are also more likely to arrive at an effective decision, which will improve business processes and reduce waste over time. In fact, CPS is so important that some companies now list creative problem solving skills as a job criteria.

MacLeod reiterates the vitality of creative problem solving in the workplace. “Problem solving is crucial for all groups and teams,” she says. “Leaders need to know how to guide the process, hear all voices and involve all members - it’s not easy.”

“This mental process [of CPS] is especially helpful in work environments where individuals and teams continuously struggle with new problems and challenges posed by their continuously changing environment,” adds Carella. 

Problem Solving Best Practices

By nature, creative problem solving does not have a clear-cut set of do’s and don’ts. Rather, creating a culture of strong creative problem solvers requires flexibility, adaptation, and interpersonal skills. However, there are a several best practices that you should incorporate:

• Use a Systematic Approach: Regardless of the technique you use, choose a systematic method that satisfies your workplace conditions and constraints (time, resources, budget, etc.). Although you want to preserve creativity and openness to new ideas, maintaining a structured approach to the process will help you stay organized and focused. 
• View Problems as Opportunities: Rather than focusing on the negatives or giving up when you encounter barriers, treat problems as opportunities to enact positive change on the situation. In fact, some experts even recommend defining problems as opportunities, to remain proactive and positive.
• Change Perspective: Remember that there are multiple ways to solve any problem. If you feel stuck, changing perspective can help generate fresh ideas. A perspective change might entail seeking advice of a mentor or expert, understanding the context of a situation, or taking a break and returning to the problem later. “A sterile or familiar environment can stifle new thinking and new perspectives,” says Carella. “Make sure you get out to draw inspiration from spaces and people out of your usual reach.”
• Break Down Silos: To invite the greatest possible number of perspectives to any problem, encourage teams to work cross-departmentally. This not only combines diverse expertise, but also creates a more trusting and collaborative environment, which is essential to effective CPS. According to Carella, “Big challenges are always best tackled by a group of people rather than left to a single individual. Make sure you create a space where the team can concentrate and convene.”
• Employ Strong Leadership or a Facilitator: Some companies choose to hire an external facilitator that teaches problem solving techniques, best practices, and practicums to stimulate creative problem solving. But, internal managers and staff can also oversee these activities. Regardless of whether the facilitator is internal or external, choose a strong leader who will value others’ ideas and make space for creative solutions.  Mattimore has specific advice regarding the role of a facilitator: “When facilitating, get the group to name a promising idea (it will crystalize the idea and make it more memorable), and facilitate deeper rather than broader. Push for not only ideas, but how an idea might specifically work, some of its possible benefits, who and when would be interested in an idea, etc. This fleshing-out process with a group will generate fewer ideas, but at the end of the day will yield more useful concepts that might be profitably pursued.” Additionally, Carella says that “Executives and managers don’t necessarily have to be creative problem solvers, but need to make sure that their teams are equipped with the right tools and resources to make this happen. Also they need to be able to foster an environment where failing fast is accepted and celebrated.”
• Evaluate Your Current Processes: This practice can help you unlock bottlenecks, and also identify gaps in your data and information management, both of which are common roots of business problems.

MacLeod offers the following additional advice, “Always get the facts. Don’t jump too quickly to a solution – working through [problems] takes time and patience.”

Mattimore also stresses that how you introduce creative problem solving is important. “Do not start by introducing a new company-wide innovation process,” he says. “Instead, encourage smaller teams to pursue specific creative projects, and then build a process from the ground up by emulating these smaller teams’ successful approaches. We say: ‘You don’t innovate by changing the culture, you change the culture by innovating.’”

Barriers to Effective Problem Solving

Learning how to effectively solve problems is difficult and takes time and continual adaptation. There are several common barriers to successful CPS, including:

• Confirmation Bias: The tendency to only search for or interpret information that confirms a person’s existing ideas. People misinterpret or disregard data that doesn’t align with their beliefs.
• Mental Set: People’s inclination to solve problems using the same tactics they have used to solve problems in the past. While this can sometimes be a useful strategy (see Analogical Thinking in a later section), it often limits inventiveness and creativity.
• Functional Fixedness: This is another form of narrow thinking, where people become “stuck” thinking in a certain way and are unable to be flexible or change perspective.
• Unnecessary Constraints: When people are overwhelmed with a problem, they can invent and impose additional limits on solution avenues. To avoid doing this, maintain a structured, level-headed approach to evaluating causes, effects, and potential solutions.
• Groupthink: Be wary of the tendency for group members to agree with each other — this might be out of conflict avoidance, path of least resistance, or fear of speaking up. While this agreeableness might make meetings run smoothly, it can actually stunt creativity and idea generation, therefore limiting the success of your chosen solution.
• Irrelevant Information: The tendency to pile on multiple problems and factors that may not even be related to the challenge at hand. This can cloud the team’s ability to find direct, targeted solutions.
• Paradigm Blindness: This is found in people who are unwilling to adapt or change their worldview, outlook on a particular problem, or typical way of processing information. This can erode the effectiveness of problem solving techniques because they are not aware of the narrowness of their thinking, and therefore cannot think or act outside of their comfort zone.

According to Jaffa, the primary barrier of effective problem solving is rigidity. “The most common things people say are, ‘We’ve never done it before,’ or ‘We’ve always done it this way.’” While these feelings are natural, Jaffa explains that this rigid thinking actually precludes teams from identifying creative, inventive solutions that result in the greatest benefit.

“The biggest barrier to creative problem solving is a lack of awareness – and commitment to – training employees in state-of-the-art creative problem-solving techniques,” Mattimore explains. “We teach our clients how to use ideation techniques (as many as two-dozen different creative thinking techniques) to help them generate more and better ideas. Ideation techniques use specific and customized stimuli, or ‘thought triggers’ to inspire new thinking and new ideas.” 

MacLeod adds that ineffective or rushed leadership is another common culprit. “We're always in a rush to fix quickly,” she says. “Sometimes leaders just solve problems themselves, making unilateral decisions to save time. But the investment is well worth it — leaders will have less on their plates if they can teach and eventually trust the team to resolve. Teams feel empowered and engagement and investment increases.”

Strategies for Problem Cause Identification

As discussed, most experts agree that the first and most crucial step in problem solving is defining the problem. Once you’ve done this, however, it may not be appropriate to move straight to the solution phase. Rather, it is often helpful to identify the cause(s) of the problem: This will better inform your solution planning and execution, and help ensure that you don’t fall victim to the same challenges in the future. 

Below are some of the most common strategies for identifying the cause of a problem:

• Root Cause Analysis: This method helps identify the most critical cause of a problem. A factor is considered a root cause if removing it prevents the problem from recurring. Performing a root cause analysis is a 12 step process that includes: define the problem, gather data on the factors contributing to the problem, group the factors based on shared characteristics, and create a cause-and-effect timeline to determine the root cause. After that, you identify and evaluate corrective actions to eliminate the root cause.

‌ Download Fishbone Diagram Template - Excel

Download 5 Whys Template   Excel  |  Word  |  PDF   

Problem Solving Techniques and Strategies

In this section, we’ll explain several traditional and creative problem solving methods that you can use to identify challenges, create actionable goals, and resolve problems as they arise. Although there is often procedural and objective crossover among techniques, they are grouped by theme so you can identify which method works best for your organization.

Divergent Creative Problem Solving Techniques

Brainstorming: One of the most common methods of divergent thinking, brainstorming works best in an open group setting where everyone is encouraged to share their creative ideas. The goal is to generate as many ideas as possible – you analyze, critique, and evaluate the ideas only after the brainstorming session is complete. To learn more specific brainstorming techniques, read this article . 

Mind Mapping: This is a visual thinking tool where you graphically depict concepts and their relation to one another. You can use mind mapping to structure the information you have, analyze and synthesize it, and generate solutions and new ideas from there. The goal of a mind map is to simplify complicated problems so you can more clearly identify solutions.

Appreciative Inquiry (AI): The basic assumption of AI is that “an organization is a mystery to be embraced.” Using this principle, AI takes a positive, inquisitive approach to identifying the problem, analyzing the causes, and presenting possible solutions. The five principles of AI emphasize dialogue, deliberate language and outlook, and social bonding. 

Lateral Thinking: This is an indirect problem solving approach centered on the momentum of idea generation. As opposed to critical thinking, where people value ideas based on their truth and the absence of errors, lateral thinking values the “movement value” of new ideas: This means that you reward team members for producing a large volume of new ideas rapidly. With this approach, you’ll generate many new ideas before approving or rejecting any.

Problem Solving Techniques to Change Perspective

Constructive Controversy: This is a structured approach to group decision making to preserve critical thinking and disagreement while maintaining order. After defining the problem and presenting multiple courses of action, the group divides into small advocacy teams who research, analyze, and refute a particular option. Once each advocacy team has presented its best-case scenario, the group has a discussion (advocacy teams still defend their presented idea). Arguing and playing devil’s advocate is encouraged to reach an understanding of the pros and cons of each option. Next, advocacy teams abandon their cause and evaluate the options openly until they reach a consensus. All team members formally commit to the decision, regardless of whether they advocated for it at the beginning. You can learn more about the goals and steps in constructive controversy here . 

Carella is a fan of this approach. “Create constructive controversy by having two teams argue the pros and cons of a certain idea,” he says. “It forces unconscious biases to surface and gives space for new ideas to formulate.”

Abstraction: In this method, you apply the problem to a fictional model of the current situation. Mapping an issue to an abstract situation can shed extraneous or irrelevant factors, and reveal places where you are overlooking obvious solutions or becoming bogged down by circumstances. 

Analogical Thinking: Also called analogical reasoning , this method relies on an analogy: using information from one problem to solve another problem (these separate problems are called domains). It can be difficult for teams to create analogies among unrelated problems, but it is a strong technique to help you identify repeated issues, zoom out and change perspective, and prevent the problems from occurring in the future. .

CATWOE: This framework ensures that you evaluate the perspectives of those whom your decision will impact. The factors and questions to consider include (which combine to make the acronym CATWOE):

• Customers: Who is on the receiving end of your decisions? What problem do they currently have, and how will they react to your proposed solution?
• Actors: Who is acting to bring your solution to fruition? How will they respond and be affected by your decision?
• Transformation Process: What processes will you employ to transform your current situation and meet your goals? What are the inputs and outputs?
• World View: What is the larger context of your proposed solution? What is the larger, big-picture problem you are addressing?
• Owner: Who actually owns the process? How might they influence your proposed solution (positively or negatively), and how can you influence them to help you?
• Environmental Constraints: What are the limits (environmental, resource- and budget-wise, ethical, legal, etc.) on your ideas? How will you revise or work around these constraints?

Complex Problem Solving

Soft Systems Methodology (SSM): For extremely complex problems, SSM can help you identify how factors interact, and determine the best course of action. SSM was borne out of organizational process modeling and general systems theory, which hold that everything is part of a greater, interconnected system: This idea works well for “hard” problems (where logic and a single correct answer are prioritized), and less so for “soft” problems (i.e., human problems where factors such as personality, emotions, and hierarchy come into play). Therefore, SSM defines a seven step process for problem solving: 

• Begin with the problem or problematic situation 
• Express the problem or situation and build a rich picture of the themes of the problem 
• Identify the root causes of the problem (most commonly with CATWOE)
• Build conceptual models of human activity surrounding the problem or situation
• Compare models with real-world happenings
• Identify changes to the situation that are both feasible and desirable
• Take action to implement changes and improve the problematic situation

SSM can be used for any complex soft problem, and is also a useful tool in change management . 

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA): This method helps teams anticipate potential problems and take steps to mitigate them. Use FMEA when you are designing (redesigning) a complex function, process, product, or service. First, identify the failure modes, which are the possible ways that a project could fail. Then, perform an effects analysis to understand the consequences of each of the potential downfalls. This exercise is useful for internalizing the severity of each potential failure and its effects so you can make adjustments or safeties in your plan. 

‌ Download FMEA Template  

Problem Solving Based on Data or Logic (Heuristic Methods)

TRIZ: A Russian-developed problem solving technique that values logic, analysis, and forecasting over intuition or soft reasoning. TRIZ (translated to “theory of inventive problem solving” or TIPS in English) is a systematic approach to defining and identifying an inventive solution to difficult problems. The method offers several strategies for arriving at an inventive solution, including a contradictions matrix to assess trade-offs among solutions, a Su-Field analysis which uses formulas to describe a system by its structure, and ARIZ (algorithm of inventive problem solving) which uses algorithms to find inventive solutions. 

Inductive Reasoning: A logical method that uses evidence to conclude that a certain answer is probable (this is opposed to deductive reasoning, where the answer is assumed to be true). Inductive reasoning uses a limited number of observations to make useful, logical conclusions (for example, the Scientific Method is an extreme example of inductive reasoning). However, this method doesn’t always map well to human problems in the workplace — in these instances, managers should employ intuitive inductive reasoning , which allows for more automatic, implicit conclusions so that work can progress. This, of course, retains the principle that these intuitive conclusions are not necessarily the one and only correct answer. 

Process-Oriented Problem Solving Methods

Plan Do Check Act (PDCA): This is an iterative management technique used to ensure continual improvement of products or processes. First, teams plan (establish objectives to meet desired end results), then do (implement the plan, new processes, or produce the output), then check (compare expected with actual results), and finally act (define how the organization will act in the future, based on the performance and knowledge gained in the previous three steps). 

Means-End Analysis (MEA): The MEA strategy is to reduce the difference between the current (problematic) state and the goal state. To do so, teams compile information on the multiple factors that contribute to the disparity between the current and goal states. Then they try to change or eliminate the factors one by one, beginning with the factor responsible for the greatest difference in current and goal state. By systematically tackling the multiple factors that cause disparity between the problem and desired outcome, teams can better focus energy and control each step of the process. 

Hurson’s Productive Thinking Model: This technique was developed by Tim Hurson, and is detailed in his 2007 book Think Better: An Innovator’s Guide to Productive Thinking . The model outlines six steps that are meant to give structure while maintaining creativity and critical thinking: 1) Ask “What is going on?” 2) Ask “What is success?” 3) Ask “What is the question?” 4) Generate answers 5) Forge the solution 6) Align resources. 

