- Next-Step Thinking for Uncertain Situations
- Reducing Uncertainty and Ambiguity
- Working Through Uncertainty and What's Next
- What Not to Do: The Brute-Force Path
- Summary
- Workshop
This chapter is from the book
This chapter is from the book
This chapter is from the book
Working Through Uncertainty and What’s Next
Sometimes we have no choice but to live with and work through the uncertainty in front of us and the ambiguity surrounding us—and we need to figure out and take the Next Best Step. We have covered how Pattern Matching and Fractal Thinking can help us envision what’s next, how Adjacent Spaces can reduce the risk of that next step, and how mapping Possible Futures and Aligning Strategies to long-term, mid-term, and short-term Time Horizons can be helpful. But we’ve only scratched the surface when it comes to techniques and exercises useful for working through uncertainty. In the next several pages, we will cover seven more ways of creating clarity while we take the best step forward.
Design Thinking in Action: “What, So What, Now What?”
Without wallowing in the past, it can be useful to consider what happened, its consequences, and what to do next in light of those consequences. This might not be the best strategic next step, but it helps us navigate the road ahead while we consider other options in parallel.
Sometimes playing a game is the easiest way to work through a problem, especially if we need to make some quick forward progress to get unstuck or just don’t have the appetite to get bogged down in petty details. An easy such game is the “What, So What, Now What?” exercise, which can help us learn enough to break free of indecision and move forward.
Management scientists Chris Argyris and Peter Senge, in their Ladder of Inference model published in 1990, introduced this approach. The idea is to work through a recent event and view it through the questions and lenses of
What? We need to discuss the what (that happened) associated with an event.
So what? We need to discuss the implications or consequences of the event.
And now what? We need to conclude with next steps and possible do-overs.
This simple three-step process is a great exercise for new tech teams, executive committees, and initiative leaders to explore a current problem or situation. “What, So What, Now What?” teaches an uncomplicated way to approach potentially difficult problems or situations. It also opens the door to determining the next best step while having healthy conversations about how to tackle these same situations more effectively in the future.
Design Thinking in Action: MVP Thinking
Many of us are familiar with the term Minimum Viable Product, or MVP. An MVP is that earliest version of a capability or product that meets the minimum needs of a person or community. An MVP isn’t the best in terms of functions or features, but it’s sufficient (and perhaps Good Enough, as we discussed in Hour 11).
Exercising MVP Thinking is nothing more than thinking through what a Minimum Viable Product or capability is in the hands of another. It is also “seed thinking” in the sense that an MVP, like a seed, will become much more when it is cared for, watered, and nurtured.
When we are faced with identifying the next best step, use MVP Thinking to determine if we can either create a simple MVP or elaborate on an existing MVP; either strategy can safely take us to the next step. By way of example, we might feel overwhelmed with a goal such as “get a doctorate” or “start a business” or “reinvent my team.” Rather than setting out to achieve that long-term goal, though, consider instead what the MVP looks like for each of these goals. What’s the first or next best step to take on each respective journey? By tackling the smaller goal, we are steps closer to achieving the larger and more difficult goal.
How? Carve out the minimum level of achievement, capability, or functionality that gets us to our goal. Call that minimum bar a Minimum Viable Product or MVP and take the first baby step:
Do we want to pursue a doctorate? Use MVP Thinking and start with a one-year or two-year degree.- Do we want to open our own business? Use MVP Thinking and start with a simple Schedule C sole proprietorship.
- Do we wish to learn more about e-commerce and websites? Use MVP Thinking and start by volunteering or helping others build a website, or by taking an online or Linked Learning course.
- Are we thinking about a career in project management and need some real experience before we can get hired for such a role? Again, use MVP Thinking! Start by running small projects at home, for the church, or for the neighborhood or community. Take some low-cost training from ExpertRating.com and in the process earn a basic project management certification. Call this basic certification our MVP, but don’t stop there. Build on this MVP by completing a PMI CAPM certification. And once we meet the required project management experience necessary for certification, study for and pass the PMI PMP certification.
