Sequential Problem Solving Part 4

How much time is available? Often problems are best solved by using "Kentucky windage." Artillery gunners use the expression, "One over, one under, one dead center." This refers to making gross adjustments rather than walking a solution toward a problem one small step at a time. This technique has also been called "Eliminating the extremes": walking toward the center from either end, half way at a time. This technique reduces the time required to solve a problem in a binary fas.h.i.+on by halves, rather than in arithmetic progression one small step at a time.

Often the first solutions tried don't work. We may learn more facts about problems as we try to solve them. Many times a problem requires re-defining and the entire nature of the solution changes from one trial to the next. In science, every experiment is valuable because what is disproven is as valuable as the final solution. A disproven solution reduces the possibilities by providing answers about what is not possible.

We need to take into account problems that will arise. It is useful to double or triple the initial time estimate when beginning new projects. It is prudent to plan on finis.h.i.+ng the job in one-third to one-half of the time we would like to finish the job. This is particularly true with artistic projects; artists often want to add one final touch, and one more touch ad infinitum (the "Michelangelo"

dilemma).

Timing for the various elements in a job can often be charted beginning with the first thing needed to be done and ending with a review of the project and future planning. Such charts are easily constructed on spreadsheets with calendar dates in vertical columns and tasks in horizontal rows. This form of time chart is a marching calendar. Initially, the chart can also be used to back schedule material purchase for future delivery. As sequential tasks are completed, the consecutive days are highlighted. This provides a rapid visualization to the project planners of the status of the project.

Project Calendar.

Task.

Initial planning.

Gather information.

Pick team.

Make drawings.

a.s.semble materials.

Make prototype.

Review prototype.

Manufacture actual product.

Evaluate project.

Plan follow up.

Material.

Are the materials available? Can we afford the cost of the materials?

Sometimes it is possible to make an "first piece" or "practice piece"

out of inexpensive materials. Practice pieces are helpful to learn practical manufacturing methods. Producing detailed drawings and listing manufacturing steps often save time and material in the long run. Practice pieces made of soft and easy to work material, like balsam wood, also serve the purpose of providing an actual mock up that can be quickly modified by cut and paste methods. The practice piece usually does not have to be pretty, only functional. It provides an idea of what changes need to be made before expensive or hard to procure materials are used.

Manpower.

Is sufficient manpower available to execute the plan? Are the talents of the available manpower matched to the task?[1] Are the available people qualified to perform the tasks? Are the men being lead by the best method? Several alternative methods exist for leading or managing workers on a project. These will be discussed in the section on leaders.h.i.+p.

Developing a Solution.

1. Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

Trying the Solution.

Often complex or new tasks become learning projects, in themselves, to try to more accurately identify the problem, and to gather sufficient facts through failure in experimentation to make progress. Projects should include ongoing evaluation and re-planning. Old World craftsmen, the master craftsmen of yesteryear, had a guiding principle that continues to have merit: "Any job worth doing is worth doing well." Doing a job well often means making a final copy after revising the rough draft.

Manpower Management.

Leaders should remember that several approaches to leaders.h.i.+p are available. No one style is satisfactory for all situations.

Leaders.h.i.+p Styles.

Three basic leaders.h.i.+p styles exist. They are the authoritarian model, the teacher model, and the team work model.[1]

The authoritarian model is useful for situations requiring immediate compliance by a subordinate. Soldiers occasionally use the authoritarian style to demand instant obedience. It is most useful in dangerous situations where hesitation in complying might be disastrous; for instance, when a child is daydreaming and in danger of walking off of a sidewalk curb into automobile traffic. In business situations, this style is not often used because the authoritarian leader is often destined to fail: "micro-management" often has a belittling effect on subordinates, who subsequently rebel, and failure follows for three reasons: the authoritarian leader often doesn't have the expertise, time, or enough energy to do all of the jobs himself job without other's help. The authoritarian leaders.h.i.+p style is seldom useful except in emergency situations.[2] (It has been said that a raised voice with someone older than five is usually inappropriate.)

The teaching leaders.h.i.+p model is more useful because the people doing the job are contributors. The teacher offers advice and monitors progress.[3]

The team work leaders.h.i.+p model is sometimes the most useful. This model works when the students become as knowledgeable as the teacher and each can and will do the other's job. This model is often seen when someone realizes a job needs doing, and does it without being told to do it. These people are conscientious "self-starters."

Leaders.h.i.+p Styles.

1. Tannenbaum, Robert and Warren H. Schmidt. "How to Choose a Leaders.h.i.+p Pattern." Harvard Business Review 36(March-April 1958): 95-101.

2. Fiedler, Fred E. "The Trouble With Leaders.h.i.+p Training Is That it Doesn't Train Leaders." Psychology Today 6(February 1973): 23-30.

3. Goodall, H. Lloyd, Jr. Small Group Communications in Organizations.

2nd ed. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, 1990.