Control Influence Accept (CIA): The basic premise of CIA is that how you respond to problems determines how successful you will be in overcoming them. Therefore, this model is both a problem solving technique and stress-management tool that ensures you aren’t responding to problems in a reactive and unproductive way. The steps in CIA include:

• Control: Identify the aspects of the problem that are within your control.
• Influence: Identify the aspects of the problem that you cannot control, but that you can influence.
• Accept: Identify the aspects of the problem that you can neither control nor influence, and react based on this composite information. 

GROW Model: This is a straightforward problem solving method for goal setting that clearly defines your goals and current situation, and then asks you to define the potential solutions and be realistic about your chosen course of action. The steps break down as follows:

• Goal: What do you want?
• Reality: Where are you now?
• Options: What could you do?
• Will: What will you do?

OODA Loop: This acronym stands for observe, orient, decide, and act. This approach is a decision-making cycle that values agility and flexibility over raw human force. It is framed as a loop because of the understanding that any team will continually encounter problems or opponents to success and have to overcome them.

There are also many un-named creative problem solving techniques that follow a sequenced series of steps. While the exact steps vary slightly, they all follow a similar trajectory and aim to accomplish similar goals of problem, cause, and goal identification, idea generation, and active solution implementation.

MacLeod offers her own problem solving procedure, which echoes the above steps:

“1. Recognize the Problem: State what you see. Sometimes the problem is covert. 2. Identify: Get the facts — What exactly happened? What is the issue? 3. and 4. Explore and Connect: Dig deeper and encourage group members to relate their similar experiences. Now you're getting more into the feelings and background [of the situation], not just the facts.  5. Possible Solutions: Consider and brainstorm ideas for resolution. 6. Implement: Choose a solution and try it out — this could be role play and/or a discussion of how the solution would be put in place.  7. Evaluate: Revisit to see if the solution was successful or not.”

Many of these problem solving techniques can be used in concert with one another, or multiple can be appropriate for any given problem. It’s less about facilitating a perfect CPS session, and more about encouraging team members to continually think outside the box and push beyond personal boundaries that inhibit their innovative thinking. So, try out several methods, find those that resonate best with your team, and continue adopting new techniques and adapting your processes along the way. 

Improve Problem Solving with Work Management in Smartsheet

Empower your people to go above and beyond with a flexible platform designed to match the needs of your team — and adapt as those needs change. 

The Smartsheet platform makes it easy to plan, capture, manage, and report on work from anywhere, helping your team be more effective and get more done. Report on key metrics and get real-time visibility into work as it happens with roll-up reports, dashboards, and automated workflows built to keep your team connected and informed. 

When teams have clarity into the work getting done, there’s no telling how much more they can accomplish in the same amount of time.  Try Smartsheet for free, today.

Discover why over 90% of Fortune 100 companies trust Smartsheet to get work done.

.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:42px;color:#F5F4F3;}@media (max-width: 1120px){.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:12px;}} AI that works. Coming June 5, Asana redefines work management—again. .css-1ixh9fn{display:inline-block;}@media (max-width: 480px){.css-1ixh9fn{display:block;margin-top:12px;}} .css-1uaoevr-heading-6{font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-1uaoevr-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} .css-ora5nu-heading-6{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:start;-ms-flex-pack:start;-webkit-justify-content:flex-start;justify-content:flex-start;color:#0D0E10;-webkit-transition:all 0.3s;transition:all 0.3s;position:relative;font-size:16px;line-height:28px;padding:0;font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{border-bottom:0;color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover path{fill:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div{border-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div:before{border-left-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active{border-bottom:0;background-color:#EBE8E8;color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active path{fill:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div{border-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div:before{border-left-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} Get early access .css-1k6cidy{width:11px;height:11px;margin-left:8px;}.css-1k6cidy path{fill:currentColor;}

• Product overview
• All features
• App integrations

CAPABILITIES

• project icon Project management
• Project views
• Custom fields
• Status updates
• goal icon Goals and reporting
• Reporting dashboards
• workflow icon Workflows and automation
• portfolio icon Resource management
• Time tracking
• my-task icon Admin and security
• Admin console
• asana-intelligence icon Asana Intelligence
• list icon Personal
• premium icon Starter
• briefcase icon Advanced
• Goal management
• Organizational planning
• Campaign management
• Creative production
• Marketing strategic planning
• Request tracking
• Resource planning
• Project intake
• View all uses arrow-right icon
• Project plans
• Team goals & objectives
• Team continuity
• Meeting agenda
• View all templates arrow-right icon
• Work management resources Discover best practices, watch webinars, get insights
• What's new Learn about the latest and greatest from Asana
• Customer stories See how the world's best organizations drive work innovation with Asana
• Help Center Get lots of tips, tricks, and advice to get the most from Asana
• Asana Academy Sign up for interactive courses and webinars to learn Asana
• Developers Learn more about building apps on the Asana platform
• Community programs Connect with and learn from Asana customers around the world
• Events Find out about upcoming events near you
• Partners Learn more about our partner programs
• Support Need help? Contact the Asana support team
• Asana for nonprofits Get more information on our nonprofit discount program, and apply.

Featured Reads

• Collaboration |
• Turn your team into skilled problem sol ...

Turn your team into skilled problem solvers with these problem-solving strategies

Picture this, you're handling your daily tasks at work and your boss calls you in and says, "We have a problem." 

Unfortunately, we don't live in a world in which problems are instantly resolved with the snap of our fingers. Knowing how to effectively solve problems is an important professional skill to hone. If you have a problem that needs to be solved, what is the right process to use to ensure you get the most effective solution?

In this article we'll break down the problem-solving process and how you can find the most effective solutions for complex problems.

What is problem solving? 

Problem solving is the process of finding a resolution for a specific issue or conflict. There are many possible solutions for solving a problem, which is why it's important to go through a problem-solving process to find the best solution. You could use a flathead screwdriver to unscrew a Phillips head screw, but there is a better tool for the situation. Utilizing common problem-solving techniques helps you find the best solution to fit the needs of the specific situation, much like using the right tools.

Decision-making tools for agile businesses

In this ebook, learn how to equip employees to make better decisions—so your business can pivot, adapt, and tackle challenges more effectively than your competition.

4 steps to better problem solving

While it might be tempting to dive into a problem head first, take the time to move step by step. Here’s how you can effectively break down the problem-solving process with your team:

1. Identify the problem that needs to be solved

One of the easiest ways to identify a problem is to ask questions. A good place to start is to ask journalistic questions, like:

Who : Who is involved with this problem? Who caused the problem? Who is most affected by this issue?

What: What is happening? What is the extent of the issue? What does this problem prevent from moving forward?

Where: Where did this problem take place? Does this problem affect anything else in the immediate area? 

When: When did this problem happen? When does this problem take effect? Is this an urgent issue that needs to be solved within a certain timeframe?

Why: Why is it happening? Why does it impact workflows?

How: How did this problem occur? How is it affecting workflows and team members from being productive?

Asking journalistic questions can help you define a strong problem statement so you can highlight the current situation objectively, and create a plan around that situation.

Here’s an example of how a design team uses journalistic questions to identify their problem:

Overarching problem: Design requests are being missed

Who: Design team, digital marketing team, web development team

What: Design requests are forgotten, lost, or being created ad hoc.

Where: Email requests, design request spreadsheet

When: Missed requests on January 20th, January 31st, February 4th, February 6th

How : Email request was lost in inbox and the intake spreadsheet was not updated correctly. The digital marketing team had to delay launching ads for a few days while design requests were bottlenecked. Designers had to work extra hours to ensure all requests were completed.

In this example, there are many different aspects of this problem that can be solved. Using journalistic questions can help you identify different issues and who you should involve in the process.

2. Brainstorm multiple solutions

If at all possible, bring in a facilitator who doesn't have a major stake in the solution. Bringing an individual who has little-to-no stake in the matter can help keep your team on track and encourage good problem-solving skills.

Here are a few brainstorming techniques to encourage creative thinking:

Brainstorm alone before hand: Before you come together as a group, provide some context to your team on what exactly the issue is that you're brainstorming. This will give time for you and your teammates to have some ideas ready by the time you meet.

Say yes to everything (at first): When you first start brainstorming, don't say no to any ideas just yet—try to get as many ideas down as possible. Having as many ideas as possible ensures that you’ll get a variety of solutions. Save the trimming for the next step of the strategy. 

Talk to team members one-on-one: Some people may be less comfortable sharing their ideas in a group setting. Discuss the issue with team members individually and encourage them to share their opinions without restrictions—you might find some more detailed insights than originally anticipated.

Break out of your routine: If you're used to brainstorming in a conference room or over Zoom calls, do something a little different! Take your brainstorming meeting to a coffee shop or have your Zoom call while you're taking a walk. Getting out of your routine can force your brain out of its usual rut and increase critical thinking.

3. Define the solution

After you brainstorm with team members to get their unique perspectives on a scenario, it's time to look at the different strategies and decide which option is the best solution for the problem at hand. When defining the solution, consider these main two questions: What is the desired outcome of this solution and who stands to benefit from this solution? 

Set a deadline for when this decision needs to be made and update stakeholders accordingly. Sometimes there's too many people who need to make a decision. Use your best judgement based on the limitations provided to do great things fast.

4. Implement the solution

To implement your solution, start by working with the individuals who are as closest to the problem. This can help those most affected by the problem get unblocked. Then move farther out to those who are less affected, and so on and so forth. Some solutions are simple enough that you don’t need to work through multiple teams.

After you prioritize implementation with the right teams, assign out the ongoing work that needs to be completed by the rest of the team. This can prevent people from becoming overburdened during the implementation plan . Once your solution is in place, schedule check-ins to see how the solution is working and course-correct if necessary.

Implement common problem-solving strategies

There are a few ways to go about identifying problems (and solutions). Here are some strategies you can try, as well as common ways to apply them:

Trial and error

Trial and error problem solving doesn't usually require a whole team of people to solve. To use trial and error problem solving, identify the cause of the problem, and then rapidly test possible solutions to see if anything changes. 

This problem-solving method is often used in tech support teams through troubleshooting.

The 5 whys problem-solving method helps get to the root cause of an issue. You start by asking once, “Why did this issue happen?” After answering the first why, ask again, “Why did that happen?” You'll do this five times until you can attribute the problem to a root cause. 

This technique can help you dig in and find the human error that caused something to go wrong. More importantly, it also helps you and your team develop an actionable plan so that you can prevent the issue from happening again.

Here’s an example:

Problem: The email marketing campaign was accidentally sent to the wrong audience.

“Why did this happen?” Because the audience name was not updated in our email platform.

“Why were the audience names not changed?” Because the audience segment was not renamed after editing. 

“Why was the audience segment not renamed?” Because everybody has an individual way of creating an audience segment.

“Why does everybody have an individual way of creating an audience segment?” Because there is no standardized process for creating audience segments. 

“Why is there no standardized process for creating audience segments?” Because the team hasn't decided on a way to standardize the process as the team introduced new members. 

In this example, we can see a few areas that could be optimized to prevent this mistake from happening again. When working through these questions, make sure that everyone who was involved in the situation is present so that you can co-create next steps to avoid the same problem. 

A SWOT analysis

A SWOT analysis can help you highlight the strengths and weaknesses of a specific solution. SWOT stands for:

Strength: Why is this specific solution a good fit for this problem? 

Weaknesses: What are the weak points of this solution? Is there anything that you can do to strengthen those weaknesses?

Opportunities: What other benefits could arise from implementing this solution?

Threats: Is there anything about this decision that can detrimentally impact your team?

As you identify specific solutions, you can highlight the different strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of each solution. 

This particular problem-solving strategy is good to use when you're narrowing down the answers and need to compare and contrast the differences between different solutions. 

Even more successful problem solving

After you’ve worked through a tough problem, don't forget to celebrate how far you've come. Not only is this important for your team of problem solvers to see their work in action, but this can also help you become a more efficient, effective , and flexible team. The more problems you tackle together, the more you’ll achieve. 

Looking for a tool to help solve problems on your team? Track project implementation with a work management tool like Asana .

Related resources

Smooth product launches are simpler than you think

Fix these common onboarding challenges to boost productivity

How Asana uses work management for organizational planning

How Asana uses work management to optimize resource planning

8 Effective Problem-Solving Strategies

Categories Cognition

If you need to solve a problem, there are a number of different problem-solving strategies that can help you come up with an accurate decision. Sometimes the best choice is to use a step-by-step approach that leads to the right solution, but other problems may require a trial-and-error approach. 

Some helpful problem-solving strategies include: Brainstorming Step-by-step algorithms Trial-and-error Working backward Heuristics Insight Writing it down Getting some sleep

Table of Contents

Why Use Problem-Solving Strategies

While you can always make a wild guess or pick at random, that certainly isn’t the most accurate way to come up with a solution. Using a more structured approach allows you to:

• Understand the nature of the problem
• Determine how you will solve it
• Research different options
• Take steps to solve the problem and resolve the issue

There are many tools and strategies that can be used to solve problems, and some problems may require more than one of these methods in order to come up with a solution.

Problem-Solving Strategies

The problem-solving strategy that works best depends on the nature of the problem and how much time you have available to make a choice. Here are eight different techniques that can help you solve whatever type of problem you might face.

Brainstorming

Coming up with a lot of potential solutions can be beneficial, particularly early on in the process. You might brainstorm on your own, or enlist the help of others to get input that you might not have otherwise considered.

Step-by-Step

Also known as an algorithm, this approach involves following a predetermined formula that is guaranteed to produce the correct result. While this can be useful in some situations—such as solving a math problem—it is not always practical in every situation.

On the plus side, algorithms can be very accurate and reliable. Unfortunately, they can also be time-consuming.

And in some situations, you cannot follow this approach because you simply don’t have access to all of the information you would need to do so.

Trial-and-Error

This problem-solving strategy involves trying a number of different solutions in order to figure out which one works best. This requires testing steps or more options to solve the problem or pick the right solution. 

For example, if you are trying to perfect a recipe, you might have to experiment with varying amounts of a certain ingredient before you figure out which one you prefer.

On the plus side, trial-and-error can be a great problem-solving strategy in situations that require an individualized solution. However, this approach can be very time-consuming and costly.

Working Backward

This problem-solving strategy involves looking at the end result and working your way back through the chain of events. It can be a useful tool when you are trying to figure out what might have led to a particular outcome.

It can also be a beneficial way to play out how you will complete a task. For example, if you know you need to have a project done by a certain date, working backward can help you figure out the steps you’ll need to complete in order to successfully finish the project.

