Dear DRS
A discussion of Wicked Problems is always of interest but often problematic. One of the first difficulties encountered is the conflation of the many assumptions of what is meant by 'problem' . There has been some extremely interesting thinking about the nature of problems and the concomitant strategies for dealing with them. A form of problem for scholars and scientists is the problem of not knowing something—not having factual knowledge, not having instrumental knowledge and not having predictive knowledge. For others it may be a problem of not knowing what to do—not having deontic (ethical) knowledge. For creatives it may be not knowing what is aesthetic. Another set of problem categories includes when things are broken as in: "Houston we've had a problem" (Apollo 13). Another popular category involves situations that frighten people, make them mad, hurt them etc. When talking about problems it is helpful to be transparent about what constitutes a problem in order to determine effective strategies for dealing with them.
Professionals and consultants often frame difficulties as complex vs. simple problems. In addition to the notion of complex and simple problems, some very good scholars have explored problems through different types. Herbert Simon explored the notion of 'ill-structured' problems, Russ Ackoff looked at problems as 'messes' and Horst Rittlel contrasted 'Wicked Problems' to 'Tame Problems'. These are all very different perspectives on what constitutes problematic situations—interesting in themselves certainly but the point made here is that there are many useful and interesting approaches to understanding problems that get lost in a generalized aggregation of the concept of 'problem'.
Wicked Problems have been an attractor for designers, managers and planners of all stripes. Too often there is little appreciation of the idea Rittel presented and Wicked Problems are taken to be actual problems of some sort. For instance a consultant might develop a strategy for decomposing Wicked Problems into Tame Problems which can then be solved in the straight forward manner one has been taught to do. Rather than developing strategies for coming up with 'solutions' to Wicked Problems, Rittel developed strategies for 'resolving' them—i.e. coming to a political or social agreement concerning what action to take rather than an agreement about what is true or predictive. Rittel developed a strategy for problem resolution based on a formal argumentation process called IBIS (Issue Based Information Systems) that has been further developed since his death.
As an alternative, a design strategy, when confronted with the conditions constitutive of Wicked Problems, is one of problem 'dissolution'. This means taking a design stance rather than a reactive problem solving stance and creating a situation that dissolves the conditions that had been considered problematic. There are 'design problems' of course but they are an artifact of a good design approach rather than the trigger for a good design approach.
Harold
[log in to unmask]
http://www.haroldnelson.com/
organizational design competence
http://www.organizationaldesigncompetence.com/
advanced design institute
http://www.advanceddesigninstitute.blogspot.com/
accidental vagrant
http://accidentalvagrant.blogspot.com/
|