Dangerous Problems

The problems in this set are truly unsettling. There is a sense of conflict that ranges from a shouting match to a shooting match. Disagreement and opposition threaten to erupt if not properly managed. In some cases, the potential for violence is overwhelming, and the core problems are lost as the focus shifts to containing the danger and avoiding escalation of the conflict.

These problems follow a slightly different process than the one described earlier. It is more about relationships among the players and less about understanding the world outside.

Problems of Our Own Making: Problems created by our assumptions or statements about the world. Naive, arrogant, or unrealistic demands. Sometimes shows up as a collective denial of the obvious, such as the recent belief that "market share was more important than cash flow" (the DOT COM bubble).

Often exacerbated by a refusal to see the complexity of the situation or cost of the proffered solution. Often accompanied by strong sense of urgency, concern for survival, or fear for loss of moral integrity. Problems of Our Own Making are seldom capricious; the perpetrator often feels compelled despite the overwhelming challenge.

Straining a system with impossible demands may create other problems, such as lowered morale and turnover.

Problems with Many Voices: Multiple stakeholders with strong preferences for the final outcome. There is no option for everyone to pursue their own choice; some constraint requires a single choice. Political maneuvering of the players typically obscures key information as well as real interests.

Often represent enduring differences of opinion that will clash in a wide variety of specific situations.

NOTE: These problems often contain a dilemma, such as Growth vs. Quality of Life, but until that dilemma is embraced by all, that class is not the appropriate anchor for the problem.

Problems that Bite: Long entrenched conflict that is heavily laced with strong moral themes; the players are intimately entangled with the problem and find it difficult to "step back" or get any perspective. They have linked their self-identify to their stand in the problem and cannot compromise or even negotiate without feeling personally violated. There is often an array of heroes and martyrs. Strong and colorful personalities cloud the issues and make analysis difficult. Those who have fallen in service of their positions create a new layer to the problem as they motivate a new round of staunch (even rabid) advocates.

There is no consensus on the nature of the problem; it is treated as an amorphous cluster with little focus on the central issues. There is little strong desire for resolution; there is more drive for moral clarity or even revenge.

It is impossible to dissect the problem into parts. It is equally impossible to "back out" of a failed solution; experimentation fundamentally changes the problem.