Heuristics are mental shortcuts that allow you to come up with solutions quite quickly. They are often based on past experiences that are then applied to other situations. They are, essentially, a handy rule of thumb.

For example, imagine a student is trying to pick classes for the next term. While they aren’t sure which classes they’ll enjoy the most, they know that they tend to prefer subjects that involve a lot of creativity. They utilize this heuristic to pick classes that involve art and creative writing.

The benefit of a heuristic is that it is a fast way to make fairly accurate decisions. The trade-off is that you give up some accuracy in order to gain speed and efficiency.

Sometimes, the solution to a problem seems to come out of nowhere. You might suddenly envision a solution after struggling with the problem for a while. Or you might abruptly recognize the correct solution that you hadn’t seen before. 

No matter the source, insight-based problem-solving relies on following your gut instincts. While this may not be as objective or accurate as some other problem-solving strategies, it can be a great way to come up with creative, novel solutions.

Write It Down

Sometimes putting the problem and possible solutions down in paper can be a useful way to visualize solutions. Jot down whatever might help you envision your options. Draw a picture, create a mind map, or just write some notes to clarify your thoughts.

Get Some Sleep

If you’re facing a big problem or trying to make an important decision, try getting a good night’s sleep before making a choice. Sleep plays an essential role in memory consolidation, so getting some rest may help you access the information or insight you need to make the best choice.

Other Considerations

Even with an arsenal of problem-solving strategies at your disposal, coming up with solutions isn’t always easy. Certain challenges can make the process more difficult. A few issues that might emerge include:

• Mental set : When people form a mental set, they only rely on things that have worked in the last. Sometimes this can be useful, but in other cases, it can severely hinder the problem-solving process.
• Cognitive biases : Unconscious cognitive biases can make it difficult to see situations clearly and objectively. As a result, you may not consider all of your options or ignore relevant information.
• Misinformation : Poorly sourced clues and irrelevant details can add more complications. Being able to sort out what’s relevant and what’s not is essential for solving problems accurately.
• Functional fixedness : Functional fixedness happens when people only think of customary solutions to problems. It can hinder out-of-the-box thinking and prevents insightful, creative solutions.

Important Problem-Solving Skills

Becoming a good problem solver can be useful in a variety of domains, from school to work to interpersonal relationships. Important problem-solving skills encompass being able to identify problems, coming up with effective solutions, and then implementing these solutions.

According to a 2023 survey by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, 61.4% of employers look for problem-solving skills on applicant resumes.

Some essential problem-solving skills include:

• Research skills
• Analytical abilities
• Decision-making skills
• Critical thinking
• Communication
• Time management 
• Emotional intelligence

Solving a problem is complex and requires the ability to recognize the issue, collect and analyze relevant data, and make decisions about the best course of action. It can also involve asking others for input, communicating goals, and providing direction to others.

How to Become a Better Problem-Solver

If you’re ready to strengthen your problem-solving abilities, here are some steps you can take:

Identify the Problem

Before you can practice your problem-solving skills, you need to be able to recognize that there is a problem. When you spot a potential issue, ask questions about when it started and what caused it.

Do Your Research

Instead of jumping right in to finding solutions, do research to make sure you fully understand the problem and have all the background information you need. This helps ensure you don’t miss important details.

Hone Your Skills

Consider signing up for a class or workshop focused on problem-solving skill development. There are also books that focus on different methods and approaches.

The best way to strengthen problem-solving strategies is to give yourself plenty of opportunities to practice. Look for new challenges that allow you to think critically, analytically, and creatively.

Final Thoughts

If you have a problem to solve, there are plenty of strategies that can help you make the right choice. The key is to pick the right one, but also stay flexible and willing to shift gears.

In many cases, you might find that you need more than one strategy to make the choices that are right for your life.

Brunet, J. F., McNeil, J., Doucet, É., & Forest, G. (2020). The association between REM sleep and decision-making: Supporting evidences. Physiology & Behavior , 225, 113109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113109

Chrysikou, E. G, Motyka, K., Nigro, C., Yang, S. I. , & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2016). Functional fixedness in creative thinking tasks depends on stimulus modality. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts , 10(4):425‐435. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000050

Sarathy, V. (2018). Real world problem-solving. Front Hum Neurosci , 12:261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

5 Steps to Teaching Students a Problem-Solving Routine

• Share article

By Jeff Heyck-Williams, the director of curriculum and instruction for Two Rivers Public Charter School

When I visited a 5th grade class recently, the students were tackling the following problem:

If there are nine people in a room and every person shakes hands exactly once with each of the other people, how many handshakes will there be? How can you prove your answer is correct using a model or numerical explanation?

There were students on the rug modeling people with Unifix cubes. There were kids at one table vigorously shaking each other’s hand. There were kids at another table writing out a diagram with numbers. At yet another table, students were working on creating a numeric expression. What was common across this class was that all of the students were productively grappling around the problem.

On a different day, I was out at recess with a group of kindergartners who got into an argument over a vigorous game of tag. Several kids were arguing about who should be “it.” Many of them insisted that they hadn’t been tagged. They all agreed that they had a problem. With the assistance of the teacher, they walked through a process of identifying what they knew about the problem and how best to solve it. They grappled with this very real problem to come to a solution that all could agree upon.

Then just last week, I had the pleasure of watching a culminating showcase of learning for our 8th graders. They presented to their families about their project exploring the role that genetics plays in our society. Tackling the problem of how we should or should not regulate gene research and editing in the human population, students explored both the history and scientific concerns about genetics and the ethics of gene editing. Each student developed arguments about how we as a country should proceed in the burgeoning field of human genetics, which they took to Capitol Hill to share with legislators. Through the process, students read complex text to build their knowledge, identified the underlying issues and questions, and developed unique solutions to this very real problem.

Problem-solving is at the heart of each of these scenarios and is an essential set of skills our students need to develop. They need the abilities to think critically and solve challenging problems without a roadmap to solutions. At Two Rivers Public Charter School in the District of Columbia, we have found that one of the most powerful ways to build these skills in students is through the use of a common set of steps for problem-solving. These steps, when used regularly, become a flexible cognitive routine for students to apply to problems across the curriculum and their lives.

The Problem-Solving Routine

At Two Rivers, we use a fairly simple routine for problem-solving that has five basic steps. The power of this structure is that it becomes a routine that students are able to use regularly across multiple contexts. The first three steps are implemented before problem-solving. Students use one step during problem-solving. Finally, they finish with a reflective step after problem-solving.

Problem Solving from Two Rivers Public Charter School on Vimeo .

Before Problem-Solving: The KWI

The three steps before problem-solving: We call them the K-W-I.

The “K” stands for “know” and requires students to identify what they already know about a problem. The goal in this step of the routine is two-fold. First, the student needs to analyze the problem and identify what is happening within the context of the problem. For example, in the math problem above, students identify that they know there are nine people and each person must shake hands with each other person. Second, the student needs to activate their background knowledge about that context or other similar problems. In the case of the handshake problem, students may recognize that this seems like a situation in which they will need to add or multiply.

The “W” stands for “what” a student needs to find out to solve the problem. At this point in the routine, the student always must identify the core question that is being asked in a problem or task. However, it may also include other questions that help a student access and understand a problem more deeply. For example, in addition to identifying that they need to determine how many handshakes in the math problem, students may also identify that they need to determine how many handshakes each individual person has or how to organize their work to make sure that they count the handshakes correctly.

The “I” stands for “ideas” and refers to ideas that a student brings to the table to solve a problem effectively. In this portion of the routine, students list the strategies that they will use to solve a problem. In the example from the math class, this step involved all of the different ways that students tackled the problem from Unifix cubes to creating mathematical expressions.

This KWI routine before problem-solving sets students up to actively engage in solving problems by ensuring they understand the problem and have some ideas about where to start in solving the problem. Two remaining steps are equally important during and after problem-solving.

During Problem-Solving: The Metacognitive Moment

The step that occurs during problem-solving is a metacognitive moment. We ask students to deliberately pause in their problem-solving and answer the following questions: “Is the path I’m on to solve the problem working?” and “What might I do to either stay on a productive path or readjust my approach to get on a productive path?” At this point in the process, students may hear from other students that have had a breakthrough or they may go back to their KWI to determine if they need to reconsider what they know about the problem. By naming explicitly to students that part of problem-solving is monitoring our thinking and process, we help them become more thoughtful problem-solvers.

After Problem-Solving: Evaluating Solutions

As a final step, after students solve the problem, they evaluate both their solutions and the process that they used to arrive at those solutions. They look back to determine if their solution accurately solved the problem, and when time permits, they also consider if their path to a solution was efficient and how it compares with other students’ solutions.

The power of teaching students to use this routine is that they develop a habit of mind to analyze and tackle problems wherever they find them. This empowers students to be the problem-solvers that we know they can become.

The opinions expressed in Next Gen Learning in Action are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Module 1: Problem Solving Strategies

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 10352

Unlike exercises, there is never a simple recipe for solving a problem. You can get better and better at solving problems, both by building up your background knowledge and by simply practicing. As you solve more problems (and learn how other people solved them), you learn strategies and techniques that can be useful. But no single strategy works every time.

Pólya’s How to Solve It

George Pólya was a great champion in the field of teaching effective problem solving skills. He was born in Hungary in 1887, received his Ph.D. at the University of Budapest, and was a professor at Stanford University (among other universities). He wrote many mathematical papers along with three books, most famously, “How to Solve it.” Pólya died at the age 98 in 1985.1

1. Image of Pólya by Thane Plambeck from Palo Alto, California (Flickr) [CC BY

In 1945, Pólya published the short book How to Solve It , which gave a four-step method for solving mathematical problems:

First, you have to understand the problem.

After understanding, then make a plan.

Carry out the plan.

Look back on your work. How could it be better?

This is all well and good, but how do you actually do these steps?!?! Steps 1. and 2. are particularly mysterious! How do you “make a plan?” That is where you need some tools in your toolbox, and some experience to draw upon.

Much has been written since 1945 to explain these steps in more detail, but the truth is that they are more art than science. This is where math becomes a creative endeavor (and where it becomes so much fun). We will articulate some useful problem solving strategies, but no such list will ever be complete. This is really just a start to help you on your way. The best way to become a skilled problem solver is to learn the background material well, and then to solve a lot of problems!

Problem Solving Strategy 1 (Guess and Test)

Make a guess and test to see if it satisfies the demands of the problem. If it doesn't, alter the guess appropriately and check again. Keep doing this until you find a solution.

Mr. Jones has a total of 25 chickens and cows on his farm. How many of each does he have if all together there are 76 feet?

Step 1: Understanding the problem

We are given in the problem that there are 25 chickens and cows.

All together there are 76 feet.

Chickens have 2 feet and cows have 4 feet.

We are trying to determine how many cows and how many chickens Mr. Jones has on his farm.

Step 2: Devise a plan

Going to use Guess and test along with making a tab

Many times the strategy below is used with guess and test.

Make a table and look for a pattern:

Procedure: Make a table reflecting the data in the problem. If done in an orderly way, such a table will often reveal patterns and relationships that suggest how the problem can be solved.

Step 3: Carry out the plan:

Notice we are going in the wrong direction! The total number of feet is decreasing!

Better! The total number of feet are increasing!

Step 4: Looking back:

Check: 12 + 13 = 25 heads

24 + 52 = 76 feet.

We have found the solution to this problem. I could use this strategy when there are a limited number of possible answers and when two items are the same but they have one characteristic that is different.

Videos to watch:

1. Click on this link to see an example of “Guess and Test”

http://www.mathstories.com/strategies.htm

2. Click on this link to see another example of Guess and Test.

http://www.mathinaction.org/problem-solving-strategies.html

Check in question 1:

Place the digits 8, 10, 11, 12, and 13 in the circles to make the sums across and vertically equal 31. (5 points)

Check in question 2:

Old McDonald has 250 chickens and goats in the barnyard. Altogether there are 760 feet . How many of each animal does he have? Make sure you use Polya’s 4 problem solving steps. (12 points)

Problem Solving Strategy 2 (Draw a Picture). Some problems are obviously about a geometric situation, and it is clear you want to draw a picture and mark down all of the given information before you try to solve it. But even for a problem that is not geometric thinking visually can help!

Videos to watch demonstrating how to use "Draw a Picture".

1. Click on this link to see an example of “Draw a Picture”

2. Click on this link to see another example of Draw a Picture.

Problem Solving Strategy 3 ( Using a variable to find the sum of a sequence.)

Gauss's strategy for sequences.

last term = fixed number ( n -1) + first term

The fix number is the the amount each term is increasing or decreasing by. "n" is the number of terms you have. You can use this formula to find the last term in the sequence or the number of terms you have in a sequence.

Ex: 2, 5, 8, ... Find the 200th term.

Last term = 3(200-1) +2

Last term is 599.

To find the sum of a sequence: sum = [(first term + last term) (number of terms)]/ 2

Sum = (2 + 599) (200) then divide by 2

Sum = 60,100

Check in question 3: (10 points)

Find the 320 th term of 7, 10, 13, 16 …

Then find the sum of the first 320 terms.

Problem Solving Strategy 4 (Working Backwards)

This is considered a strategy in many schools. If you are given an answer, and the steps that were taken to arrive at that answer, you should be able to determine the starting point.

Videos to watch demonstrating of “Working Backwards”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FFWTsMEeJw

Karen is thinking of a number. If you double it, and subtract 7, you obtain 11. What is Karen’s number?

1. We start with 11 and work backwards.

2. The opposite of subtraction is addition. We will add 7 to 11. We are now at 18.

3. The opposite of doubling something is dividing by 2. 18/2 = 9

4. This should be our answer. Looking back:

9 x 2 = 18 -7 = 11

5. We have the right answer.

Check in question 4:

Christina is thinking of a number.

If you multiply her number by 93, add 6, and divide by 3, you obtain 436. What is her number? Solve this problem by working backwards. (5 points)

Problem Solving Strategy 5 (Looking for a Pattern)

Definition: A sequence is a pattern involving an ordered arrangement of numbers.

We first need to find a pattern.

Ask yourself as you search for a pattern – are the numbers growing steadily larger? Steadily smaller? How is each number related?

Example 1: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13…

Find the next 2 numbers. The pattern is each number is increasing by 3. The next two numbers would be 16 and 19.

Example 2: 1, 4, 9, 16 … find the next 2 numbers. It looks like each successive number is increase by the next odd number. 1 + 3 = 4.