As we see in Figure 13.4, MVP Thinking helps us build on what we know. And MVP Thinking helps us validate along the way that the larger goal is indeed still worth pursuing.
)
FIGURE 13.4 Use MVP Thinking to build on what we know in a low-risk way while validating along the way that our direction is still worth pursuing.
Design Thinking in Action: 2×2 Matrix Thinking for What’s Next
When we need to know which way to go, sometimes it’s helpful to dissect two dimensions of a situation such as effort versus time, difficulty versus importance, cost versus effort, and so on. Credited to Alex Lowy and Phil Hood in their 2004 book The Power of the 2×2 Matrix: Using 2×2 Thinking to Solve Business Problems and Make Better Decisions, the simple 2×2 matrix has been used for years to help people and teams evaluate a number of options across two dimensions. Considering options in this way can help us uncover the best choice or the ideal path forward. Sometimes called 2×2 Matrix Thinking, this method helps us get moving again with confidence.
Some of the most common uses of 2×2 Matrix Thinking include
- Urgency versus Importance (tasks or goals)
- Importance versus Difficulty (tasks or goals)
- Effort versus Value (tasks or goals)
- Cost versus Value (tasks or goals)
- Simplicity versus Outcome (tasks or goals)
- Power versus Interest (stakeholders)
Starting to use the 2×2 matrix is easy. For example, draw a horizonal line and label this “Importance” (we will call this the horizontal or x-axis), and then draw a vertical line and label this one “Difficulty” (let’s call this the vertical or y-axis). Use these two lines as the bottom and left side, respectively, of a box. Divide that box into four smaller boxes like the example in Figure 13.5, and we now have a 2×2 matrix.
)
FIGURE 13.5 It is easy to draw and use a 2×2 matrix for thinking about two dimensions of a problem or situation. (raywoo/123RF)
Alternatively, simply draw a large plus sign to create a set of four open-ended boxes. And then add an x-axis and a y-axis and label those with the dimension that each axis represents.
While the process of creating and populating the matrix is useful in itself, the real value comes once the matrix is populated. For example, once an Importance versus Difficulty 2×2 matrix is populated, we can see which tasks or goals are the most important and the least difficult, and we would probably prioritize those items (and that entire quadrant). Conversely, we would be able to see the tasks and goals that are least important and yet the most difficult to achieve, and we would probably deprioritize those items and that quadrant. And in this way, we would gain more clarity in terms of next steps.
Design Thinking in Action: Bullseye Prioritization
When our team is stuck and we are unable to see a path forward, a special adaptation of 2×2 matrix thinking can prove useful. Called Bullseye Prioritization, this visual method combines a 2×2 matrix overlaid with a bullseye or radar image. Combined, the two images together help us make the next best choice or decision when we are presented with many possible choices or decisions.
The key to this exercise is organization. Bullseye Prioritization helps us organize the choices in front of us into the four quadrants of the matrix, and then within each quadrant organize what’s most important, what’s second most important, and so on to the team (see Figure 13.6, keeping in mind that each sticky note would include the actual written choice). Visualizing each choice makes this exercise quite intuitive; the closer to the bullseye, the more important the team agrees is the choice or decision.
)
FIGURE 13.6 A quadrant-based bullseye provides two distinct dimensions for insights—one for organizing groups and another for prioritizing the items within those groups.
To execute a Bullseye Prioritization exercise for organizing and prioritizing options, invite our team or an ideation group together and then do the following:
TIME AND PEOPLE: A Bullseye Prioritization exercise requires 5–10 people for 60–120 minutes.
Write out the problem or situation on a virtual or physical whiteboard.
Off to the side on the whiteboard, round-robin through the team to create a list of options or choices related to the problem or situation. We don’t want to start grouping or prioritizing yet! Simply populate this list.
Once the list is off to a good start, begin identifying the emerging themes and groupings. Ideally, identify three or four groupings. More is fine, but generally three to four is ideal.
Ask the team to label these groupings with a theme. The act of talking through labeling will help drive a shared understanding of each group (and probably help the team identify several more choices or options or list items).
