Mercy! Mercy! That Dang Nabed PERCY!

Episode 3: Defining the Problem

I discovered in Vietnam as a small unit infantry leader that the most dangerous combatant on a battlefield is somebody who can figure out what is best and get people to do it. It is my pet definition for Leadership. The Greeks gave us a process for determining best and it is called reason. The German General Staff refined it and it is taught today in the Nation’s war colleges and one of the names it goes by is The Commander’s Estimate of the Situation.

When experienced war fighters combine this process with the planning of warfighting the results give those who are familiar with its use a decided edge. Since the edge between success and failure is often slim indeed, it can spell the difference between a positive or negatice outcome. It is really no more then applying the problem solving process in order to anticipate what an enemy is likely to do.

It begins with defining the problem. The problem is defined and analyzed in a way that allows for the optimization of resources based upon what the enemy is likely to try and accomplish. The idea is to predict what the enemy is likely to do in a given situation and put the grease where it will do the most good.

Over generations of use this Estimate Process has been refined and is completed before any Planning takes place. Indeed the planning is predicated on the results of the Estimate. It consists of Defining the Problem, stating relevant Facts and Assumptions, laying out courses of action (CAs), analyzing these courses, reaching a conclusion that chooses the optimal approach consistent with the findings of the analysis.

Defining a problem might seem like the easiest and most self evident part of the process but actually it is elusive, and requires a piece of boiler plate verbiage to get the ball rolling down the right path. Using the words, “THE PROBLEM IS TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO…” is a good beginning. If this is where the problem solver starts the statement will open the study up to discrete courses of action rather than a “Yes/No” Or Go/No-Go solution.

If someone were asked what the Problem Statement was in preparing for the Boston Marathon (Assuming that there was one) a good answer would be, “TO DETERMINE THE BEST WAY TO PREVENT A TERRORIST INCIDENT…)

Now if you were to ask a group of experts what the problem statement is for the next New York Marathon, you will get a broad range of responses some of which might be as follows.

The problem we will face is that we can’t cover twenty-six miles.
The problem is that there will be a million spectators and participants.
The problem is that the terrorist can pick the time and place of the attack.
The problem is that the current administration is weak on terror.
The problem is that we are under resourced and over committed.
The problem is we need to send all the Muslims home.

Yada, Yada Yada… As true or false as these suppositions might be if this is going to be the basis upon which limited resources are deployed then we are not going to optimized how we prepare for a terror attack. So the definition above in bold is a better starting point that those listed below.