So the next number would be

25 + 11 = 36

Example 3: 10, 7, 4, 1, -2… find the next 2 numbers.

In this sequence, the numbers are decreasing by 3. So the next 2 numbers would be -2 -3 = -5

-5 – 3 = -8

Example 4: 1, 2, 4, 8 … find the next two numbers.

This example is a little bit harder. The numbers are increasing but not by a constant. Maybe a factor?

So each number is being multiplied by 2.

16 x 2 = 32

1. Click on this link to see an example of “Looking for a Pattern”

2. Click on this link to see another example of Looking for a Pattern.

Problem Solving Strategy 6 (Make a List)

Example 1 : Can perfect squares end in a 2 or a 3?

List all the squares of the numbers 1 to 20.

1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 121 144 169 196 225 256 289 324 361 400.

Now look at the number in the ones digits. Notice they are 0, 1, 4, 5, 6, or 9. Notice none of the perfect squares end in 2, 3, 7, or 8. This list suggests that perfect squares cannot end in a 2, 3, 7 or 8.

How many different amounts of money can you have in your pocket if you have only three coins including only dimes and quarters?

Quarter’s dimes

0 3 30 cents

1 2 45 cents

2 1 60 cents

3 0 75 cents

Videos demonstrating "Make a List"

Check in question 5:

How many ways can you make change for 23 cents using only pennies, nickels, and dimes? (10 points)

Problem Solving Strategy 7 (Solve a Simpler Problem)

Geometric Sequences:

How would we find the nth term?

Solve a simpler problem:

1, 3, 9, 27.

1. To get from 1 to 3 what did we do?

2. To get from 3 to 9 what did we do?

Let’s set up a table:

Term Number what did we do

Looking back: How would you find the nth term?

Find the 10 th term of the above sequence.

Let L = the tenth term

Problem Solving Strategy 8 (Process of Elimination)

This strategy can be used when there is only one possible solution.

I’m thinking of a number.

The number is odd.

It is more than 1 but less than 100.

It is greater than 20.

It is less than 5 times 7.

The sum of the digits is 7.

It is evenly divisible by 5.

a. We know it is an odd number between 1 and 100.

b. It is greater than 20 but less than 35

21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35. These are the possibilities.

c. The sum of the digits is 7

21 (2+1=3) No 23 (2+3 = 5) No 25 (2 + 5= 7) Yes Using the same process we see there are no other numbers that meet this criteria. Also we notice 25 is divisible by 5. By using the strategy elimination, we have found our answer.

Check in question 6: (8 points)

Jose is thinking of a number.

The number is not odd.

The sum of the digits is divisible by 2.

The number is a multiple of 11.

It is greater than 5 times 4.

It is a multiple of 6

It is less than 7 times 8 +23

What is the number?

Click on this link for a quick review of the problem solving strategies.

https://garyhall.org.uk/maths-problem-solving-strategies.html

Check Out the New Website Shop!

Novels & Picture Books

Anchor Charts

6 Strategies for Increasing Critical Thinking with Problem Solving

By Mary Montero

Share This Post:

• Facebook Share
• Twitter Share
• Pinterest Share
• Email Share

For many teachers, problem-solving feels synonymous with word problems, but it is so much more. That’s why I’m sharing my absolute favorite lessons and strategies for increasing critical thinking through problem solving below. You’ll learn six strategies for increasing critical thinking through mathematical word problems, the importance of incorporating error analysis into your weekly routines,  and several resources I use for improving critical thinking – almost all of which are free! I’ll also briefly touch on teaching students to dissect word problems in a way that enables them to truly understand what steps to take to solve the problem.

This post is based on my short and sweet (and FREE!) Increasing Critical Thinking with problem Solving math mini-course . When you enroll in the free course you’ll get access to everything you need to get started:

• Problem Solving Essentials
• Six lessons to implement into your classroom
• How to Implement Error Analysis
• FREE Error Analysis Starter Kit
• FREE Mathematician Posters
• FREE Multi-Step Problem Solving Starter Kit
• FREE Task Card Starter Kit

Introduction to Critical Thinking and Problem Solving

According to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, “The term “problem solving” refers to mathematical tasks that have the potential to provide intellectual challenges for enhancing students’ mathematical understanding and development .)”

That’s a lot of words, but I’d like to focus in on the word POTENTIAL. I’m going to share with you strategies that move these tasks from having the potential to provide a challenge to actually providing that challenge that will enrich their mathematical understanding and development. 

If you’re looking for an introduction to multi-step problem solving, I have a free multi-step problem solving starter kit for that! 

I also highly encourage you to download and use my free Mathematician posters that help students see what their “jobs” are as mathematicians. Giving students this title of mathematician not only holds them accountable, but it gives them greater confidence and gives me very specific verbiage to use when discussing math with my students. 

The impacts of Incorporating Problem Solving

When I made the shift to incorporate problem solving into my everyday instruction intentionally, I saw a distinct increase in student understanding and application of mathematical concepts, more authentic connections to real-world mathematics scenarios, greater student achievement, and notably increased engagement. There are also ripple effects observed in other areas, as students learn grit and a growth mindset after tackling some more challenging problem-solving situations. I hope that by implementing some of these ideas, you see the very same shift.

Here’s an overview of some problem solving essentials I use to teach students to solve problems.

Routine vs. Non-Routine Problem Solving

Routine problems comprise the vast majority of the word problems we pose to students. They require using an algorithm through one or more of the four major operations, have relevance to real-world situations, and often have a distinct answer. They are solvable, and students can use several concrete strategies for solving, like “make a table” or “draw a picture” to solve.

Conversely, non-routine problem-solving focuses on mathematical reasoning. These are often more open-ended and allow students to make generalizations about math and numbers. There isn’t usually a straight path leading to the answer, there isn’t an algorithm readily available for finding the solution (or students are going to have to come up with the algorithm), and it IS going to require some level of experimentation and manipulation of numbers in order to solve it. In non-routine problems, students learn to look for patterns, work backwards, build models, etc. 

Incorporating both routine and non-routine problems into your instruction for EVERY student is critical. When solving non-routine problems, students can use some of the strategies they’ve learned for solving routine problems, and when solving routine problems, students benefit from a deeper understanding of the complexity of numbers that they gained from non-routine problems. For this training, we will focus heavily on routine problems, though the impacts of these practices will transition into non-routine problem solving.

Increasing Critical Thinking in Problem Solving

When tackling a problem, students need to be able to determine WHAT to do and HOW to do it.  Knowing the HOW is what you likely teach every day – your students know how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. But knowing WHAT to do is arguably the most essential part of solving problems – once students know what needs to be done, then they can apply the conceptual skills – the algorithms and strategies – they’ve learned and will know how to solve. While dissecting word problems is an excellent starting point, exposing students to various ways to examine problems can help them figure out the WHAT. 

Being faced with a lengthy, complex word problem can be intimidating to even your most adept students. Having a toolbox of strategies to use when you tackle problems and seeing problems in various ways can enable students to get to the point where they feel comfortable knowing where to begin.

Shifting away from keywords

While it isn’t best practice to rely solely on operation “keywords” to determine what operation needs to occur when solving a problem, I’m not ready to fully ditch keyword-based instruction in math. I think there’s a huge difference between teaching students to blindly rely on keywords to determine which operation to use for a solution and using words found in the text to guide students in figuring out what to do. For that reason, I place heavy emphasis on using precise mathematical vocabulary , including specific operation keywords, and when students become accustomed to using that precise mathematical vocabulary every day, it really helps them to identify that language in word problems as well.

I also allow my students to dissect math word problems using strategies like CUBES , but in a way that is more aligned with best practice. 

Six Lessons for Easy Implementation

Here are six super quick “outside the box” word problem, problem solving lessons to begin implementing into your classroom. These lessons shouldn’t replace your everyday problem solving, but are instead extensions that will help students tackle those tricky problems they encounter everyday. As a reminder, we look at all of these lessons in the FREE Increasing Critical Thinking with problem Solving math mini-course .

Lesson #1: What’s the Question?

In this lesson, we’ll encourage students to see. just how many different questions can be asked about the same statements or information. We start with a typical, one-step, one-operation problem. Then we cross out or cover up the answer and ask students to generate possible questions.

After students have come up with a variety of questions, ask them to determine HOW they would solve for each one.

Reveal the question and ask students how they would solve this one and see if any of the questions they came up with match.

This activity is important because it demonstrates to students just how many different questions can be asked about the same statement or information. It’s perfect for your students who automatically pick out numbers and start “operating” on them blindly. I’ve had students come up with 5-8 questions with a single statement!

I like to do this throughout the year using different word problems based on the skill we’re focused on at the time AND skills we’ve previously mastered, but be careful not to only use examples based on the skill you’re teaching right then so their brains don’t automatically go to the same place.

These 32 What’s My Operation? task cards will help your student learn and review which operations to use for different types of word problems! They’re perfect to use as a quick assessment, game of SCOOT, math center activity, or homework.

Lesson 2: Similar Scenarios

In this lesson, students will evaluate similar scenarios to determine the appropriate operations. Start with three similar scenarios requiring different operations and identify what situation is happening in each scenario (finding total, determining an amount, splitting or combining, etc.).

Read all three-word problems on a similar topic. Determine the similarity of all of them and determine which operation would be used to solve them. How does the situation/action of the problem help you determine what step to take?

I also created these differentiated word problem task cards after noticing my students struggling with which operation to choose, especially when given multiple problems from a similar scenario. They encourage students to select the appropriate operation for each word problem.

Lesson 3: Opposing Operations

In this lesson, students will determine relevant information from a set of facts, which requires a great deal of critical thinking to determine which operation to use. Give students a scenario and a variety of facts/information relating to the scenario as well as several questions to answer based on the facts . Students will focus on determining HOW they will solve each question using only the relevant information. 

These Operation Fascination task c ards engage students in critical thinking about operations. Each card has a scenario, multiple clues and facts to support the scenario, and four questions to accompany each scenario. The questions are a variety of operations so that students can see how using the same information can solve multiple problems.

Lesson 4: Next Level Numberless

In this lesson, we’ll take numberless word problems to the next level by developing a strong conceptual understanding of word problems. Give students scenarios without numbers and have them write a question and/or insert numbers using a specific operation and purpose . This requires a great deal of thinking to not only determine the situation, but to also figure out numbers that fit into the situation in a way that makes sense.

By integrating these types of math problems into your daily lessons, you can significantly enhance your students’ comprehension of word problems and problem-solving. These numberless word problem task cards are the ideal to improve your students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. They offer a variety of numbered and numberless word problems.

Lesson 5: Story Situations

In this lesson, we’ll discuss the importance of students generating their own word problems with a given set of information. This requires a great deal of quantitative reasoning as students determine how they would use a given set of numbers to create a realistic situation. Present students with two predetermined numbers and a theme. Then have students write a word problem, including a question, using the given information. 

Engage your students in additional practice with these differentiated division task cards that require your students to write their OWN word problems (and create real-world relevance in their learning!). Each task card has numbers and a theme that students use to guide their thinking and creation of a word problem.

Lesson 6: No Scenario Solving

In this lesson, we’ll decontextualize problem solving and require students to create the situation, represent it numerically, and solve. It’s a cognitively demanding task! Give students an operation and a purpose (joining, separating, comparing, etc.) with no other context, numbers, numbers, or theme. Then have students generate a word problem.

For additional practice, have students swap problems to identify the operation, purpose, and solution.

Implementing Error Analysis

Error analysis is an exceptional way to promote thinking and learning, but how do we teach students to figure out which type of math error they’ve made? This error analysis starter kit can help!

First, it is very rare that I will tell my students what error they have made in their work. I want to challenge them to figure it out on their own. So, when I see that they have a wrong answer, I ask them to go back and figure out where something went wrong. Because I resist the urge to tell them right away where their error is, my students tend to get a lot more practice identifying them!

Second, when I introduce a concept, I always, always, always create anchor charts with students and complete interactive notebook activities with them so that they have step-by-step procedures for completing tasks right at their fingertips. I have them go back and reference their notebooks while they are looking at their errors.  Usually, they can follow the anchor chart step-by-step to make sure they haven’t made a conceptual error, and if they have, they can identify it.

Third, I let them use a calculator. When worst comes to worst, and they are fairly certain they haven’t made a conceptual mistake to identify, I let them get out a calculator and start computing, step-by-step to see where they’ve made a mistake.

IF, after taking these steps, a student can’t figure out their mistake (especially if I find that it’s a conceptual mistake), I know I need to go back and do some individual reteaching with them because they don’t have a solid understanding of the concept.

This FREE addition error analysis is a good place to start, no matter the grade level. I show them the process of walking through the problem and how best to complete an error analysis task.

Digging Deeper into Error Analysis

Once students show proficiency in the standard algorithm (or strategies), I take it a step further and have them dive into error analysis where they can show a “reverse” understanding as they evaluate mistakes made and fix them. Being able to identify an error in someone else’s work requires higher order thinking not found in most other projects or activities and certainly not found in basic math fact completion.

First, teach students the difference between a computational error and a conceptual error. 

• Computational is when they make a mistake in basic math facts. This might look as simple as  64/8 does not equal 7. Oops!
• A Conceptual or Procedural Error is when they make a mistake in the procedure or concept. 
• I can’t tell you how many times students show as not proficient on a topic when the mistakes they are making are COMPUTATIONAL and not conceptual or procedural. They don’t need more review in how to use a strategy… they need to slow down and pay closer attention to their math facts!

Once we’ve introduced the types of errors they should be looking out for, we move on to actually analyzing these errors in someone else’s work and fixing the mistake.

I have created error analysis tasks for you to use with you students so they can identify the errors, types of errors, rework the problem, and create their own version of the problem and solve it. I have seen great success with incorporating these tasks into ALL of my math units. I even have kids beg to take their error analysis tasks out to recess to finish! These are great resources to start:

• Error Analysis Bundle
• 3rd Grade Word Problem of the Day
• 4th Grade Word Problem of the Day
• 5th Grade Word Problem of the Day

The final step in using error analysis is actually having students correct their OWN mistakes. Once I have instructed on types of errors, I will start by simply telling them, Oops! You’ve made a computational error here! That way they aren’t furiously looking through the procedure for a mistake, instead they are looking to see where they computed wrong. Conversely, I’ll tell them if they’ve made a procedural mistake, and that can guide them in figuring out what they need to look for.