Now draw an image of a bullseye (or radar screen or dart board) on the whiteboard and divide the image into four quadrants. Label each quadrant with a theme. Again, it’s okay for starters if we have only a couple of themes.
Write each option or choice from our list onto a sticky note. We will place these sticky notes on the bullseye or radar screen or dart board image next.
Starting with the first sticky note, read it aloud to the team. Together, think about where it belongs on the image in terms of the appropriate quadrant. Place the sticky note in that quadrant and don’t worry about its placement relative to the middle of the image (the bullseye) or the outer edge of the image. Simply place it into the appropriate quadrant.
Work through the next set of sticky notes, placing them in the appropriate quadrant.
As a quadrant becomes a bit crowded, the team might be inclined to start prioritizing the placement of each sticky note relative to the bullseye or center of the image. Fight the urge!
When all of the sticky notes are placed, now we can think about each one’s importance relative to the other sticky notes in the same quadrant. Adjust how far each is from the center of the radar based on the options near it. If one option is better or more important than another, “promote” the better option closer to the center of the bullseye.
As the team discusses and determines one option is worse or less valuable than another, move it out toward the edge of the image. Allow room for the best options to take center stage.
Agree on and place the most important options at the center of the image, one sticky note per quadrant.
Continue prioritizing, pushing the less important options out further and further from the middle of the radar screen; the further from the middle, the less important the option.
That’s it! We may wish to use different forms of democratic voting if too few voices tend to drive the prioritization effort. We need everyone weighing in with their opinions and experiences.
Similarly, if we are faced with ties or choices that are too close to call, we may wish to use another Design Thinking exercise to solve for tiebreakers. Examples of easy tiebreaker exercises include
- Use Rose, Thorn, Bud (covered next) to learn more about each option in terms of its positives, negatives, and possibilities.
- Use the Five Whys (covered in Hour 9) to better understand each option, starting by asking the team or group “Why is this option the best option in this quadrant?”
- Use “How Might We” Questioning (covered generally already and in more detail in Hour 14) to optimistically set the stage for why one option is more achievable or healthier than another option. Use this discussion to reprioritize the options.
Alternatively, if we find ourselves comparing options that sit across only two quadrants (rather than four like we can easily do with the bullseye image-based approach), consider using 2×2 Matrix Thinking. A 2×2 matrix is good for comparing a set of options against two dimensions such as cost versus value, or cost versus difficulty, or importance versus urgency. And to think about a single dimension, such as how the difficulty in implementing or executing a particular option might be reflected in the changes for and changes against that option, look to Force Field Analysis. Both of these exercises are found in Hour 14.
Design Thinking in Action: RTB for Smarter Next Steps
Created by the LUMA Institute in 2012, we use a “Rose, Thorn, Bud,” or RTB, exercise to explore a particular choice in detail. The idea here is to organize together the positive, the negative, and the opportunities associated with an option or choice. Each dimension forms a group. We view our option or choice in terms of the roses, thorns, and buds it produces. In doing so, we will find aspects of a situation or choice that are good, others that are holding us back, and still others that might offer an opportunity or way out. More specifically:
- Roses are those aspects of an option or choice that are positive, healthy, or working well.
- Thorns are those outcomes or consequences that are not positive or healthy.
- Buds are the areas of potential; they represent insights and opportunities or areas for improvement. Buds are often the difference makers in choosing one option over another.
To run a simple RTB exercise, follow the steps here:
TIME and PEOPLE: An RTB exercise requires 3–5 people for 30 minutes or longer depending on the complexity of the situation or landscape.
Bring together our team or group, determine whether a physical or virtual whiteboard is appropriate, and explain the situation or problem and the goal: to identify options or choices.
Discuss and agree on three unique types of sticky notes (including the use of an icon or emoji) for identifying the positives, negatives, and opportunities. Each unique sticky note will represent one of the three RTB dimensions.
Give each person a set of all three sticky notes.
Use something similar to the template in Figure 13.7 and ask each person to identify their first rose, thorn, and bud.
