Three ways to solve problems — Andreas Fragner

One of my favorite definitions of a problem comes from the late Gerald Weinberg [1]

A problem is the difference between things as perceived and desired.

This definition is great because it’s actionable. It tells you that there are three ways to approach a problem:

• Move the world towards the desired state

• Change your perception of the current state

• Change your desired state

Points two and three seem like cop-outs at first — you basically avoid solving the problem. But they often turn out to be not just viable but optimal since they force you to re-frame and re-contextualize the problem.

Changing your desired state allows you to solve a different, possibly easier problem. For example, rather than solving the full problem (to get to the original desired state) you might find that a partial solution (the new desired state) gets you 80% there at 20% of the cost.

Changing your perception of the current state, you might realize it’s close enough to the desired state and so the problem doesn’t need to be dealt with at all right now. Deciding not to solve a problem can also be a solution.

As a strategy, deciding not to solve a problem or to solve a different version seems generally underutilized. I suspect this is largely because (a) we’re bad at understanding tradeoffs and quantifying opportunity costs, and (b) because it’s just hard to say no to people who feel strongly about reaching a desired state but might lack the full picture. For example, startups most often have messy finances and HR at the beginning. Not having good accounting or employment contracts is definitely a problem but one with lower weight than failing to ship product or hit growth targets. So deciding to minimally solve for it at first is the rational move. There will be pressure to do it to a high standard from the get-go — from investors or people on your team — but you have to resist it.

As a founder you’re constantly confronted with these kinds of tradeoffs and being good at mastering them is underrated I think. It takes discipline and clarity of mind to say no in the face of pressure. It’s especially hard when the pressure comes from yourself — when your own high, uncompromising standards get in the way. This is where I think repeat founders set themselves apart from first-time ones.

Similar situation as a product manager. All products have all sorts of problems all the time — missing features, broken edge cases, high-friction UI, bad UX, etc. But reaching the desired state (perfect product) is neither possible nor sensible. The key is to say no to solving 90% of the problems you have and to focus on the 10% that really matter.