Looking at the different types of errors students are making is essential to guiding my instruction as well, so even though it takes a bit longer to grade things like this, it is immensely helpful to me as I make adjustments to my instruction.

Resources and Ideas for Critical Thinking

I’ve compiled a collection of websites for complex tasks with multiple, open-ended answers and scenarios. The majority of these tasks are non-routine and so easy to implement. I often post these tasks and allow students short bursts of time to strategize and plan for a solution. Consider using the tasks and problems from these sites as warm-ups, extensions of your morning meeting, during enrichment groups, or on a Problem of the Week board. I also highly encourage you to incorporate these non-routine problems into your core instruction time for all students at least once or twice a month.

• NRICH provides thousands of FREE online mathematics resources for ages 3 to 18. The tasks focus on developing problem-solving skills, perseverance, mathematical reasoning, the ability to apply knowledge creatively in unfamiliar contexts, and confidence in tackling new challenges..
• Open Middle offers challenging math word problems that require a higher depth of knowledge than most problems that assess procedural and conceptual understanding. They support the Common Core State Standards and provide students with opportunities for discussing their thinking. All problems have a “closed beginning,” meaning that they all start with the same initial problem, a “closed-end” meaning that they all end with the same answer, and an “open middle” meaning that there are multiple ways to approach and ultimately solve the problem.
• Mathcurious offers interactive digital puzzles. Each adventure is dedicated to exploring the world of math and sharing experiences, knowledge, and ideas.
• Robert Kaplinsky shares math strategies, lessons, and resources designed to create problem solvers. The lessons are detailed and challenging!
• Mathigon “The mathematical playground” offers free manipulatives, activities, and lessons to make online learning interactive and engaging. The digital manipulates are a must-use!
• Fractal Foundation uses fractals to inspire interest in science, math and art. It has numerous fractal activities, software to help your students create their own fractals, and more.
• Greg Fletcher 3 Act Tasks contain engaging math videos with guiding questions. You can also download recording sheets to go with each video.

Mary Montero

I’m so glad you are here. I’m a current gifted and talented teacher in a small town in Colorado, and I’ve been in education since 2009. My passion (other than my family and cookies) is for making teachers’ lives easier and classrooms more engaging.

You might also like…

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

©2023 Teaching With a Mountain View . All Rights Reserved | Designed by Ashley Hughes

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

Lost your password?

Review Cart

No products in the cart.

Problem Solving Activities: 7 Strategies

• Critical Thinking

Problem solving can be a daunting aspect of effective mathematics teaching, but it does not have to be! In this post, I share seven strategic ways to integrate problem solving into your everyday math program.

In the middle of our problem solving lesson, my district math coordinator stopped by for a surprise walkthrough. 

I was so excited!

We were in the middle of what I thought was the most brilliant math lesson– teaching my students how to solve problem solving tasks using specific problem solving strategies. 

It was a proud moment for me!

Each week, I presented a new problem solving strategy and the students completed problems that emphasized the strategy. 

Genius right? 

After observing my class, my district coordinator pulled me aside to chat. I was excited to talk to her about my brilliant plan, but she told me I should provide the tasks and let my students come up with ways to solve the problems. Then, as students shared their work, I could revoice the student’s strategies and give them an official name. 

What a crushing blow! Just when I thought I did something special, I find out I did it all wrong. 

I took some time to consider her advice. Once I acknowledged she was right, I was able to make BIG changes to the way I taught problem solving in the classroom. 

When I Finally Saw the Light

To give my students an opportunity to engage in more authentic problem solving which would lead them to use a larger variety of problem solving strategies, I decided to vary the activities and the way I approached problem solving with my students. 

Problem Solving Activities

Here are seven ways to strategically reinforce problem solving skills in your classroom. 

Seasonal Problem Solving

Many teachers use word problems as problem solving tasks. Instead, try engaging your students with non-routine tasks that look like word problems but require more than the use of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division to complete. Seasonal problem solving tasks and daily challenges are a perfect way to celebrate the season and have a little fun too!

Cooperative Problem Solving Tasks

Go cooperative! If you’ve got a few extra minutes, have students work on problem solving tasks in small groups. After working through the task, students create a poster to help explain their solution process and then post their poster around the classroom. Students then complete a gallery walk of the posters in the classroom and provide feedback via sticky notes or during a math talk session.

Notice and Wonder

Before beginning a problem solving task, such as a seasonal problem solving task, conduct a Notice and Wonder session. To do this, ask students what they notice about the problem. Then, ask them what they wonder about the problem. This will give students an opportunity to highlight the unique characteristics and conditions of the problem as they try to make sense of it. 

Want a better experience? Remove the stimulus, or question, and allow students to wonder about the problem. Try it! You’ll gain some great insight into how your students think about a problem.

Math Starters

Start your math block with a math starter, critical thinking activities designed to get your students thinking about math and provide opportunities to “sneak” in grade-level content and skills in a fun and engaging way. These tasks are quick, designed to take no more than five minutes, and provide a great way to turn-on your students’ brains. Read more about math starters here ! 

Create your own puzzle box! The puzzle box is a set of puzzles and math challenges I use as fast finisher tasks for my students when they finish an assignment or need an extra challenge. The box can be a file box, file crate, or even a wall chart. It includes a variety of activities so all students can find a challenge that suits their interests and ability level.

Calculators

Use calculators! For some reason, this tool is not one many students get to use frequently; however, it’s important students have a chance to practice using it in the classroom. After all, almost everyone has access to a calculator on their cell phones. There are also some standardized tests that allow students to use them, so it’s important for us to practice using calculators in the classroom. Plus, calculators can be fun learning tools all by themselves!

Three-Act Math Tasks

Use a three-act math task to engage students with a content-focused, real-world problem! These math tasks were created with math modeling in mind– students are presented with a scenario and then given clues and hints to help them solve the problem. There are several sites where you can find these awesome math tasks, including Dan Meyer’s Three-Act Math Tasks and Graham Fletcher’s 3-Acts Lessons . 

Getting the Most from Each of the Problem Solving Activities

When students participate in problem solving activities, it is important to ask guiding, not leading, questions. This provides students with the support necessary to move forward in their thinking and it provides teachers with a more in-depth understanding of student thinking. Selecting an initial question and then analyzing a student’s response tells teachers where to go next. 

Ready to jump in? Grab a free set of problem solving challenges like the ones pictured using the form below. 

Which of the problem solving activities will you try first? Respond in the comments below.

Shametria Routt Banks

• Assessment Tools
• Content and Standards
• Differentiation
• Math & Literature
• Math & Technology
• Math Routines
• Math Stations
• Virtual Learning
• Writing in Math

You may also like...

2 Responses

This is a very cool site. I hope it takes off and is well received by teachers. I work in mathematical problem solving and help prepare pre-service teachers in mathematics.

Thank you, Scott! Best wishes to you and your pre-service teachers this year!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

©2024 The Routty Math Teacher.   All Rights Reserved.  Designed by Ashley Hughes.

Privacy overview.

E ducational D esigner

Journal of the international society for design and development in education, introduction, the value of critiquing alternative problem solving strategies., development of the problem solving lessons: the designers’ remit, an example of a problem-solving lesson., sample and data collection, potential uses of “sample student work”, the design and form of sample student work, students needed exposure to a wide range of methods, difficulties in using sample student work in the classroom., discussion of the design issues raised, acknowledgements, about the authors.

Note: If you browse this site it will use temporary 'session cookies' to assist navigation and keep an anonymous record of page visits. More info…

Developing students’ strategies for problem solving in mathematics:

The role of pre-designed “sample student work”, sheila evans and malcolm swan centre for research in mathematics education university of nottingham, england.

This paper describes a design strategy that is intended to foster self and peer assessment and develop students’ ability to compare alternative problem solving strategies in mathematics lessons. This involves giving students, after they themselves have tackled a problem, simulated “sample student work” to discuss and critique. We describe the potential uses of this strategy and the issues that have arisen during trials in both US and UK classrooms. We consider how this approach has the potential to develop metacognitive acts in which students reflect on their own decisions and planning actions during mathematical problem solving.

An accompanying paper in this volume ( Swan & Burkhardt 2014 ) outlines the rationale, design and structure of the lesson materials developed in the Mathematics Assessment Project (MAP) [1] . In short, the MAP team has designed and developed over one hundred Formative Assessment Lessons (FALs) to support US Middle and High Schools in implementing the new Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Each lesson consists of student resources and an extensive teacher guide. About one-third of these lessons involves the tackling of non-routine, problem-solving tasks. The aim of these lessons is to use formative assessment to develop students’ capacity to apply mathematics flexibly to unstructured problems, both from pure mathematics and from the real world. These non-routine lessons are freely available on the web: http://map.mathshell.org.uk

One challenge in designing the FALs was to incorporate aspects of self and peer-assessment, activities that have regularly been associated with significant learning gains ( Black & Wiliam 1998a ). These gains appear to be due to the reflective, self-monitoring or metacognitive habits of mind generated by such activity. As Schoenfeld ( 1983 , 1985, 1987, 1992 ) demonstrated, expert problem solvers frequently engage in metacognitive acts in which they step back and reflect on the approaches they are using. They ask themselves planning and monitoring questions, such as: ‘Is this going anywhere? Is there a helpful way I might represent this problem differently?’ They bring to mind alternative approaches and make selections based on prior experience. In contrast, novice problem solvers are often observed to become fixated on an approach and pursue it relentlessly, however unprofitably. Self and peer assessment appear to allow students to step back in a similar manner and allow ‘ working through tasks’ to be replaced by ‘ working on ideas’ . Our design challenge was therefore to incorporate opportunities into our lessons for students to develop the facility to engage in metacognitive acts in which they consider and evaluate alternative approaches to non-routine problems.

One of the practices from the Common Core State Standards that we sought to specifically address in this way, was: Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others. Part of this standard reads as follows:

Mathematically proficient students are able to compare the effectiveness of two plausible arguments, distinguish correct logic or reasoning from that which is flawed, and—if there is a flaw in an argument—explain what it is. Students at all grades can listen or read the arguments of others, decide whether they make sense, and ask useful questions to clarify or improve the arguments. ( NGA & CCSSO 2010 , p. 6)

A possible design strategy was to construct “sample student work” for students to discuss, critique and compare with their own ideas. In this paper we describe the reasons for this approach and the outcomes we have observed when this was used in classroom trials.

In a traditional classroom, a task is often used by the teacher to introduce a new technique, then students practice the technique using similar tasks. This is what some refer to as ‘Triple X’ teaching: ‘exposition, examples, exercises.’ There is no need for the teacher to connect or compare alternative approaches as it is predetermined that all students will solve each task using the same method. Any student difficulties are unlikely to surprise the teacher. This is not the case in a classroom where students employ different approaches to solve the same non-routine task; the teacher’s role is more demanding. Students may use unanticipated solution-methods and unforeseen difficulties may arise.

The benefits of learning mathematics by understanding, critiquing, comparing and discussing multiple approaches to a problem are well-known ( Pierce, et al. 2011 ; Silver, et al. 2005 ). Two approaches are commonly used: inviting students to solve each problem in more than one way, and allowing multiple methods to arise naturally within the classroom then having these discussed by the class. Both methods are difficult for teachers.

Instructional interventions intended to encourage students to produce alternative solutions have proved largely unsuccessful ( Silver, et al. 2005 ). It has been found that not only do students lack motivation to solve a problem in more than one way, but teachers are similarly reluctant to encourage them to do so ( Leikin & Levav-Waynberg 2007 ).

The second, perhaps more natural, approach is for students to share strategies within a whole class discussion. In Japanese classrooms, for example, lessons are often structured with four key components: Hatsumon (the teacher gives the class a problem to initiate discussion); Kikan-shido (the students tackle the problem in groups or individually); Neriage (a whole class discussion in which alternative strategies are compared and contrasted and through which consensus is sought) and finally the Matome , or summary ( Fernandez & Yoshida 2004 ; Shimizu 1999 ). Among these, the Neriage stage is considered to be the most crucial. This term, in Japanese refers to kneading or polishing in pottery, where different colours of clay are blended together. This serves as a metaphor for the considering and blending of students’ own approaches to solving a mathematics problem. It involves great skill on the part of the teacher, as she must select student work carefully during the Kikan-shido phase and sequence the work in a way that will elicit the most profitable discussions. In the Matome stage of the lesson, the Japanese teachers will tend to make a careful final comment on the mathematical sophistication of the approaches used. The process is described by Shimizu:

Based on the teacher’s observations during Kikan-shido, he or she carefully calls on students to present their solution methods on the chalkboard, selecting the students in a particular order. The order is quite important both for encouraging those students who found naive methods and for showing students’ ideas in relation to the mathematical connections among them. In some cases, even an incorrect method or error may be presented if the teacher thinks this would be beneficial to the class. Once students’ ideas are presented on the chalkboard, they are compared and contrasted orally. The teacher’s role is not to point out the best solution but to guide the discussion toward an integrated idea. ( Shimizu 1999 , p110)

In part, perhaps, influenced by the Japanese approaches, other researchers have also adopted similar models for structuring classroom activity. They too emphasize the importance of: anticipating student responses to cognitively demanding tasks; careful monitoring of student work; discerning the mathematical value of alternative approaches in order to scaffold learning; purposefully selecting solution-methods for whole class discussion; orchestrating this discussion to build on the collective sense-making of students by intentionally ordering the work to be shared; helping students make connections between and among different approaches and looking for generalizations; and recognizing and valuing students’ constructed solutions by comparing this with existing valued knowledge, so that they may be transformed into reusable knowledge ( Brousseau 1997 ; Chazan & Ball 1999 ; Lampert 2001 ; Stein, et al. 2008 ). However, this is demanding on teachers. The teachers’ concern that students participate in these discussions by sharing ideas with the whole class often becomes the main goal of the activity. Often researchers observe teachers sticking to a ‘show and tell’ approach rather than discussing the ideas behind the solutions in any depth. Student talk is often prioritized over peer learning ( Stein, et al. 2008 ). Merely accepting answers, without attempting to critique and synthesize individual contributions does guarantee participation, is less demanding on the teacher, but can constrain the development of mathematical thinking ( Mercer 1995 )

In our work prior to the Mathematics Assessment Project (MAP) project, however, we have found that approaches which rely on teachers selecting and discussing students’ own work are problematic when the mathematical problems are both non-routine and involve substantial chains of reasoning. Teachers have only limited time to spend with each group during the course of a lesson. They find it extremely difficult to monitor and interpret extended student reasoning as this can be poorly articulated or expressed. Most of the ‘problems’ discussed in the research literature are short and contain only a few steps, so the selection of student work is relatively straightforward. We have attempted to tackle this issue by suggesting teachers allow students time to work on the problems individually in advance of the lesson, and then collect in these early ideas and attempt to interpret the approaches before the formative assessment lesson itself. This time gap does allow teachers an opportunity to anticipate student responses in the lesson and prepare formative feedback in the form of written and oral questions. In addition, we have suggested that group work is undertaken using shared resources and is presented on posters so that student reasoning becomes more visible to the teacher as he or she is monitoring work. The selection and presentation of student approaches remains difficult however, partly because the responses are so complex that other students have difficulty understanding them. We often witness ‘show and tell’ events where the students present their approach only to be greeted with a silent incomprehension from their peers.