FIGURE 13.7 Use RTB to organize the dimensions of an option or choice along the lines of those that are positive, negative, or represent opportunities.
Round-robin through the team or group, giving each person the chance to participate.
When everyone has had a chance, repeat the exercise and do so through several loops. The more, the better.
)
Several themes will emerge in an RTB exercise, and a quick look at these themes may be enough to guide a team or group to make a choice. But in cases where multiple themes emerge, we might go back and run a Bullseye Prioritization exercise or turn instead to our next exercise, Affinity Clustering.
Design Thinking in Action: Affinity Clustering for Pattern Finding
Sometimes we are faced with so much data and so many possibilities for next steps that we just don’t know how to go about sorting through and understanding what is in front of us. And doing nothing obviously doesn’t help us make progress. Fortunately, we have several techniques available to provide more clarity, including the LUMA Institute’s Affinity Clustering approach (LUMA, 2012).
Affinity Clustering helps us see the logical groups or clusters of options in front of us, which can help us make some initial choices and smarter next best steps. And through the exercise itself, Affinity Clustering naturally reduces some of the uncertainty surrounding seemingly complex situations.
How does Affinity Clustering work? Let’s say we have recently graduated college and have dozens of options available to pursue now. Use an Affinity Clustering exercise to first sort through the options based on similarity (rather than getting bogged down looking at each option individually). For example, we might determine we have options related to the military, joining one of several small start-ups, joining one of several more established firms, striking out on our own, helping with one of the family businesses, pursuing a graduate degree, taking some time off to travel before diving into the workplace, or settling down and raising a family. We might combine several of these options as well and introduce hybrids such as working part time or pursuing a graduate degree part time or raising a family and working on our career full time.
Regardless of the myriad of choices, organize them into clusters or groups, as we see in Figure 13.8. We might organize our options around three clusters; for example, based on work, education, and personal themes.
)
FIGURE 13.8 We may find the next best step after we organize and cluster the options in front of us.
Conversely, we might use our Pattern Matching skills to find other, less-obvious connections between our options. For example, we might create clusters or groups that are aligned by geography (options that keep us near our family, others that keep us in the state or region, and still others that are travel-based or international). We might create clusters or groups that are organized around the notion of family too (such as family-friendly options, family-neutral options, and anti-family-friendly options).
Design Thinking in Action: Buy a Feature for Consensus
When all else fails and we don’t have a clear next step ahead of us, we still probably need to do something—some kind of next step. In this case, it’s smart to gain a certain amount of consensus to move in some kind of direction with some level of unity. Use LUMA Institute’s Buy a Feature exercise to prioritize and drive this consensus.
The premise for Buy a Feature is simple: The team needs to pull together a list of features, or next best steps, or options, and then align on the priority of the items in this list. They align not by words, though, but with imaginary money a la “put your money where your mouth is.” If a feature or next step or option is important to many people, it will probably be given the most budget, and they come out as the clear winner. In this way, Buy a Feature draws out what each team member truly values rather than what they might say they value. The money does the talking.
Note that Buy a Feature typically requires that all team members are equal and are given an imaginary $100 budget (we can change the rules, of course, and give our product manager or VP of Sales more money and hence more voter “weighting,” but it’s generally a good idea to keep everyone equal). Each team member is asked to allocate their imaginary money across the compiled list (of different features, or next best steps, or options). In some cases, it’s better to allocate these budgets anonymously, whereas in other cases the exercise leader might wish for all participants to see one another’s choices.
Whether they are passionate or on the fence about an item, a person may choose to drop their whole wad of faux cash on a single item in the list, or they may choose to spread their money around. And they may be swayed as we mentioned earlier. The choice is theirs.
And just like in the real world, unless budgets are allocated anonymously, this method creates a certain amount of tension. People tend to pair up or group up to use their influence, power, and budget to drive a choice. We need to take these kinds of actions into consideration, and further we need to take the steps necessary to drive unity again after such an exercise! It’s only consensus if everyone agrees to abide by the outcome after all.