One possible solution we explore in the rest of this paper, is the use of pre-prepared “sample student work”. This is carefully designed, handwritten material that simulates how students may respond to a problem. The handwritten nature conveys to students that this work may contain errors and may be incomplete. The task for students is to critique each piece and compare the approaches used, with each other and with their own, before returning to improve their own work on the problem.

Here, we explore the use of sample student work in the classroom. We first describe how the sample student work fits into the design of a problem solving FALs; then consider its potential uses, its design and form and then the difficulties that have been observed as it has been used within the classroom. We conclude by discussing the design issues raised and possible directions for future research.

The design of the MAP lessons has been explained elsewhere in this volume ( Swan & Burkhardt 2014 ), so we refrain from repeating that here. The process was based on design research principles, involving theory-driven iterative cycles of design, enactment, analysis and redesign ( Barab & Squire 2004 ; Bereiter 2002 ; Cobb, et al. 2003 ; DBRC 2003 , p. 5; Kelly 2003 ; van den Akker, et al. 2006 ). Each lesson was developed, through two iterative design cycles, with each lesson being trialed in three or four US classrooms between each revision. Revisions were based on structured, detailed feedback from experienced observers of the materials in use in classrooms. The intention was to develop robust designs that may be used more widely by teachers, without further support.

The remit for the designers was to create lessons that had clarity of purpose and would maximize opportunities for students to make their reasoning visible to each other and their teacher. This was intended to ensure the alignment of teacher and student learning goals, to enable teachers to adapt and respond to student learning needs in the classroom, and to enable teachers to follow-up lessons appropriately ( Black & Wiliam 1998a , 1998b; Leahy, et al. 2005 ; Swan 2006 ). The lessons were designed to draw on a range of important mathematical content, be engaging and feature high-level cognitive challenges. They were intended to be accessible, allowing multiple entry points and solution strategies. This allowed students to approach the task in different ways based on their prior knowledge. The lessons were also designed to encourage decision-making, leading to a sense of student ownership. Opportunities for students to conjecture, review and make connections were embedded. Finally, the lessons were designed to provide opportunities for students to compare and critique multiple solution-methods ( Figure 1 Figure 1 ).

Research indicates that it is not sufficient for teachers to be simply handed non-routine tasks. Lessons such as these can proceed in unexpected ways and, without teacher guidance, can often result in teachers reducing the cognitive demands of the task and the corresponding learning opportunities ( Stein, et al. 1996 ). In order to support teachers in developing skills to successfully work with these lessons, detailed guides were written. The guides outline the structure of each lesson, clearly stating the designers’ intentions, suggestions for formative assessment, examples of issues students may face and offering detailed pedagogical guidance for the teacher.

In Figure 2 we offer one example of a problem-solving task [2] , and below outline a typical lesson structure:

• An unscaffolded problem is tackled individually by students Students are given about 20 minutes to tackle the problem without help, and their initial attempts are collected in by the teacher.
• Teachers assess a sample of the work The teacher reviews the sample and identifies the main issues that need addressing in the lesson. We describe the common issues ( Figure 3 ) that arise and suggest questions for the teacher to use to move students’ thinking forward. (In Having Kittens , these included: not developing a suitable representation, working unsystematically, not making assumptions explicit and so on).
• Groups work on the problem The teacher asks students to work together, sharing their initial ideas and attempt to arrive at a joint, group solution, that they can present on a poster. The pre-prepared strategic questions are posed to students that seem to be struggling.
• Students share different approaches Students visit each other’s posters and groups explain their approach. Alternatively a few group solutions may be displayed and discussed. This may help for example, to begin discussions on the assumptions made, and so on.

• Students discuss sample student work Students are given a range of sample student work that illustrate a range of possible approaches ( Figure 4 ). They are asked to complete, correct and/or compare these. In the Kittens example, students are asked to comment on the correct aspects of each piece, the assumptions made, and how the work may be improved. The teacher’s guide contains a detailed commentary on each piece. For example, for Wayne’s solution, the guide says: Wayne has assumed that the mother has six kittens after 6 months, and has considered succeeding generations. He has, however, forgotten that each cat may have more than one litter. He has shown the timeline clearly. Wayne doesn’t explain where the 6-month gaps have come from.
• Students improve their own solutions Students are given a further opportunity to act on what they have learned from each other and the sample student work.
• Whole class discussion to review learning points in the lesson The teacher holds a class discussion focusing on some aspects of the learning. For example, he or she may focus on the role of assumptions, the representations used, and the mathematical structure of the problem. This may also involve further references to the sample student work.
• Students complete a personal review questionnaire This simply invites students to reflect on how their understanding of the problem has evolved over the lesson andwhat they have learned from it.

Collect students’ responses to the task. Make some notes on what their work reveals about their current levels of understanding, and their different problem solving approaches. The purpose of doing this is to forewarn you of issues that will arise during the lesson itself, so that you may prepare carefully. We suggest that you do not score students’ work. The research shows that this will be counterproductive, as it will encourage students to compare their scores and will distract their attention from what they can do to improve their mathematics To, help students to make further progress by summarizing their difficulties as a series of questions. Some suggestions for these are given on the next page. These have been drawn from common difficulties observed in trials of this lesson unit. (extract from the Teacher Guide)

By drawing attention to common issues, the contents of the table can also support teachers to scaffold students learning both during the collaborative activity and whole class discussions.

Altogether, these formative assessment lessons were trialed by over 100 teachers in over 50 US schools. During the third year of the project, many of the problem solving lessons were also taught in the UK by eight secondary school teachers, with first-hand observation by the lesson designers.

Although teachers in all of these trials were invited to teach the lesson as outlined in the guide, we also made it clear that teachers should feel able to adapt the materials to accommodate the needs, interests and previous attainment of students, as well as the teacher’s own preferred ways of working. We recognized that teachers play the central role in transforming the design intentions and, inevitably, that some of these transformations would surprise the designers .

We examined all available observer reports on the problem solving lessons and elicited all references to sample student work. These comments were then categorized under specific themes such as ‘Errors in Sample Student Work’ or ‘Questions for students to answer about sample student work’. Additionally, observers completed a questionnaire ( Figure 5 Figure 5 ) designed specifically to help designers better understand how teachers use the sample student work and the supporting guide, and how this use has evolved over the course of the project. This data forms the basis of the findings from the US lesson trials.

The analysis of the UK data is ongoing. Before and after each FAL teachers were interviewed using a questionnaire ( Figure 6 Figure 6 ) intended to help designers better comprehend key teacher behaviors and understandings, such as how the teacher prepared for the lesson, what she perceived as the ‘big mathematical ideas’ of the lesson, what she had learnt from the lesson. At the end of the one-year project, teachers were interviewed about their experiences. Again the questions asked were shaped by the literature and issues that had arisen over the course of the project. For example, how teachers used the guide and their opinions on the sample student work. At the time of writing, all the final interviews have been analyzed, as have the pre and post lesson responses made by two of the teachers. We have also developed a framework to analyze whole class discussions. Twelve class discussions have been analyzed. This data forms the basis of the findings from the UK lesson trials.

During the refinement of the lessons we have gradually become more aware that the purpose of sharing student approaches needs to be made explicit. By combining purposes inappropriately, we can undermine their effect. For example, if a sample approach is full of errors, the student may become so absorbed in working through the sample work that they fail to make comparisons between different pieces of work.

The following list describes some of the reasons we have designed sample student work:

To encourage a student that is stuck in one line of thinking to consider others If a student has struggled for some time with a particular approach, teachers are often tempted to suggest a specific approach. This can lead to subsequent imitative behavior by students. Alternatively the teacher may ask the student to consider other students’ attempts to solve the problem. This offers fresh insight and help without being directive.

“For students who have had trouble coming up with a solution, having the sample student work has helped them think of a way to organize or get started with the task. Since these students are having trouble getting a solution, they usually look over the various sample student work and pick one with which they feel most comfortable. Having Kittens was one task where students benefitted by seeing how other students organized their thinking”. (Observer comment from questionnaire)

To enable a student to make connections within mathematics Different approaches to a problem can facilitate connections between different elements of knowledge, thereby creating or strengthening networks of related ideas and enabling students to achieve ‘a coherent, comprehensive, flexible and more abstract knowledge structure’ ( Seufert, et al. 2007 ).

“I did not routinely, except perhaps at A level, make connections between topics and now I am trying to incorporate this into my practice at a much lower level. The sample student work highlighted how traditional my approach was and how I followed quite a linear route of mathematical progression” (UK teacher during end-of-project interview)

Figure 7 Figure 7 shows an example of sample solutions provided in the FALs that provide students with opportunities to connect and compare different representations.

• To signal to students that mistakes are part of learning In so doing the stigma attached to being wrong may be reduced ( Staples 2007 ).
• To draw attention to common mathematical misconceptions A sample piece of student work may be chosen or carefully designed to embody a particular mathematical misconception. Students may then be asked to analyse the line of reasoning embedded in the work, and explain its defects.
• To compare alternative representations of a problem For modelling problems, many different representations are possible during the formulation stage. Typically these include verbal, diagrammatic, graphical, tabular and algebraic representations. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, and through the comparison of these over a succession of problems, students may become more able to appreciate their power.
• To compare hidden assumptions It is often helpful to offer students two correct responses to a problem that arrive at very different solutions solely because different modelling assumptions have been made. This draws attention to the sensitivity of the solution to the variables within the problem. An example of this is provided by the sample solutions in Figure 3 .
• To draw students attention to valued criteria for assessment. Particularly when using tasks that involve problem solving and investigation, students often remain unsure of the educational purpose of the lesson and the criteria the teacher is using to judge the quality of their work ( Bell, et al. 1997 ). If they are asked, for example, to rank-order several pieces of sample student work according to given criteria (such as accuracy, quality of communication, elegance) they become more aware of such criteria. This can contribute significantly to the alignment of student and teacher objectives ( Leahy, et al. 2005 ). Also, engaging in another student’s thinking may strengthen students’ self-assessment skills.

Research suggests that students’ self-assessment capabilities may be enhanced if they are provided with existing solutions to work through and reflect upon. Carroll (1994) , for example, replaced students working through algebra problems with students studying worked examples. This was shown to be particularly effective with low-achievers because it reduced the cognitive load and allowed students to reflect on the processes involved.

In our work we have frequently found it necessary to design the ‘student work’ ourselves, rather than use examples taken straight from the classroom. This is often to ensure that the focus of students’ discussion will remain on those aspects of the work that we intend. For example, the work must be clear and accessible, if other students are to be able to follow the reasoning. If each piece of work is overlong, then students may find it difficult to apprehend the work as a whole, so that comparisons become difficult to make. If our created student work is too far removed (too easy or too difficult) from what the students themselves would or could do, then it loses credibility.

It was felt important to use handwritten work, as this communicates to students that the work is freshly created and has not been polished for publication. It reduces the perceived ‘authority’ of the mathematics presented, increases the likelihood that it may contain errors and introduces a third ‘person’ to the classroom who is unknown to the students. This anonymity can be advantageous; students do not know the mathematical prowess of the author. If it is known that a student with an established reputation for being ‘mathematically able’ has authored a solution then most will assume the solution is valid. Anonymity removes this danger. Making ‘student work’ anonymous also reduces the emotional aspects of peer review. Feedback from our early trials indicated that sometimes students were reserved and over-polite about one another’s work, reluctant to voice comments that could be perceived as negative. When outside work was introduced, they became more critical.

In the US trials, we found that, within a single class, the solution methods used by students were often similar in kind. This may be partly due to the common practice of US teachers to focus exclusively on each topic area for an extended period, thus making it likely that students will draw from that area when solving a problem. Alternatively, students may choose to use a solution method they assume is particularly valued, even when this might be inappropriate. The following observer comment would suggest that a numerical solution would be favored over a geometric one, for example:

Due to the ‘traditional’ approaches generally used here in the States, many teachers believe that ‘geometric’ solutions are NOT showing rigor or intelligence and that number is the best way. Students have internalized this… (Observer report)

In our experience, students are unlikely to draw autonomously on methods they are still unsure of or they have only just learned. The mathematics they choose to use will often relate back to mathematics used in earlier years. They may frequently resort, for example, to safe and inefficient ‘guess and check’ numerical methods, that they know they can rely on, rather than graphical or algebraic methods.

The difficulty of transferring methods from one context to another is a common theme in the research literature. For example, students may know how to figure out the gradient, intercept and the equation of a graph, but still find it challenging to recall and apply these concepts to a ‘real-world’ problem. One reason for the low degree of transfer is that students often recall concepts in a situation-specific manner, focusing mainly on surface features ( Gentner 1989 ; Medin & Ross 1989 ) rather than on the underlying mathematical principles. Our UK study supports these findings. On several occasions teachers taught a concept, in advance of the lesson, that they considered would help students to solve the problem and were subsequently surprised that students decided not to use it! Clearly, successful problem solving is not just about students’ knowledge - it is about how, when and whether they decide to use it ( Schoenfeld, 1992 , p. 44).

In the few cases where students did use a wide range of approaches, these rarely included strategies to match all the learning goals of the lesson. For example, students did not necessarily select different representations of the same concept, or use efficient, elegant or generalizable strategies. The mathematical learning opportunities were therefore limited.

For the above reasons we concluded that some fresh input of methods needed to be introduced into the classroom if students were to have opportunities to discuss alternative representations and powerful methods. This could perhaps come from the teacher, but that would then almost certainly remove the problem from students and result in students imitating the teacher’s method. Sample student work provides an alternative input that, as we have said, carries less authority.

In this section we outline a few of the main difficulties we observed when sample student work was used in US and UK classrooms.

Students were analyzing work in superficial ways

In our first version of the teacher’s guide, we suggested that the teacher could introduce the sample work to the class by writing the following instructions on the board:

Imagine you are the teacher and have to assess this work. Correct the work and write comments on the accuracy and organization of each response. Make some specific suggestions as to how the work may be improved.

Feedback from the US trials indicated that these instructions were inadequate. Teachers and students were not clear on the purposes of the activity, and student responses were superficial. For example, observers reported US teachers asking:

What is the math we want to have a conversation about? Do we want students to explain the method? Do we want each piece to stand-alone or should students compare and contrast strategies?

Observers reported that students were not digging deeply enough into the mathematics of each sample and, unless asked a direct question by the teacher, they often worked in silence, looking for errors without evaluating the overall solution strategy. Some students mimicked the feedback they often received from their teacher, providing comments such as ‘Awesome’, ‘Good answer’ or ‘Show a little more work’. A clear message came from the observers; the prompts in the guide needed to be more explicit and focus on the mathematics of the problem; scaffolding was required. The decision was therefore made to include more specific questions, such as:

What piece of information has Danny forgotten to use? What is the purpose of Lydia’s graph? What is the point of figuring out the slope and intercept?

Such questions appeared to make the purpose more discernable to teachers. Feedback from the US observers to these changes was encouraging:

I think the questions or prompts about each piece of student work really focus the students on the thinking, bring out the key mathematics and are a great improvement to the original lesson…Last year students just made judgment statements, but this year the comments were focused on the mathematics.

Not all teachers shared this view, however. In the UK, one teacher commented:

Students are being forced along a certain path as a way to engage with the sample student work. Rather, they [the questions] should be more open and students are then able to comment in any way they like. …. I think sometimes they feel themselves kind of shoehorning in certain types of answer.

This teacher preferred to simply ask students to explain the approach; describe what the student had done well and suggest possible improvements. This practice did encourage engagement, and students’ assessment criteria were made visible to the teacher, but at times the learning goals of the lesson were only superficially attended to.

In both the US and UK, many students focused on the appearance of the work, rather than on its content, with comments on the neatness of diagrams and handwriting. Many commented that the sample work was poorly explained, but did not go on to say clearly how it should be improved. Sample comments were: ‘she needs to explain it better’; ‘the diagrams should not be all over the place’. We attempted to remedy this by suggesting that, rather than just making suggestions for improvement, students should actually make improvements. One teacher commented that this focus on effective mathematical communication had resulted in her students writing fuller explanations when solving problems for themselves.

Students were focused on correcting errors, while ignoring holistic issues

The feedback from observers on the use of errors in sample student work presented us with a more complex issue. Observers commented that when understandings were fragile, the errors often made ‘the most complicated ideas more complicated’. It also became apparent from US feedback that when errors were found in sample student work, some students dismissed the solutions as undeserving of further analysis. Similarly, in UK classrooms students and teachers often assumed the only goal of the activity was to locate and correct errors. One UK teacher commented that when the student work was error-free, students were more inclined to make holistic comparisons of strategic approach.

This led us to look carefully at our purposes in using errors. We had originally included two different kinds of errors: procedural and conceptual. Procedural errors are common arithmetic or algebraic mistakes. Conceptual errors are symptoms of incorrect reasoning and are often more structural in nature. In response to feedback from observers, we removed many of the procedural errors. In many cases, however, the design decision was taken to retain conceptual errors that encourage students to understand the solution-method and its purpose.

For example, Figure 10 shows a problem solving task and Figure 11 shows three samples of student work. Each sample contains a conceptual error. Included in the guide is an explanation of these errors:

Ella draws a sample space in the form of an organized table. Although Ella clearly presents her work, she makes the mistake of including the diagonals. This means the same ball is selected twice. This is not possible, as the balls are not replaced. (Teacher’s guide) Anna assumes that there are only two outcomes (that the two balls are the same color or that they are different colors), so that the probabilities are equal. Anna does not take into account the changes in probabilities when a ball is removed from the bag and not replaced. Jordan does not take into account that the first ball is not replaced. When selecting the second ball there are only 5 balls in the bag, so these probability fractions should all have a denominator of 5.

In some lessons we decide that, rather than including errors, we invited students to complete unfinished responses. For example, in the Testing a New Product task ( Figure 12 ) students’ were asked to complete the tables in Penny and Aran’s work and the final column in Harry’s graph ( Figure 13 ).

They were then asked to describe the advantages and disadvantages of each approach to the problem. Most students in a UK trial of the lesson were able to complete the work, they understood the processes, and were able to work out the correct answers. They did however encounter difficulties interpreting the resulting figures in the context of the real-world situation. This struggle prompted students to consider how far each approach is fit for purpose: how well it each one tackles the problem of working with the four variables of packaging, fragrance, gender and preference, and how far useful conclusions may be reached using each approach.

Students were not given time to consider a sufficient range of sample student work

Initial feedback from observers indicated the lessons were taking longer than had been anticipated; teachers were giving out all pieces of sample student work, but there was often insufficient time for students to successfully evaluate and compare the different approaches. In response to this, designers included the following generic text to all lessons guides:

There may not be time, and it is not essential, for all groups to look at all sample responses. If this is the case, be selective about what you hand out. For example, groups that have successfully completed the task using one method will benefit from looking at different approaches. Other groups that have struggled with a particular approach may benefit from seeing another student’s work that uses the same strategy.

These instructions encourage students to critique and reflect on unfamiliar approaches, to explicate a process and to compare their own work with a similar approach; this, in turn could serve as a catalyst to review and revise their own work. Differentiating the allocation of sample student work in this way may however create problems in the whole class discussion, as not all of the students will have worked on the piece of work under discussion. This instruction places pedagogical demands on teachers, however. They have to again make rapid decisions on which piece of work to allocate to each group. In US trials, however, the suggested approach was not followed:

We have some teachers who give all the sample student work and let students choose the order and the amount they do. This might be less common. Others are very controlling and hand out certain pieces to each group. Others like a certain method to solve problems and like to use that one to model. I think this is a function of the teacher’s comfort level with control and students expectations. (Observer report)

It turned out that very few students were allowed sufficient time to work on all the pieces of sample student work or time to evaluate unfamiliar methods.

These issues were also a concern for the UK teachers. At the start of the project some were reluctant to issue all of the sample student work at the same time, for fear that students would be overwhelmed. As one teacher commented:

At the beginning (of the project) it was too much for pupils to take on all the different methods at once. Even towards the end I didn’t always give them all to them. I believed they became unsettled because the task felt too great. I felt they needed to get used to just looking at one piece first. I also picked out pieces of work that I felt within their ability they could access. (Teacher report)

Students were not using the sample student work to improve their own solutions

Although the teachers clearly recognized that a prime purpose of sample student work was to serve as a catalyst for students to ultimately improve their own solutions, there was little evidence of students subsequently changing their work apart from when they noticed numerical errors. While most students acknowledged that their work needed improving, many did not take the next step and improve it. Only students that were stuck were likely to adapt or use a strategy from the sample student work.

The problem solving lessons were designed to involve cycles of refinement of students’ solutions. They attempted the task individually, before the lesson, then in groups, then considered the sample work and then again were urged to improve their work a third time. For teachers that were used to students working through a problem once, then moving on, this was a substantial new demand.

It is clear that communicating complex pedagogic intentions is not easy. It is made easier by having some common framework with reference points. A strategic goal of these lessons was to build this infrastructure in teachers’ minds

Students were often not invited to make comparisons between the sample approaches.

As mentioned earlier in the paper, the design intention is for students to compare alternative problem solving approaches. As such, all lessons include whole-class discussion instructions of the following kind:

Ask students to compare the different methods: Which method did you like best? Why? Which method did you find most difficult to understand? Why? How could the student improve his/her answer? Did anyone come up with a method different from these?

Feedback from both the US and UK classrooms indicate that teachers rarely encouraged students to make such comparisons. There appear to be multiple reasons for this.

Time pressure was a frequently raised issue. Students need sufficient time to identify and reflect on the similarities and differences between methods and connect these to the constraints and affordances of each method in terms of the context of the problem. The whole class discussion was held towards the end of the lesson. These discussions were often brief or non-existent, possibly reflecting how teachers value the activity. A common assumption was that the important learning had already happened, in the collaborative activity.

Another factor may be lack of adequate support in the guide. Research indicates it is not enough to simply suggest that sample student work should be compared, there need to be instructional prompts that draw students’ attention to the similarities and differences of methods ( Chazan & Ball 1999 ). Teachers and students need criteria for comparison to frame the discussion ( Gentner, et al. 2003 ; Rittle-Johnson & Star 2009 ). Furthermore, these prompts should occur prior to the whole-class discussion. Students need time to develop their own ideas before sharing them with the class.

Rather than compare the different pieces of sample student work, UK students were consistently given the opportunity to compare one piece with their own. Students often used the sample to figure out errors either in their own or in the sample itself. One UK teacher noted that when groups were given the sample student work that most closely reflected their own solution-method, their comments appeared to be more thoughtful, whereas with unfamiliar solution-methods students often focused on the correctness of the result or the neatness of the drawing and did not perceive it as a solution-method they would use.

Most of the teachers involved in the trials had never before attempted to ask students to critique work in the ways described above. They reported that ‘getting inside another person’s head’ proved challenging and students learned to do this only gradually.

I think it has taken most of the year to get the kids to actually be able to look at a piece of work and follow it through to see what that person has done …..

One of the profound difficulties for designers is in trying to increase the possibilities for reflective activity in classrooms. The etymology of the word curriculum is from the Latin word for a race or a racecourse, which in turn is derived from the verb currere meaning to run. Perhaps unfortunately, that is precisely what it feels like for most students. The introduction of problem solving in general, and of analyzing sample student work in particular are seen by many as time-consuming activities that detract from the primary goal of improving procedural fluency or ‘learning more stuff’.

We are encouraged, however to see that the new Common Core State Standards place explicit value on the development of problem solving, mathematical practices and, in particular, on students being able to critique reasoning. Most students, we suspect, are not aware of this new agenda. Some years ago, we conducted an experiment to see whether students could identify the purposes of a number of different kinds of mathematics lesson. It became clear that students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the purposes of the lessons were only aligned for procedural mathematics. The mismatch between teacher and student perceptions was more pronounced as lessons became progressively more practices-oriented ( Swan, et al. 2000 ). There was some empirical evidence, however, that by introducing metacognitive activities into the classroom that this mismatch could be reduced. These included such activities as discussing key conceptual obstacles and common errors, explaining errors in sample student work – and orally reviewing the purpose of each lesson.

In this paper, we have seen that, left to themselves, students are unlikely to produce a wide range of qualitatively different solutions for comparison, and therefore it may be helpful to create samples of work to stimulate such reflective discussion. We have, however also noted that we have found it necessary to:

• discourage superficial analysis, by stating explicitly the purpose of the sample student work, and by asking specific questions that relate to this purpose;
• encourage holistic comparisons by making the sample student work short, accessible and clear, and by not including arithmetic and other low-level errors that distract the students’ attention away from the identified purpose;
• make the distribution of the sample student work more effective, by perhaps sequencing it so that successive pairwise comparisons of approaches can be made;
• offer students explicit opportunities to incorporate what they have learned from the sample work into their own solutions;
• offer the teachers support for the whole class discussion so that they can identify and draw out criteria for the comparison of alternative approaches.

From a designers’ perspective, it is natural to focus on the challenges in creating a design that may be used effectively by the target audiences. We may thus have given the impression that the lessons have been unsuccessful in achieving their goals. This, however, is far from the truth. These lessons are proving extremely popular with teachers and are currently being used as professional development tools across the US. They are also forming the basis for ‘lesson studies’ in both the US and the UK. In the lesson studies, they are viewed as ‘research proposals’ rather than ‘lesson plans’.

Teachers and observers have described on many occasions the learning they have gained from comparing student work in these lessons; teacher comments include:

I now think pupils can learn more from working with many different solutions to one problem rather than solving many different problems, each in only one way.

It moves away from students chasing the answer.

I can now see how much easier it is for a student to recognize that, say a trial and improvement method is inefficient, when it is compared to a sleek geometrical method rather than when simply looking at the solution on its’ own.

To our knowledge, there are no major studies that focus on how teachers work with a range of pre-written solution-methods for a range of non-routine problems. This study raises many issues and in so doing acts as a launch pad for further more detailed studies. More exploration is required into how the use of sample student work affects pupils’ capacity to solve problems. One might expect to see, for example, that students increase their repertoire of available methods when solving problems. So far, however, we have no evidence of this. We do, however, have some early indications that students are beginning to write clearer and fuller explanations as a result of critiquing sample student work.

We would like to acknowledge the support for the study, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, our co-researchers at the University of Berkeley, California and the observer team.

[1] The Maths Assessment Project, based at UC Berkeley, was directed by Alan Schoenfeld, Hugh Burkhardt, Daniel Pead, Phil Daro and Malcolm Swan, who led the lesson design team which included at various stages Nichola Clarke, Rita Crust, Clare Dawson, Sheila Evans, Colin Foster and Marie Joubert. The work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; their program officer was Jamie McKee. The US observers who provided the feedback from US classrooms were led by David Foster, Mary Bouck and Diane Schaefer, working with Sally Keyes, Linda Fisher, Joe Liberato and Judy Keeley.

[2] The Having Kittens task used in this lesson was originally designed by Acumina Ltd. ( http://www.acumina.co.uk/ ) for Bowland Maths ( http://www.bowlandmaths.org.uk ) and appears courtesy of the Bowland Charitable Trust.

Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13 (1), 1-14.

Bell, A., Phillips, R., Shannon, A., & Swan, M. (1997). Students’ perceptions of the purposes of mathematical activities. Paper presented at the 21st Conference of International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lahti, Finland.

Bereiter, C. (2002). Design research for sustained innovation. Cognitive studies, Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 9 (3), 321-327.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment in Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles Policy and Practice, 5 (1), 7-74.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box : raising standards through classroom assessment . London: King's College London School of Education 1998.

Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland & V. Warfield, Trans. Vol. 19). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Carroll, W. M. (1994). Using worked examples as an instructional support in the algebra classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83 , 360-367.

Chazan, D., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Beyond being told not to tell. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19 (2), 2-10.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design Experiments in Educational Research. Educational Researcher, 32 (1).

DBRC (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational researcher, 32 (1), 5-8.

Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson Study: A japanese Approach to Improving Mathematics Teaching and Learning . Mahwah, New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.

Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and Transfer: A General Role for Analogical Encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95 (2), 393–408.

Kelly, A. (2003). Theme issue: The role of design in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 3-4.

Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom Assessment: Minute by Minute, Day by Day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 19-24.

Leikin, R., & Levav-Waynberg, A. (2007). Exploring mathematics teacher knowledge to explain the gap between theory-based recommendations and school practice in the use of connecting tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66 , 349-371.

Medin, D. L., & Ross, B. H. (1989). The specific character of abstract thought: Categorization, problem solving, and induction. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of intelligence (Vol. 5, pp. 189-223). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge . Clevedon, Philadelphia, Adelaide.

NGA, & CCSSO (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/Math

Pierce, R., Stacey, K., Wander, R., & Ball, L. (2011). The design of lessons using mathematics analysis software to support multiple representations in secondary school mathematics. . Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20 (1), 95-112.

Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2009). Compared to what? The effects of different comparisons on conceptual knowledge and procedural flexibility for equation solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (3), 529-544.

Schoenfeld, A. (1983). Episodes and executive decisions in mathematical problem-solving In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 345-395). New York: Academic Press.

Schoenfeld, A. (1985). Mathematical Problem Solving : Academic Press.

Schoenfeld, A. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? . In A. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education (pp. 189-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.

Schoenfeld, A. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Learning and Teaching (pp. 334-370). New York: Macmillan.

Seufert, T., Janen, I., & Brunken, R. (2007). The impact of instrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in human behavior, 23 , 1055-1071.

Shimizu, Y. (1999). Aspects of Mathematics Teacher Education in Japan: Focusing on Teachers' Roles. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 2 , 107-116.

Silver, E. A., Ghousseini, H., Gosen, D., Charalambous, C., & Font Strawhun, B. T. (2005). Moving from rhetoric to praxis: Issues faced by teachers in having students consider multiple solutions for problems in the mathematics classroom. . Journal of Mathematical Behavior 24 287–301.

Staples, M. (2007). Supporting Whole-class Collaborative Inquiry in a Secondary Mathematics Classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 25 (2), 161-217.

Stein, M. K., Eagle, R. A., Smith, M. A., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10 , 313-340.

Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building Student Capacity for Mathematical Thinking and Reasoning: An Analysis of Mathematical Tasks Used in Reform Classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33 (2), 455-488.

Swan, M. (2006). Collaborative Learning in Mathematics: A Challenge to our Beliefs and Practices . London: National Institute for Advanced and Continuing Education (NIACE) for the National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy (NRDC).

Swan, M., Bell, A., Phillips, R., & Shannon, A. (2000). The purposes of mathematical activities and pupils' perceptions of them. Research in Education, 63 (May), 11-20.

Swan, M., & Burkhardt, H. (2014). Lesson Design for Formative Assessment. Educational Designer, 2 (7). This issue. Retrieved from: http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume2/issue7/article24

van den Akker, J., Graveemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Educational Design Research . London and New York: Routledge.

Sheila Evans is a member of the Mathematics Assessment Project team in the Centre for Research in Mathematical Education at the University of Nottingham. For the last four years she has worked designing, observing, teaching, revising and providing professional development for the MAP Formative Assessment Lessons. She is currently working on a doctorate using teaching resources that have been shaped by this project. Before that, she taught for fifteen years in secondary schools in the UK and Africa, and wrote a textbook Access to Maths aimed at students without traditional qualifications who wished to study at University .

Malcolm Swan is Director of the Centre for Research in Mathematical Education at the University of Nottingham, which incorporates the Shell Centre for Mathematical Education team. He has led the design teams in a sequence of research and development projects. He led the diagnostic teaching research program that established many of the design principles set out in this paper. In 2008 he was awarded the first ISDDE Prize for educational design, for The Language of Functions and Graphs.

The link in the following reference points directly to the selected section in this article:

Use copy & paste to share the link, or click on the link and then use your browser’s add bookmark function.

Improving Students’ Problem-Solving Flexibility in Non-routine Mathematics

• Conference paper
• First Online: 30 June 2020
• Cite this conference paper

• Huy A. Nguyen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1227-6173 13 ,
• Yuqing Guo 13 ,
• John Stamper 13 &
• Bruce M. McLaren 13  

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12164))

Included in the following conference series:

• International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education

6081 Accesses

1 Citations

A key issue in mathematics education is supporting students in developing general problem-solving skills that can be applied to novel, non-routine situations. However, typical mathematics instruction in the U.S. too often is dominated by rote learning, without exposing students to the underlying reasoning or alternate ways to solve problems. As a first step in addressing this problem, we present a cognitive task analysis study that investigates how students without a mathematics-related background solve novel non-routine problems. We found that most students were able to identify the underlying pattern that yields the final solution in each problem. Furthermore, they tended to use various forms of visualization in their draft work, but occasionally made computational mistakes. Based on these results, we propose our plan for developing an instructional platform that leverages learning science principles to train students in problem-solving abilities.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download conference paper PDF

Similar content being viewed by others

Opportunity to learn problem solving in dutch primary school mathematics textbooks.

Problem solving in mathematics education: tracing its foundations and current research-practice trends

Reflections on Problem-Solving

• Problem-solving flexibility
• Non-routine mathematics

1 Introduction

The ability to tackle non-routine problems – those that cannot be solved with a known method or formula and require analysis and synthesis as well as creativity [ 9 ] – is becoming increasingly important in the 21st century [ 5 ]. However, when faced with a non-routine problem, U.S. students tend to apply memorized procedures incorrectly rather than modify them or develop new solutions [ 8 ]. One possible source for this difficulty is the typical instructional focus in U.S. schools on memorization and application of routine procedures [ 2 , 6 , 7 ]. Such an approach makes students proficient at executing rote procedures, but it does little to help them understand the conceptual basis for the procedures or to think creatively about novel problems - both of which are essential for developing problem-solving flexibility.

An important first step in addressing this issue is to assess how students currently approach non-routine problem solving, so that we can design the appropriate learning interventions. In this work, we present an empirical cognitive task analysis where participants were asked to think aloud while solving a series of non-routine problems from discrete mathematics. We chose this domain because discrete math problems can often be tackled from multiple perspectives while not requiring any advanced background beyond the high school curriculum [ 3 ]. Based on the findings from this study, we propose our plan for developing a tutoring system for non-routine problem-solving ability. Then, we discuss the system’s broader implications and the challenges we need to address in deploying this system at scale.

2 Assessing Students’ Problem-Solving Skills

We conducted interview sessions with three students at a private university in a midwest US city. None of the students had a mathematics-related background. The participants were asked to solve three non-routine mathematics problems on paper in one hour. They were also encouraged to think aloud and write down their draft work. The three problems in our study, taken from [ 3 ], and a brief summary of their sample solutions, are as follows.

In an air show there are twenty rows. The first row contains one seat, the second three seats, the third five seats, the fourth seventh seats, and so on. How many seats are there in total ?

Sample solution: In the first row there is 1 seat. In the first two rows there are 1 + 3 =  4 seats. In the first three rows there are 1 + 3 + 5 =  9 seats. In the first four rows there are 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 =  16 seats. In the first five rows there are 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9 =  25 seats. Based on this pattern, in the first k rows there are k 2 seats. In our case, there are 20 rows and therefore 400 seats in total.

Find all integers between 1 and 99 (inclusive) with all distinct digits.

Sample solution: there are 99 integers between 1 and 99 in total, and 9 of them have non-distinct digits, namely 11, 22, 33, …, 88, 99. Hence, the remaining 90 integers have distinct digits.

What is the digit in the ones place of 2 57 ?

Sample solution: Looking at the sequence of powers of 2–2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, … – we see that the corresponding sequence of digits in the ones places is 2, 4, 8, 6, 2, 4, 8, 6, 2, 4, … In other words, this sequence is a cycle of length 4. Therefore the last digit of 2 57 is that of 2 53 , which is that of 2 49 , …, which is that of 2 1 , which is 2.

We then analyzed recordings of the participants’ think-aloud and their draftwork, from which we derived the following insights:

Pattern Identification.

Participants were aware that they had to find a pattern or formula to solve the problems, because it was not feasible to directly compute the final answer. All participants were able to identify the expected pattern for each problem as outlined above, except for one student who failed to do so for Problem 1 . While this participant realized that the number of seats on row k is the k-th positive odd number, this pattern alone was insufficient to solve the problem.

Visualization.

Participants tended to visualize the problem by drawing examples and making lists or tables (Fig.  1 ). They expressed that these visualizations were crucial in helping them identify the correct pattern and solve the problem.

Participants’ attempts at visualizing the problem in their draftworks.

Computation.

Participants occasionally made computational mistakes while calculating the initial sequence values, especially in Problem 3 . As a consequence, they could not identify any pattern based on the wrong values, and took some time to realize the mistake. All students who corrected their mistakes were able to subsequently solve the problem.

In summary, we found that participants were aware of the idea behind identifying patterns, and they all did so via some kind of visualization. On the other hand, computational mistakes, while not directly related to our learning objectives, can be detrimental to the overall problem-solving process. From these insights, we propose the following next steps.

3 Developing a Tutoring System for Flexible Problem-Solving

Moving forward, our plan is to iteratively conduct more cognitive task analysis interviews and develop a prototype of the system. Our initial conceptualization of how the system will work is as follows. A single round of exercise in the system incorporates four learning stages, all of which are built on established learning principles: 1) Reviewing a worked example of a non-routine mathematics problem, 2) Explaining the worked example to a partner, 3) Solving a new problem which is isomorphic to the worked example problem, and 4) Explaining the isomorphic solution to a partner. Between rounds, the student can review previous solutions, look at materials related to the problem space, or practice basic math skills. This design is intended to (1) formally introduce students to a complete solution through worked examples, (2) reinforce their understanding of the worked example through self-explanation, and (3) assess students’ learning through an isomorphic problem. Our hypothesis is that through the learning system, students will get a better sense of how to approach a novel non-routine problem, so that in case they have not yet found the solution – for example, like the participant in our study who did not identify the true pattern in Problem 1 – they can still adopt a different viewpoint and explore other strategies.

We have already begun mapping the problem space by developing a non-routine problem-solving flowchart and identifying sets of potential non-routine problem solutions. Once we have tested our solution space, we will develop and pilot a low fidelity paper prototype version of the system with college students to further refine the mathematical content and identify areas for revision to the design. We are also looking at which technological features could be useful for students learning in this domain. As a first step, our system will include a canvas for students to perform their draftwork on, as well as a simple calculator interface with basic arithmetic operations to help students avoid computational mistakes. An important follow-up question is whether students’ draftwork can be analyzed to infer their thinking process, which could in turn guide the design of appropriate feedback mechanics. While this task has previously been performed manually by domain experts [ 1 ], employing a machine learning technique to automate it to some extent would greatly enhance the system’s adaptive support functionality and scalability.

4 Conclusion

This research will provide concrete, generalizable evidence about the utility and implementation of worked examples, multiple solutions, and self-explanation to promote skills in non-routine problem solving. Results will inform future tutoring system design by identifying how and when the instructional features are most beneficial for developing problem-solving skills. We also intend to have a practical impact by distributing a tutoring system that is accessible to a wide range of students, including lower-performing students who would typically not be exposed to these types of problems and strategies [ 1 , 4 ]. In addition, we will provide a teacher’s guide to support educators in using the system adaptively to support their instructional goals.

Arslan, C., Yazgan, Y.: Common and flexible use of mathematical non routine problem solving strategies. Am. J. Educ. Res. 3 , 1519–1523 (2015)

Google Scholar  

Crooks, N.M., Alibali, M.W.: Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Dev. Rev. 34 , 344–377 (2014)

Article   Google Scholar  

Johnson, K., Herr, T.: Problem Solving Strategies: Crossing the River with Dogs: and Other Mathematical Adventures. Key Curriculum Press, New York (2001)

Kolovou, A., Van Den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Bakker, A.: Non-routine problem solving tasks in primary school mathematics textbooks–a needle in a haystack. Math. Prob. Solving Primary School 8 , 45 (2011)

Neubert, J.C., Mainert, J., Kretzschmar, A., Greiff, S.: The assessment of 21st century skills in industrial and organizational psychology: complex and collaborative problem solving. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 8 , 238–268 (2015)

Richland, L.E., Stigler, J.W., Holyoak, K.J.: Teaching the conceptual structure of mathematics. Educ. Psychol. 47 , 189–203 (2012)

Stigler, J., Hiebert, J.: Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction: an overview of the TIMSS video study. In: ACER National Conference 1997, pp. 52–65 (1997)

Stigler, J.W., Givvin, K.B., Thompson, B.J.: What community college developmental mathematics students understand about mathematics. MathAMATYC Educ. 1 , 4–16 (2010)

Woodward, J., et al.: Improving Mathematical Problem Solving in Grades 4 through 8. IES Practice Guide. NCEE 2012-4055. What Works Clearinghouse (2012)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

Huy A. Nguyen, Yuqing Guo, John Stamper & Bruce M. McLaren

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huy A. Nguyen .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Federal University of Alagoas, Maceió, Brazil

Ig Ibert Bittencourt

University College London, London, UK

Mutlu Cukurova

Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Kasia Muldner

Rose Luckin

University of Malaga, Málaga, Spain

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Nguyen, H.A., Guo, Y., Stamper, J., McLaren, B.M. (2020). Improving Students’ Problem-Solving Flexibility in Non-routine Mathematics. In: Bittencourt, I., Cukurova, M., Muldner, K., Luckin, R., Millán, E. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12164. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_74

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_74

Published : 30 June 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-52239-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-52240-7

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Mathematics 4 Quarter 1 – Module 8: Solving Routine and Non-routine Problems Involving Multiplication of Whole Numbers

Good day learner!

You have learned from the previous module how to multiply numbers up to 3 digits by up to 2-digit numbers without or with regrouping. In this module, you will encounter different problems involving multiplication of whole numbers including money. You will solve these problems using appropriate problem solving strategies and tools. Always put yourself in each problem so that you can easily solve it. Enjoy and have fun solving.

At the end of this module, you will be able to solve routine and non-routine problems involving multiplication of whole numbers including money using appropriate problem solving strategies and tools.

Can't Find What You'RE Looking For?

We are here to help - please use the search box below.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply