the problem solving wheel

Problem Solving Wheel: Help Kids Solve Their Own Problems

Students who act out in aggressive behaviors often do so because they struggle with identifying solutions to their problems. A Problem-Solving Wheel can help teach your students to learn how to independently solve a problem.

A problem-solving wheel also known as the wheel of choice or solution wheel is a great way to give students a visual of choices to help them either calm down when they are upset or to help them solve a problem with a classmate.

It is best to use the problem-solving wheel when students are dealing with a “small” problem. “Small” problems include conflicts that cause “small” feelings of annoyance, embarrassment, boredom, etc. If the student has a BIG problem they should practice telling an adult. “BIG problems” are situations that are scary, dangerous, illegal, etc.

Examples of Small Problems

A classmate broke your pencil
Someone cut in front of them in line
A classmate is using the color crayon they want to use
A friend keeps kicking their chair

Conflict Resolution

Children don’t always know what to do when they are experiencing conflicts with others. When students are stressed and in the moment of a conflict they can often forget how to solve the problem A problem-solving choice wheel can help them learn different ways to solve their problems. I’ve created a few free printable problem-solving choice wheels for you to choose from. Simply download and start using in your classroom today!

Problem Solving Wheel Freebie

Comes in 4 different versions:

Ready-Made: “What can I do?” choice wheel is ready to use right away. Simply download, print and start using this freebie!
Blank with Pictures: Have your students add their own words to the pictures.
Blank: Have your students draw their own pictures and write a short description.
Editable Version: Using the free version of Adobe Acrobat Reader edit all the blue boxes with your own words.

When you create a consistent pattern of how to solve problems students will eventually pick up on that pattern and begin to implement the pattern independently.

Send me the Problem Solving Choice Wheel!

Involve children in finding the solution..

Involving children in the problem-solving process can help give them buy-in into using the system that they take part in creating. Use the blank version or the editable version and have your students create their own ideas for how to solve “small” problems on their own. Your students might even surprise you and come up with some creative solutions.

Teach Feeling Words

In addition, for some of our students teaching feeling words can help them have the vocabulary necessary to express how they are feeling during a problem. We can start by naming students’ feelings for them and after some practice hopefully, the students will begin to use feeling words to describe how they are feeling during a conflict. For example, “Sam the way you yelled, “no” and stomped your feet tell me that you are angry.” Talking to our students this way can help bring their attention to their feelings so they can eventually identify their own feelings.

Help your students resolve a social conflict on their own with this – PROBLEM-SOLVING WHEEL .

Where to Begin

Start by posting the PROBLEM-SOLVING WHEEL in a good spot in your classroom or office.
Start slowly and use 1-2 solutions and build up to using all 6 solutions.
Practice, practice, practice!

Helpful Tips

Start slowly: practice using 1-2 choices at a time and slowly build up to using all six. Be clear about what each choice looks like in practice.
Practice is critical: Even after introducing the Problem-Solving Wheel students will still depend on you to help them resolve their conflicts. Continue to modal and have your students practice.

Books on Problem Solving

For Younger Children: Recommended Ages 2-6

The Little Mouse, The Red Ripe Strawberry, and the Big Hungry Bear
Duncan the Story Dragon
The Whale in my Swimming Pool

For Older Children: Recommended Ages 8-12

Appleblossom the Possum
Dough Knights and Dragons
Rosie Revere, Engineer

Aggressive behaviors are often exhibited when a student struggles with identifying solutions to their problems. A problem-solving wheel can be a great way to give students a visual of choices to help them calm down and to solve a problem with a classmate or friend.

Grab your freebie printable today and get started helping your students independently solving their own problems!

Want More Problem Solving?

Be sure to check out my other problem-solving freebies:

31 Wordless Videos to Teach Problem-Solving
71+ Free Social Problem Solving Task Cards Scenarios

Get More Problem Solving Time Saving Materials

Next, be sure to check out the following time-saving materials to continue to teach your students how to solve their social problems in addition to this freebie.

Problem Size & Reaction Size

Problem size and reaction size. Teach your students to identify the size of a problem and to match the size of the problem with their reaction size.

Weekly Social Pragmatics Homework

Weekly problem-solving. Send home a weekly homework page that includes a problem-solving scenario plus an idiom and a conversational practice scenario.

Restorative Justice Problem Solving Flip Book

Restorative justice graphic visual. Use this graphic visual to help your student restore a social relationship after a social problem.

Thursday 2nd of February 2023

Great idea!

71+ Free Social Problem-Solving Scenarios - Speech Therapy Store

Wednesday 23rd of October 2019

[…] with these small problems can be a great learning opportunity. Children can practice problem-solving with a small problem which can help them learn how to handle bigger problems in the […]

Deciphering the Problem Solving Wheel – A Guide for Critical Thinkers

Understanding the Problem-Solving Wheel

Hey there, I get it. It can be daunting when you first encounter the problem-solving wheel. But don’t worry, we’ll break it down together. The problem-solving or decision-making wheel is a visual tool that helps us make informed decisions.

Picture a circle divided into several sections, each representing a step in the problem-solving process. Starting with identifying the problem, brainstorming solutions, evaluating these solutions, making a decision, implementing the decision, and finally, reviewing the outcome.

Sounds like a lot, right? But trust me, the wheel is a simple yet powerful way to approach problems, especially those that seem complicated or overwhelming.

Importance of the Problem-Solving Wheel in Critical Thinking

You might ask, “Why should I use the problem-solving wheel? Can’t I figure things out on my own?” You can, of course, but the wheel helps structure your thinking and ensures you take into account essential steps.

It’s a vital tool for critical thinking because it encourages us to be organized, systematic, and thorough. It pushes us to consider multiple perspectives and evaluate each solution carefully before deciding. And remember, effective problem-solving is a highly valued skill in the professional world.

Recognizing the Struggles and Concerns about using the Problem Solving Wheel

Using the problem-solving wheel could seem like an extra layer of complexity. You might think, “I’ve got enough on my plate; why add more?” Or perhaps you’re worried that it might slow you down or stifle your creativity.

Here’s what I’d say: Initially, it might take some time to get used to. But once you get the hang of it, the wheel can streamline your problem-solving process and save you time in the long run. As for creativity, the wheel doesn’t restrict it; instead, it channels your creative energy into productive avenues.

Remember, feeling overwhelmed or anxious when learning new tools or techniques is perfectly okay. Take a breath, take your time, and don’t be too hard on yourself. You’re not alone in this journey; with some practice, I believe you’ll master the problem-solving wheel in no time.

Ultimately, the aim is to empower you to tackle problems confidently and efficiently. So go ahead and give the problem-solving wheel a spin. You might be surprised at how much easier decision-making becomes.

Breakdown of the Problem Solving Wheel

In every career journey, there can be bumps along the way, unexpected problems that suddenly appear and seem impossible. But don’t worry, you’re not alone! Many of us have been there too. In this section, we’ll walk through the stages of the Problem Solving Wheel, a powerful tool to help you navigate any challenge.

Overview of the stages in the Problem Solving Wheel

The Problem Solving Wheel is a dynamic process that includes six key stages:

Identify the problem.
Brainstorm possible solutions.
Evaluate the solutions.
Choose the best solution.
Implement the solution.
Review the results.

In theory, it sounds straightforward. However, in practice, each stage can feel overwhelming and daunting, especially when you’re knee-deep in a problem. But don’t worry, we’ve got you covered.

Detailed explanation of each stage and how it contributes to problem-solving

Each stage of the Problem Solving Wheel plays a crucial role in finding a solution:

Identify the problem. This is about acknowledging that something isn’t working and defining what it is. It might feel uncomfortable, but remember, recognizing the problem is the first step towards solving it!
Brainstorm possible solutions. This stage is all about creativity and open-mindedness. Don’t limit yourself, and don’t fear the outlandish ideas. Sometimes, they’re the best ones!
Evaluate the solutions. Here, you assess each solution based on its feasibility, potential impact, and required resources. It can feel like a lot, but it’s essential to ensure you choose the most effective solution.
Choose the best solution. After evaluating, you’ll select the solution that best fits the problem. This stage may stir up some anxiety, but remember, no explanation is perfect, and making a decision is better than staying stuck!
Implement the solution. This is where you put your chosen solution into action. It might be nerve-racking, but remember, you’ve done your homework; trust your judgment!
Review the results. Lastly, you’ll assess how well your solution worked and make necessary adjustments. This continuous learning and improvement process might seem tiring, but it’s critical to becoming a better problem-solver!

Acknowledging difficulties in comprehending and applying each stage

We understand that comprehending and applying these stages is only sometimes a walk in the park. It can be overwhelming, especially when dealing with a challenging problem.

However, it’s crucial to remember that practice makes perfect. The more you use the Problem Solving Wheel, the more comfortable you’ll become with it.

And remember, it’s okay to ask for help. You’re not alone in this journey. With patience, persistence, and a bit of courage, you can conquer any problem that comes your way. After all, every issue is an opportunity for growth and learning. So, let’s embrace the challenge together!

How to Use the Problem Solving Wheel Effectively

Are you feeling overwhelmed by problems? You’re not alone. We’ve all been there. The good news? There’s a tool that can help you navigate through the storm – The Problem Solving Wheel. Let’s dive into it together, shall we?

Tips for Getting Started with the Problem Solving Wheel

Feeling anxious about using new tools, especially those designed to help manage our problems, is okay. Here are some tips to help you get started with the Problem Solving Wheel:

Start Small : Don’t rush yourself. Start by applying the wheel to smaller problems before tackling the bigger ones.
Write It Down : Make your wheel tangible. Draw it out on paper and fill in each section as you go.
Be Honest with Yourself : Being truthful about the problem and your feelings towards it is crucial. This is your journey, after all.

Strategies for Overcoming Challenges in Using the Problem-Solving Wheel

Using the Problem-Solving Wheel might seem tricky at first. That’s perfectly normal. Here’s how you can overcome potential challenges:

Practice, Practice, Practice : Like any new skill, using the wheel effectively takes time and practice. Don’t be discouraged if it doesn’t work perfectly the first time.
Seek Feedback : Be bold and ask others for their perspective. They might see a solution you still need to consider.
Stay Flexible : The wheel is a guide, not a rulebook. If something doesn’t quite fit, feel free to adapt it.

Encouragement for Persisting, Even When It Seems Difficult

Look, I get it. Sometimes, the path to problem-solving can feel like climbing an ever-growing mountain. But remember, every step you take brings you closer to the peak, no matter how small. Here are some words of encouragement:

Believe in Yourself : You have the power to solve your problems. Trust in your abilities.
Remember Your Victories : Recall previous problems you’ve solved. You’ve done it before, and you can do it again.
Patience is Key : Change doesn’t happen overnight. Be patient with yourself and the process.

In conclusion, using the Problem Solving Wheel may seem daunting initially, but with practice, feedback, and patience, you will master it. We’re all navigating this life together, and tools like this can make the journey a little easier. Keep going; you’ve got this!

Role of the Problem-Solving Wheel in Decision Making

You’ve been there. You are staring at a problem, feeling like you’re in the center of a maze with no clear path out. It’s natural to feel anxious, especially when the stakes are high. You’re not alone. We all experience this at some point in our careers. But a powerful tool can help the Problem-Solving Wheel.

The connection between the Problem Solving Wheel and decision-making process

Think of the Problem Solving Wheel as your compass in the middle of that maze. It’s a guide, a tool that leads you through decision-making. It’s structured, it’s logical, and it’s step-by-step. You start by identifying the problem, brainstorming solutions, weighing your options, deciding, taking action, and finally, reviewing the results.

It’s a process that can be used for any problem, big or small. And, like any process, it gets easier the more you use it. The Problem-Solving Wheel isn’t just a way to make decisions; it’s a way to build confidence in your decision-making skills.

Addressing anxieties about making decisions

Making decisions can feel overwhelming, especially when you need help figuring out how to start or where to turn. That’s where the Problem Solving Wheel comes in. It gives you a clear path to follow, breaking down the problem into manageable parts.

And remember, it’s okay to feel anxious. It’s okay to be unsure. Decisions are often complex, and they can feel daunting. But you’re not alone. You have the Problem-Solving Wheel and the support of others who have been there before.

Ways to use the Problem Solving Wheel to make more confident decisions

Ready to start feeling more confident in your decisions? Here are a few ways to use the Problem Solving Wheel:

Start small : Practice using the Problem Solving Wheel with minor, low-stakes problems. Get a feel for the process before tackling more significant, complex issues.
Be patient : The Problem Solving Wheel isn’t a magic solution. It’s a process, and it takes time. Take your time with the steps.
Reflect : After you’ve made a decision, take time to reflect. What worked? What didn’t? Use this insight to refine your decision-making process for next time.

Remember, the Problem-Solving Wheel isn’t just a decision-making tool. It’s a tool for building confidence, understanding your thought process, and recognizing that you can make good decisions. So, give it a try. See where the wheel takes you. You might be surprised at how far you can go.

Real-Life Applications of the Problem Solving Wheel

I get it; problem-solving can sometimes feel like an uphill battle, especially when life throws us curveballs. But don’t worry; the Problem Solving Wheel is here to help you navigate these challenges. Here’s how you can apply it in real-life situations.

Examples of how the Problem Solving Wheel can be used in everyday situations

At Work: Maybe you’re dealing with a difficult colleague or a project that’s gone off track. Instead of panicking or going into blame mode, you can use the problem-solving wheel to identify the problem, brainstorm potential solutions, and assess the best course of action.
At Home: Perhaps there’s tension brewing over shared household chores. Applying the wheel could involve defining the issue, coming up with potential solutions, discussing them with family members, and deciding on a solution everyone can agree on.
Personal Life: Struggling with time management ? The wheel can help you pinpoint where you’re losing time, brainstorm ways to manage your time better and implement a plan.

Tips for implementing the Problem Solving Wheel in various aspects of life

Keep an open mind: View each problem as an opportunity for improvement rather than a setback.
Involve Others: Don’t hesitate to involve others in brainstorming and decision-making. They might offer a fresh perspective.
Take Action: Once you’ve decided on a solution, implement it. Remember, the wheel is only effective if you take action.

Assurance that the Problem-Solving Wheel can bring about positive change in life

I understand that change can be daunting and even a little scary. But let me assure you, the Problem-Solving Wheel is not about drastic changes. It’s about making minor adjustments that can significantly improve your life.

By systematically breaking down your problems and tackling them one by one, you’ll find that your issues are more manageable and gain the confidence to face future challenges head-on.

So, embrace the Problem Solving Wheel, give it a whirl, and see how it can usher in a positive change in your life. Remember, problem-solving is not a destination but a journey. And like any journey, it’s easier when you have a reliable map to guide you – in this case, the Problem Solving Wheel.

Remember, you’re not alone in this. We all have our share of problems and are all in this together. And with the Problem Solving Wheel in your toolkit, you’re well-equipped to navigate the ups and downs of life. So go on and give it a try; you’ve got this!

Beyond the Problem-Solving Wheel: Developing Overall Critical Thinking Skills

The importance of critical thinking beyond the problem-solving wheel.

First, let’s acknowledge this: Enhancing your critical thinking skills can be a challenging walk in the park. It’s an ongoing journey that requires persistence; sometimes, it feels overwhelming. But remember, every step you take towards enhancing your critical thinking abilities is a step towards personal and career growth.

Why is critical thinking so vital beyond just the Problem Solving Wheel? It equips you to think logically and objectively. It empowers you to question assumptions, reflect on your thoughts, and make informed decisions. This skill is not confined to solving problems at work, but it’s also applicable in personal life situations.

Other Helpful Tools and Techniques for Enhancing Critical Thinking

The Problem Solving Wheel is undoubtedly a handy tool, but it’s not the only one in your critical thinking toolkit. Other strategies can help you become a better critical thinker. Let’s explore some:

Question Assumptions: This technique pushes you to challenge the status quo and existing beliefs. It’s all about asking, “Why?”
Analyze Differing Perspectives: Being open to and understanding others’ viewpoints can widen your perspective and deepen your understanding.
Use Pro-Con Lists: They are simple but effective in weighing options and making decisions.
Practice Mindfulness: By being present and focused, you’re better equipped to observe details, which is crucial for critical thinking.
Use the 5 Whys Method: This technique helps get to the root cause of a problem by asking “Why?” five times.

Remember, these tools and techniques are not one-size-fits-all. Try them out, see what works best for you, and adjust as needed.

Final Words of Encouragement and Empowerment for the Journey to Become a Better Critical Thinker

As we wrap up, remember that developing critical thinking skills is a journey, not a race. You might sometimes feel like you’re not making progress fast enough, but don’t let that discourage you. Every question asked, every assumption challenged, and every new perspective considered is a step forward.

Embrace the journey with patience and persistence. Know that your efforts are not in vain, for critical thinking is a skill that will serve you in all areas of life. You’re not just becoming a better problem solver at work but a better decision-maker in life.

So keep going, keep growing. You’re doing better than you think and more capable than you know. You’re on your way to becoming a more empowered and influential critical thinker, and that’s something to be proud of.

Key Takeaways from Deciphering the Problem Solving Wheel

Tips for the problem solving wheel.

We get it. Problem-solving can be daunting. It’s like a puzzle with missing pieces. But don’t worry. We’ve got you covered. Below are some practical and easy-to-follow tips to help you master the art of problem-solving.

Understand the Problem: It’s okay to feel overwhelmed. Start by taking a deep breath, then work on understanding the problem. What is it about? Who does it affect? Take your time.
Identify the Root Cause: This is often where confusion creeps in. Remember, it’s not about finding someone to blame. It’s about identifying where the issue originated. Take your time with this step.
Brainstorm Solutions: This should be an open and judgment-free zone. Every idea is valuable. Be bold and think outside the box.
Evaluate Options: Not all solutions are feasible. And that’s alright. Weigh the pros and cons. Look at the resources available. It’s okay to discard options.
Choose a Solution: This is a critical step. It might induce some anxiety. But trust yourself. You’ve done the groundwork. Choose the solution that seems best.
Implement the Solution: You might feel apprehensive about this step. It’s normal. It means you care about the outcome. Stay calm, follow your plan, and take one action at a time.
Review the Outcome: This is where you learn. Don’t beat yourself up if things don’t go as planned. Every outcome is a chance to grow. Reflect on what worked and what didn’t.

Remember, problem-solving is a process. It’s about something other than getting it right the first time. It’s about learning, adapting, and improving. You’re doing great. Keep going.

Niche industries and emerging careers – a look into tomorrow’s jobs, adapting to automation – how to future-proof your career, navigating the sustainable job market – green careers and opportunities.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Search form

Customer Service 1-800-456-7770

The Wheel of Choice

Focusing on solutions is a primary theme of Positive Discipline, and kids are great at focusing on solutions when they are taught the skills and are allowed to practice them.

The wheel of choice provides a fun and exciting way to involve kids in learning and practicing problem-solving skills, especially when they are involved in creating it.

Make sure your child takes the primary lead in creating his or her wheel of choice. The less you do, the better. Your child can be creative and decide if he or she would like to draw pictures or symbols to represent solutions, or to find pictures on the Internet. Then let your child choose (within reason) where to hang his or her wheel of choice.

Older kids may not want to create a wheel, but could benefit from brainstorming ideas for focusing on solutions and writing them down on an easily accessible list. It is helpful when you have other options for finding solutions, such as family meetings. Then you can offer a choice: “What would help you the most right now—your wheel of choice or putting this problem on the family meeting agenda?”

Helping your child create a wheel of choice increases his or her sense of capability and self-regulation. From Mary’s story you will gain a sense of why it is best to have your kids make their own wheel of choice from scratch instead of using a template.

Success Story

The following Wheel of Choice was created by 3-year-old Jake with the help of his mom, Laura Beth. Jake chose the clip art he wanted to represent some choices. His Mom, shared the following success story.

Jake used his Wheel of Choice today. Jake and his sister (17 months old) were sitting on the sofa sharing a book. His sister, took the book and Jake immediately flipped his lid. He yelled at her, grabbed the book, made her cry. She grabbed it back and I slowly walked in. I asked Jake if he’d like to use his Wheel Of Choice to help—and he actually said YES! He chose to “share his toys.” He got his sister her own book that was more appropriate for her and she gladly gave him his book back. They sat there for a while and then traded!

by Mary Tamborski , co-author of Positive Discipline Parenting Tools

It was such fun creating a wheel of choice with my son Reid when he was 7 years old. We purchased a few supplies in advance: poster board, stickers, scented markers, scissors, and colored paper. None of these materials are required, but I knew it would make it more fun.

It turned out to be even more of an advantage than I thought because his 3-year-old brother, Parker, wanted to be involved too. He had fun making his own wheel of choice (even though he didn’t really under- stand it). This was a great distraction for Reid’s little brother, who felt like he was involved in the process.

I started by asking Reid, “What are some of the things you do or can do when you are having a challenge?”

I was really impressed with how easy it was for Reid to come up with so many solutions. He had already been using many of these skills, so he created his list very quickly.

Walk away or go to a different room.
Take deep breaths.
Put it on the family meeting agenda.
Use a different tone.
Ask Mom or Dad for help.
Count to ten to cool off.
Hit the “reset button” and try again.

He had fun writing them all on his pie graph. The scented pens added to his enthusiasm. He wanted to “practice” writing them on a piece of scratch paper before he officially drew them on his poster board.

I loved how he handled it when he misspelled a word or when his circle wasn’t even. He just crossed out the word and rewrote it. I was tempted to give my two cents and step in to fix it for him, but I remembered how important it was for him to do it by himself. I could see the pride in his grin and his little happy dance movement in his chair. I was relieved when Reid patiently allowed his little brother to be involved by adding stickers to his finished project.

Reid was so proud when he held up his wheel of choice. Even Parker was proud. They were both posing for a photo, and Reid even wanted me to take a video as he described it.

About two hours later he had his first challenge: his older brother, Greyson, was saying, “Reid smells like a fart.” Then he started mimicking everything Reid said.

Reid came to me and said, “Greyson keeps bugging me.”

I said, “You’re having a challenging moment. Would it help you to go to your wheel of choice to choose something you could do?”

He went to his wheel of choice, looked at it, and did his own little process of elimination. He said, “I’ve already walked away and he keeps following me.

I’m asking you for help.”

I asked, “What else could you try?”

Reid started taking deep breaths. Then he said, “I’m going to try asking him in a calm voice to please stop, and lie on the bed while you read us a book.”

Before I could even fully process this magical moment, all three boys were lying next to me while we read a book.

One of the most valuable lessons I learned was that he had the tools and skills to solve his problems on his own. Knowing that he had his wheel of choice reminded me to not get involved in solving the problem. After all, getting me involved wasn’t one of his “solutions.” (Yes, asking me for help was one of his solutions, and I used my judgment to know he could find something that didn’t involve me. If he had been in physical danger I would have helped.)

Click Here to view the Wheel of Choice from a program created by Lynn Lott and Jane Nelsen (illustrations by Paula Gray).

Click Here to get a more complete description and to order your own Wheel of Choice: A Problem Solving Program . It includes 14 lessons to teach the skills for using the Wheel of Choice.

Online Learning

Positive Discipline offers online learning options for parents, teachers, and parent educators. Learn in the comfort of your own home and at your own pace. You have unlimited access to our online streaming programs, so you can watch and re-watch the videos as often as you like.

CREATE Week: Using the Problem-Solving Wheel to Prioritize Solutions by Abby Woods

As a school leader for more than 15 years, having the ability to quickly problem solve while including my team has been a vital craft to develop. I’m Abby Woods , a longtime leader in schools working alongside teams to improve educational experiences for students. My current role, besides being a board member for CREATE , is as the Director of Internal Consulting for Charleston County School District .

The problem-solving wheel graphic has been an essential tool for my school teams to attack educational issues related to student achievement and program evaluation. Many times teams gather to admire the problem and often get derailed with discussing the issues rather than prioritizing the solution through a process of performance measures and documentation .

Lessons Learned:

Ensure your team can stay focused on the issues at hand and encourage them to be specific with problem. For example, the literacy program is not working is vague; whereas gathering information and creating a ‘work flow’ of the literacy process will help identify the breakdown.
Providing stakeholders with an outline or steps helps the team feel successful in problem solving. Additionally, the cogs of the wheel can be assigned, then brought back to share for further examination. Teacher teams feel especially empowered through this level of responsibility and problem-solving for their students.
Guiding the team through this problem-solving wheel requires a systematic approach giving each member a role. Put differently, the ‘buy-in’ of the team will grow as the leader develops responsibility within the team.

Rad Resources:

American Evaluation Association is a great resource for leaders to evaluate how your team is growing. https://www.eval.org/page/competencies
The Flippen Group has a myriad of resources for growing, developing and stabilizing teams. These were practices that are most helpful when creating the appropriate culture for team growth and problem solving. https://flippengroup.com/capturing-kids-hearts/
The Racial Equity Institute provided an incredible insight and tools for evaluation as leaders work in a variety of organizations.

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating Consortium for Research on Educational Assessment and Teaching (CREATE) week. The contributions all this week to aea365 come from members of CREATE. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to [email protected] . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

1 thought on “CREATE Week: Using the Problem-Solving Wheel to Prioritize Solutions by Abby Woods”

I am a student in the PME program at Queens University, in Kingston Ontario and am currently taking a course in Program Inquiry and Evaluation. I connected to your article as soon as I saw the “problem solving” wheel. As an instructional lead at my school, I can also see how this wheel would come in very handy to evaluate programs. I have led many PLC’s and we have taken on the Collaborative Inquiry model and follow the work of Jennifer Donohoo. This wheel and this model I have mentioned, have many similarities. Every stage of this wheel and the collaborative inquiry model are similar in that the contain the stages of problem solving (reflection), inquiry (awareness, gather information), collaboration (analyze information, vision and planning) and design (implement plan). Both of these models or processes allow stakeholders the ability to collaborate and through their inquires come up with a central idea or overall problem they need to try and solve by designing and implementing plans to meet their students learning needs. I appreciate that although the collaborative model is very systematic, it is not linear, and teams may need to go back and forth on the cycle. I would imagine this problem-solving wheel would be the same and participants would have the ability to go back and forth depending on any challenges the evaluation may pose. When I have facilitated inquiry teams, we brainstorm ideas, frame our problem and decide upon a common goal but after analyzing data we realize that we may need to take a step or two back and that the problem runs a little deeper than we thought. (i.e.: set a school goal of improving students reading fluency when after analyzing reading records realized that accuracy was the overall underlying issue and thus had to change our goal and focus.) I appreciate the three points you made as I also agree that participants need a systematic approach, with every member serving a specific purpose, clearly defined goals, which everyone agrees upon and are working towards and a clearly defined process to keep everyone motivated and on track. I wonder about any challenges you may face when evaluating programs and working collaboratively with a team. I wonder how you have overcome these challenges. I also have found that if success is not found after a certain amount of time, participants may lose interest in the end goal. Do you have any advice for keeping members motivated to continue and complete the program evaluation using this problem-solving wheel? I appreciated the link provided to the “performance measures and documentation” and look forward to sharing this with my team at work as I think it will help guide our evaluation questions.

Problem Solving Wheel

The “Problem Solving Wheel” has many options the student can choose from such as, walk away and let it go, apologize, tell them to stop, ignore it, talk it out, and wait and cool off. Having this tool in the classroom helps minimize the fighting and arguing in the younger grade classes. It helps with giving different options that the students can choose from to handle their difficult situations themselves. For example if a student is constantly taking their classmates scissors or school supplies without asking, their behavior needs to be corrected. They can do this by going to the wheel and choosing the best option to help them make the situation better. In this case it would be to apologize to the other student who they were taking supplies from without permission.

More Information – Tool Source: Pinterest

1 thought on “Problem Solving Wheel”

I am placed in a first-grade classroom with 21 students in a suburban neighborhood. I prepared this tool by finding a wheel of choice that fit my grade level and included age-appropriate choices. I printed three copies of the wheels, laminated them, and stapled them around the room at eye level for students. I introduced the wheel at carpet time with the students, explained each choice on the wheel, and gave examples of what each one would look like in use. Since the wheels have been posted, some students have been referencing the wheel when needed and I have noticed a decrease in escalated conflicts among students. Students understand how the wheel is used and that it is their responsibility to pick a choice that is most appropriate for the situation. An adjustment that could be made to make this tool more effective would be creating a wheel of choice from scratch in collaboration with the students in your class.

Monday, June 23, 2014

The wheel of choice.

2 comments:

YOU just made my day! My 3.5 year old has been having a rough time lately and this would be SO perfect for him. thank you!!

Thank you for this!

14.3 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups

Learning objectives.

Discuss the common components and characteristics of problems.
Explain the five steps of the group problem-solving process.
Describe the brainstorming and discussion that should take place before the group makes a decision.
Compare and contrast the different decision-making techniques.
Discuss the various influences on decision making.

Although the steps of problem solving and decision making that we will discuss next may seem obvious, we often don’t think to or choose not to use them. Instead, we start working on a problem and later realize we are lost and have to backtrack. I’m sure we’ve all reached a point in a project or task and had the “OK, now what?” moment. I’ve recently taken up some carpentry projects as a functional hobby, and I have developed a great respect for the importance of advanced planning. It’s frustrating to get to a crucial point in building or fixing something only to realize that you have to unscrew a support board that you already screwed in, have to drive back to the hardware store to get something that you didn’t think to get earlier, or have to completely start over. In this section, we will discuss the group problem-solving process, methods of decision making, and influences on these processes.

Group Problem Solving

The problem-solving process involves thoughts, discussions, actions, and decisions that occur from the first consideration of a problematic situation to the goal. The problems that groups face are varied, but some common problems include budgeting funds, raising funds, planning events, addressing customer or citizen complaints, creating or adapting products or services to fit needs, supporting members, and raising awareness about issues or causes.

Problems of all sorts have three common components (Adams & Galanes, 2009):

An undesirable situation. When conditions are desirable, there isn’t a problem.
A desired situation. Even though it may only be a vague idea, there is a drive to better the undesirable situation. The vague idea may develop into a more precise goal that can be achieved, although solutions are not yet generated.
Obstacles between undesirable and desirable situation. These are things that stand in the way between the current situation and the group’s goal of addressing it. This component of a problem requires the most work, and it is the part where decision making occurs. Some examples of obstacles include limited funding, resources, personnel, time, or information. Obstacles can also take the form of people who are working against the group, including people resistant to change or people who disagree.

Discussion of these three elements of a problem helps the group tailor its problem-solving process, as each problem will vary. While these three general elements are present in each problem, the group should also address specific characteristics of the problem. Five common and important characteristics to consider are task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in problem, group member familiarity with problem, and the need for solution acceptance (Adams & Galanes, 2009).

Task difficulty. Difficult tasks are also typically more complex. Groups should be prepared to spend time researching and discussing a difficult and complex task in order to develop a shared foundational knowledge. This typically requires individual work outside of the group and frequent group meetings to share information.
Number of possible solutions. There are usually multiple ways to solve a problem or complete a task, but some problems have more potential solutions than others. Figuring out how to prepare a beach house for an approaching hurricane is fairly complex and difficult, but there are still a limited number of things to do—for example, taping and boarding up windows; turning off water, electricity, and gas; trimming trees; and securing loose outside objects. Other problems may be more creatively based. For example, designing a new restaurant may entail using some standard solutions but could also entail many different types of innovation with layout and design.
Group member interest in problem. When group members are interested in the problem, they will be more engaged with the problem-solving process and invested in finding a quality solution. Groups with high interest in and knowledge about the problem may want more freedom to develop and implement solutions, while groups with low interest may prefer a leader who provides structure and direction.
Group familiarity with problem. Some groups encounter a problem regularly, while other problems are more unique or unexpected. A family who has lived in hurricane alley for decades probably has a better idea of how to prepare its house for a hurricane than does a family that just recently moved from the Midwest. Many groups that rely on funding have to revisit a budget every year, and in recent years, groups have had to get more creative with budgets as funding has been cut in nearly every sector. When group members aren’t familiar with a problem, they will need to do background research on what similar groups have done and may also need to bring in outside experts.
Need for solution acceptance. In this step, groups must consider how many people the decision will affect and how much “buy-in” from others the group needs in order for their solution to be successfully implemented. Some small groups have many stakeholders on whom the success of a solution depends. Other groups are answerable only to themselves. When a small group is planning on building a new park in a crowded neighborhood or implementing a new policy in a large business, it can be very difficult to develop solutions that will be accepted by all. In such cases, groups will want to poll those who will be affected by the solution and may want to do a pilot implementation to see how people react. Imposing an excellent solution that doesn’t have buy-in from stakeholders can still lead to failure.

Group problem solving can be a confusing puzzle unless it is approached systematically.

Muness Castle – Problem Solving – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Group Problem-Solving Process

There are several variations of similar problem-solving models based on US American scholar John Dewey’s reflective thinking process (Bormann & Bormann, 1988). As you read through the steps in the process, think about how you can apply what we learned regarding the general and specific elements of problems. Some of the following steps are straightforward, and they are things we would logically do when faced with a problem. However, taking a deliberate and systematic approach to problem solving has been shown to benefit group functioning and performance. A deliberate approach is especially beneficial for groups that do not have an established history of working together and will only be able to meet occasionally. Although a group should attend to each step of the process, group leaders or other group members who facilitate problem solving should be cautious not to dogmatically follow each element of the process or force a group along. Such a lack of flexibility could limit group member input and negatively affect the group’s cohesion and climate.

Step 1: Define the Problem

Define the problem by considering the three elements shared by every problem: the current undesirable situation, the goal or more desirable situation, and obstacles in the way (Adams & Galanes, 2009). At this stage, group members share what they know about the current situation, without proposing solutions or evaluating the information. Here are some good questions to ask during this stage: What is the current difficulty? How did we come to know that the difficulty exists? Who/what is involved? Why is it meaningful/urgent/important? What have the effects been so far? What, if any, elements of the difficulty require clarification? At the end of this stage, the group should be able to compose a single sentence that summarizes the problem called a problem statement . Avoid wording in the problem statement or question that hints at potential solutions. A small group formed to investigate ethical violations of city officials could use the following problem statement: “Our state does not currently have a mechanism for citizens to report suspected ethical violations by city officials.”

Step 2: Analyze the Problem

During this step a group should analyze the problem and the group’s relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the “what” related to the problem, this step focuses on the “why.” At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty. Group members may also want to begin setting out an agenda or timeline for the group’s problem-solving process, looking forward to the other steps. To fully analyze the problem, the group can discuss the five common problem variables discussed before. Here are two examples of questions that the group formed to address ethics violations might ask: Why doesn’t our city have an ethics reporting mechanism? Do cities of similar size have such a mechanism? Once the problem has been analyzed, the group can pose a problem question that will guide the group as it generates possible solutions. “How can citizens report suspected ethical violations of city officials and how will such reports be processed and addressed?” As you can see, the problem question is more complex than the problem statement, since the group has moved on to more in-depth discussion of the problem during step 2.

Step 3: Generate Possible Solutions

During this step, group members generate possible solutions to the problem. Again, solutions should not be evaluated at this point, only proposed and clarified. The question should be what could we do to address this problem, not what should we do to address it. It is perfectly OK for a group member to question another person’s idea by asking something like “What do you mean?” or “Could you explain your reasoning more?” Discussions at this stage may reveal a need to return to previous steps to better define or more fully analyze a problem. Since many problems are multifaceted, it is necessary for group members to generate solutions for each part of the problem separately, making sure to have multiple solutions for each part. Stopping the solution-generating process prematurely can lead to groupthink. For the problem question previously posed, the group would need to generate solutions for all three parts of the problem included in the question. Possible solutions for the first part of the problem (How can citizens report ethical violations?) may include “online reporting system, e-mail, in-person, anonymously, on-the-record,” and so on. Possible solutions for the second part of the problem (How will reports be processed?) may include “daily by a newly appointed ethics officer, weekly by a nonpartisan nongovernment employee,” and so on. Possible solutions for the third part of the problem (How will reports be addressed?) may include “by a newly appointed ethics commission, by the accused’s supervisor, by the city manager,” and so on.

Step 4: Evaluate Solutions

During this step, solutions can be critically evaluated based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Once the potential solutions have been narrowed based on more obvious differences in relevance and/or merit, the group should analyze each solution based on its potential effects—especially negative effects. Groups that are required to report the rationale for their decision or whose decisions may be subject to public scrutiny would be wise to make a set list of criteria for evaluating each solution. Additionally, solutions can be evaluated based on how well they fit with the group’s charge and the abilities of the group. To do this, group members may ask, “Does this solution live up to the original purpose or mission of the group?” and “Can the solution actually be implemented with our current resources and connections?” and “How will this solution be supported, funded, enforced, and assessed?” Secondary tensions and substantive conflict, two concepts discussed earlier, emerge during this step of problem solving, and group members will need to employ effective critical thinking and listening skills.

Decision making is part of the larger process of problem solving and it plays a prominent role in this step. While there are several fairly similar models for problem solving, there are many varied decision-making techniques that groups can use. For example, to narrow the list of proposed solutions, group members may decide by majority vote, by weighing the pros and cons, or by discussing them until a consensus is reached. There are also more complex decision-making models like the “six hats method,” which we will discuss later. Once the final decision is reached, the group leader or facilitator should confirm that the group is in agreement. It may be beneficial to let the group break for a while or even to delay the final decision until a later meeting to allow people time to evaluate it outside of the group context.

Step 5: Implement and Assess the Solution

Implementing the solution requires some advanced planning, and it should not be rushed unless the group is operating under strict time restraints or delay may lead to some kind of harm. Although some solutions can be implemented immediately, others may take days, months, or years. As was noted earlier, it may be beneficial for groups to poll those who will be affected by the solution as to their opinion of it or even to do a pilot test to observe the effectiveness of the solution and how people react to it. Before implementation, groups should also determine how and when they would assess the effectiveness of the solution by asking, “How will we know if the solution is working or not?” Since solution assessment will vary based on whether or not the group is disbanded, groups should also consider the following questions: If the group disbands after implementation, who will be responsible for assessing the solution? If the solution fails, will the same group reconvene or will a new group be formed?

Once a solution has been reached and the group has the “green light” to implement it, it should proceed deliberately and cautiously, making sure to consider possible consequences and address them as needed.

Jocko Benoit – Prodigal Light – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Certain elements of the solution may need to be delegated out to various people inside and outside the group. Group members may also be assigned to implement a particular part of the solution based on their role in the decision making or because it connects to their area of expertise. Likewise, group members may be tasked with publicizing the solution or “selling” it to a particular group of stakeholders. Last, the group should consider its future. In some cases, the group will get to decide if it will stay together and continue working on other tasks or if it will disband. In other cases, outside forces determine the group’s fate.

“Getting Competent”

Problem Solving and Group Presentations

Giving a group presentation requires that individual group members and the group as a whole solve many problems and make many decisions. Although having more people involved in a presentation increases logistical difficulties and has the potential to create more conflict, a well-prepared and well-delivered group presentation can be more engaging and effective than a typical presentation. The main problems facing a group giving a presentation are (1) dividing responsibilities, (2) coordinating schedules and time management, and (3) working out the logistics of the presentation delivery.

In terms of dividing responsibilities, assigning individual work at the first meeting and then trying to fit it all together before the presentation (which is what many college students do when faced with a group project) is not the recommended method. Integrating content and visual aids created by several different people into a seamless final product takes time and effort, and the person “stuck” with this job at the end usually ends up developing some resentment toward his or her group members. While it’s OK for group members to do work independently outside of group meetings, spend time working together to help set up some standards for content and formatting expectations that will help make later integration of work easier. Taking the time to complete one part of the presentation together can help set those standards for later individual work. Discuss the roles that various group members will play openly so there isn’t role confusion. There could be one point person for keeping track of the group’s progress and schedule, one point person for communication, one point person for content integration, one point person for visual aids, and so on. Each person shouldn’t do all that work on his or her own but help focus the group’s attention on his or her specific area during group meetings (Stanton, 2009).

Scheduling group meetings is one of the most challenging problems groups face, given people’s busy lives. From the beginning, it should be clearly communicated that the group needs to spend considerable time in face-to-face meetings, and group members should know that they may have to make an occasional sacrifice to attend. Especially important is the commitment to scheduling time to rehearse the presentation. Consider creating a contract of group guidelines that includes expectations for meeting attendance to increase group members’ commitment.

Group presentations require members to navigate many logistics of their presentation. While it may be easier for a group to assign each member to create a five-minute segment and then transition from one person to the next, this is definitely not the most engaging method. Creating a master presentation and then assigning individual speakers creates a more fluid and dynamic presentation and allows everyone to become familiar with the content, which can help if a person doesn’t show up to present and during the question-and-answer section. Once the content of the presentation is complete, figure out introductions, transitions, visual aids, and the use of time and space (Stanton, 2012). In terms of introductions, figure out if one person will introduce all the speakers at the beginning, if speakers will introduce themselves at the beginning, or if introductions will occur as the presentation progresses. In terms of transitions, make sure each person has included in his or her speaking notes when presentation duties switch from one person to the next. Visual aids have the potential to cause hiccups in a group presentation if they aren’t fluidly integrated. Practicing with visual aids and having one person control them may help prevent this. Know how long your presentation is and know how you’re going to use the space. Presenters should know how long the whole presentation should be and how long each of their segments should be so that everyone can share the responsibility of keeping time. Also consider the size and layout of the presentation space. You don’t want presenters huddled in a corner until it’s their turn to speak or trapped behind furniture when their turn comes around.

Of the three main problems facing group presenters, which do you think is the most challenging and why?
Why do you think people tasked with a group presentation (especially students) prefer to divide the parts up and have members work on them independently before coming back together and integrating each part? What problems emerge from this method? In what ways might developing a master presentation and then assigning parts to different speakers be better than the more divided method? What are the drawbacks to the master presentation method?

Decision Making in Groups

We all engage in personal decision making daily, and we all know that some decisions are more difficult than others. When we make decisions in groups, we face some challenges that we do not face in our personal decision making, but we also stand to benefit from some advantages of group decision making (Napier & Gershenfeld, 2004). Group decision making can appear fair and democratic but really only be a gesture that covers up the fact that certain group members or the group leader have already decided. Group decision making also takes more time than individual decisions and can be burdensome if some group members do not do their assigned work, divert the group with self-centered or unproductive role behaviors, or miss meetings. Conversely, though, group decisions are often more informed, since all group members develop a shared understanding of a problem through discussion and debate. The shared understanding may also be more complex and deep than what an individual would develop, because the group members are exposed to a variety of viewpoints that can broaden their own perspectives. Group decisions also benefit from synergy, one of the key advantages of group communication that we discussed earlier. Most groups do not use a specific method of decision making, perhaps thinking that they’ll work things out as they go. This can lead to unequal participation, social loafing, premature decisions, prolonged discussion, and a host of other negative consequences. So in this section we will learn some practices that will prepare us for good decision making and some specific techniques we can use to help us reach a final decision.

Brainstorming before Decision Making

Before groups can make a decision, they need to generate possible solutions to their problem. The most commonly used method is brainstorming, although most people don’t follow the recommended steps of brainstorming. As you’ll recall, brainstorming refers to the quick generation of ideas free of evaluation. The originator of the term brainstorming said the following four rules must be followed for the technique to be effective (Osborn, 1959):

Evaluation of ideas is forbidden.
Wild and crazy ideas are encouraged.
Quantity of ideas, not quality, is the goal.
New combinations of ideas presented are encouraged.

To make brainstorming more of a decision-making method rather than an idea-generating method, group communication scholars have suggested additional steps that precede and follow brainstorming (Cragan & Wright, 1991).

Do a warm-up brainstorming session. Some people are more apprehensive about publicly communicating their ideas than others are, and a warm-up session can help ease apprehension and prime group members for task-related idea generation. The warm-up can be initiated by anyone in the group and should only go on for a few minutes. To get things started, a person could ask, “If our group formed a band, what would we be called?” or “What other purposes could a mailbox serve?” In the previous examples, the first warm up gets the group’s more abstract creative juices flowing, while the second focuses more on practical and concrete ideas.
Do the actual brainstorming session. This session shouldn’t last more than thirty minutes and should follow the four rules of brainstorming mentioned previously. To ensure that the fourth rule is realized, the facilitator could encourage people to piggyback off each other’s ideas.
Eliminate duplicate ideas. After the brainstorming session is over, group members can eliminate (without evaluating) ideas that are the same or very similar.
Clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. Before evaluation, see if any ideas need clarification. Then try to theme or group ideas together in some orderly fashion. Since “wild and crazy” ideas are encouraged, some suggestions may need clarification. If it becomes clear that there isn’t really a foundation to an idea and that it is too vague or abstract and can’t be clarified, it may be eliminated. As a caution though, it may be wise to not throw out off-the-wall ideas that are hard to categorize and to instead put them in a miscellaneous or “wild and crazy” category.

Discussion before Decision Making

The nominal group technique guides decision making through a four-step process that includes idea generation and evaluation and seeks to elicit equal contributions from all group members (Delbecq & Ven de Ven, 1971). This method is useful because the procedure involves all group members systematically, which fixes the problem of uneven participation during discussions. Since everyone contributes to the discussion, this method can also help reduce instances of social loafing. To use the nominal group technique, do the following:

Silently and individually list ideas.
Create a master list of ideas.
Clarify ideas as needed.
Take a secret vote to rank group members’ acceptance of ideas.

During the first step, have group members work quietly, in the same space, to write down every idea they have to address the task or problem they face. This shouldn’t take more than twenty minutes. Whoever is facilitating the discussion should remind group members to use brainstorming techniques, which means they shouldn’t evaluate ideas as they are generated. Ask group members to remain silent once they’ve finished their list so they do not distract others.

During the second step, the facilitator goes around the group in a consistent order asking each person to share one idea at a time. As the idea is shared, the facilitator records it on a master list that everyone can see. Keep track of how many times each idea comes up, as that could be an idea that warrants more discussion. Continue this process until all the ideas have been shared. As a note to facilitators, some group members may begin to edit their list or self-censor when asked to provide one of their ideas. To limit a person’s apprehension with sharing his or her ideas and to ensure that each idea is shared, I have asked group members to exchange lists with someone else so they can share ideas from the list they receive without fear of being personally judged.

During step three, the facilitator should note that group members can now ask for clarification on ideas on the master list. Do not let this discussion stray into evaluation of ideas. To help avoid an unnecessarily long discussion, it may be useful to go from one person to the next to ask which ideas need clarifying and then go to the originator(s) of the idea in question for clarification.

During the fourth step, members use a voting ballot to rank the acceptability of the ideas on the master list. If the list is long, you may ask group members to rank only their top five or so choices. The facilitator then takes up the secret ballots and reviews them in a random order, noting the rankings of each idea. Ideally, the highest ranked idea can then be discussed and decided on. The nominal group technique does not carry a group all the way through to the point of decision; rather, it sets the group up for a roundtable discussion or use of some other method to evaluate the merits of the top ideas.

Specific Decision-Making Techniques

Some decision-making techniques involve determining a course of action based on the level of agreement among the group members. These methods include majority, expert, authority, and consensus rule. Table 14.1 “Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques” reviews the pros and cons of each of these methods.

Majority rule is a simple method of decision making based on voting. In most cases a majority is considered half plus one.

Becky McCray – Voting – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Majority rule is a commonly used decision-making technique in which a majority (one-half plus one) must agree before a decision is made. A show-of-hands vote, a paper ballot, or an electronic voting system can determine the majority choice. Many decision-making bodies, including the US House of Representatives, Senate, and Supreme Court, use majority rule to make decisions, which shows that it is often associated with democratic decision making, since each person gets one vote and each vote counts equally. Of course, other individuals and mediated messages can influence a person’s vote, but since the voting power is spread out over all group members, it is not easy for one person or party to take control of the decision-making process. In some cases—for example, to override a presidential veto or to amend the constitution—a super majority of two-thirds may be required to make a decision.

Minority rule is a decision-making technique in which a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision and may or may not consider the input of other group members. When a designated expert makes a decision by minority rule, there may be buy-in from others in the group, especially if the members of the group didn’t have relevant knowledge or expertise. When a designated authority makes decisions, buy-in will vary based on group members’ level of respect for the authority. For example, decisions made by an elected authority may be more accepted by those who elected him or her than by those who didn’t. As with majority rule, this technique can be time saving. Unlike majority rule, one person or party can have control over the decision-making process. This type of decision making is more similar to that used by monarchs and dictators. An obvious negative consequence of this method is that the needs or wants of one person can override the needs and wants of the majority. A minority deciding for the majority has led to negative consequences throughout history. The white Afrikaner minority that ruled South Africa for decades instituted apartheid, which was a system of racial segregation that disenfranchised and oppressed the majority population. The quality of the decision and its fairness really depends on the designated expert or authority.

Consensus rule is a decision-making technique in which all members of the group must agree on the same decision. On rare occasions, a decision may be ideal for all group members, which can lead to unanimous agreement without further debate and discussion. Although this can be positive, be cautious that this isn’t a sign of groupthink. More typically, consensus is reached only after lengthy discussion. On the plus side, consensus often leads to high-quality decisions due to the time and effort it takes to get everyone in agreement. Group members are also more likely to be committed to the decision because of their investment in reaching it. On the negative side, the ultimate decision is often one that all group members can live with but not one that’s ideal for all members. Additionally, the process of arriving at consensus also includes conflict, as people debate ideas and negotiate the interpersonal tensions that may result.

Table 14.1 Pros and Cons of Agreement-Based Decision-Making Techniques

“Getting Critical”

Six Hats Method of Decision Making

Edward de Bono developed the Six Hats method of thinking in the late 1980s, and it has since become a regular feature in decision-making training in business and professional contexts (de Bono, 1985). The method’s popularity lies in its ability to help people get out of habitual ways of thinking and to allow group members to play different roles and see a problem or decision from multiple points of view. The basic idea is that each of the six hats represents a different way of thinking, and when we figuratively switch hats, we switch the way we think. The hats and their style of thinking are as follows:

White hat. Objective—focuses on seeking information such as data and facts and then processes that information in a neutral way.
Red hat. Emotional—uses intuition, gut reactions, and feelings to judge information and suggestions.
Black hat. Negative—focuses on potential risks, points out possibilities for failure, and evaluates information cautiously and defensively.
Yellow hat. Positive—is optimistic about suggestions and future outcomes, gives constructive and positive feedback, points out benefits and advantages.
Green hat. Creative—tries to generate new ideas and solutions, thinks “outside the box.”
Blue hat. Philosophical—uses metacommunication to organize and reflect on the thinking and communication taking place in the group, facilitates who wears what hat and when group members change hats.

Specific sequences or combinations of hats can be used to encourage strategic thinking. For example, the group leader may start off wearing the Blue Hat and suggest that the group start their decision-making process with some “White Hat thinking” in order to process through facts and other available information. During this stage, the group could also process through what other groups have done when faced with a similar problem. Then the leader could begin an evaluation sequence starting with two minutes of “Yellow Hat thinking” to identify potential positive outcomes, then “Black Hat thinking” to allow group members to express reservations about ideas and point out potential problems, then “Red Hat thinking” to get people’s gut reactions to the previous discussion, then “Green Hat thinking” to identify other possible solutions that are more tailored to the group’s situation or completely new approaches. At the end of a sequence, the Blue Hat would want to summarize what was said and begin a new sequence. To successfully use this method, the person wearing the Blue Hat should be familiar with different sequences and plan some of the thinking patterns ahead of time based on the problem and the group members. Each round of thinking should be limited to a certain time frame (two to five minutes) to keep the discussion moving.

This decision-making method has been praised because it allows group members to “switch gears” in their thinking and allows for role playing, which lets people express ideas more freely. How can this help enhance critical thinking? Which combination of hats do you think would be best for a critical thinking sequence?
What combinations of hats might be useful if the leader wanted to break the larger group up into pairs and why? For example, what kind of thinking would result from putting Yellow and Red together, Black and White together, or Red and White together, and so on?
Based on your preferred ways of thinking and your personality, which hat would be the best fit for you? Which would be the most challenging? Why?

Influences on Decision Making

Many factors influence the decision-making process. For example, how might a group’s independence or access to resources affect the decisions they make? What potential advantages and disadvantages come with decisions made by groups that are more or less similar in terms of personality and cultural identities? In this section, we will explore how situational, personality, and cultural influences affect decision making in groups.

Situational Influences on Decision Making

A group’s situational context affects decision making. One key situational element is the degree of freedom that the group has to make its own decisions, secure its own resources, and initiate its own actions. Some groups have to go through multiple approval processes before they can do anything, while others are self-directed, self-governing, and self-sustaining. Another situational influence is uncertainty. In general, groups deal with more uncertainty in decision making than do individuals because of the increased number of variables that comes with adding more people to a situation. Individual group members can’t know what other group members are thinking, whether or not they are doing their work, and how committed they are to the group. So the size of a group is a powerful situational influence, as it adds to uncertainty and complicates communication.

Access to information also influences a group. First, the nature of the group’s task or problem affects its ability to get information. Group members can more easily make decisions about a problem when other groups have similarly experienced it. Even if the problem is complex and serious, the group can learn from other situations and apply what it learns. Second, the group must have access to flows of information. Access to archives, electronic databases, and individuals with relevant experience is necessary to obtain any relevant information about similar problems or to do research on a new or unique problem. In this regard, group members’ formal and information network connections also become important situational influences.

The urgency of a decision can have a major influence on the decision-making process. As a situation becomes more urgent, it requires more specific decision-making methods and types of communication.

Judith E. Bell – Urgent – CC BY-SA 2.0.

The origin and urgency of a problem are also situational factors that influence decision making. In terms of origin, problems usually occur in one of four ways:

Something goes wrong. Group members must decide how to fix or stop something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that half of the building is contaminated with mold and must be closed down.
Expectations change or increase. Group members must innovate more efficient or effective ways of doing something. Example—a firehouse crew finds out that the district they are responsible for is being expanded.
Something goes wrong and expectations change or increase. Group members must fix/stop and become more efficient/effective. Example—the firehouse crew has to close half the building and must start responding to more calls due to the expanding district.
The problem existed from the beginning. Group members must go back to the origins of the situation and walk through and analyze the steps again to decide what can be done differently. Example—a firehouse crew has consistently had to work with minimal resources in terms of building space and firefighting tools.

In each of the cases, the need for a decision may be more or less urgent depending on how badly something is going wrong, how high the expectations have been raised, or the degree to which people are fed up with a broken system. Decisions must be made in situations ranging from crisis level to mundane.

Personality Influences on Decision Making

A long-studied typology of value orientations that affect decision making consists of the following types of decision maker: the economic, the aesthetic, the theoretical, the social, the political, and the religious (Spranger, 1928).

The economic decision maker makes decisions based on what is practical and useful.
The aesthetic decision maker makes decisions based on form and harmony, desiring a solution that is elegant and in sync with the surroundings.
The theoretical decision maker wants to discover the truth through rationality.
The social decision maker emphasizes the personal impact of a decision and sympathizes with those who may be affected by it.
The political decision maker is interested in power and influence and views people and/or property as divided into groups that have different value.
The religious decision maker seeks to identify with a larger purpose, works to unify others under that goal, and commits to a viewpoint, often denying one side and being dedicated to the other.

In the United States, economic, political, and theoretical decision making tend to be more prevalent decision-making orientations, which likely corresponds to the individualistic cultural orientation with its emphasis on competition and efficiency. But situational context, as we discussed before, can also influence our decision making.

Personality affects decision making. For example, “economic” decision makers decide based on what is practical and useful.

One Way Stock – Tough Decisions Ahead – CC BY-ND 2.0.

The personalities of group members, especially leaders and other active members, affect the climate of the group. Group member personalities can be categorized based on where they fall on a continuum anchored by the following descriptors: dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional (Cragan & Wright, 1999). The more group members there are in any extreme of these categories, the more likely that the group climate will also shift to resemble those characteristics.

Dominant versus submissive. Group members that are more dominant act more independently and directly, initiate conversations, take up more space, make more direct eye contact, seek leadership positions, and take control over decision-making processes. More submissive members are reserved, contribute to the group only when asked to, avoid eye contact, and leave their personal needs and thoughts unvoiced or give into the suggestions of others.
Friendly versus unfriendly. Group members on the friendly side of the continuum find a balance between talking and listening, don’t try to win at the expense of other group members, are flexible but not weak, and value democratic decision making. Unfriendly group members are disagreeable, indifferent, withdrawn, and selfish, which leads them to either not invest in decision making or direct it in their own interest rather than in the interest of the group.
Instrumental versus emotional. Instrumental group members are emotionally neutral, objective, analytical, task-oriented, and committed followers, which leads them to work hard and contribute to the group’s decision making as long as it is orderly and follows agreed-on rules. Emotional group members are creative, playful, independent, unpredictable, and expressive, which leads them to make rash decisions, resist group norms or decision-making structures, and switch often from relational to task focus.

Cultural Context and Decision Making

Just like neighborhoods, schools, and countries, small groups vary in terms of their degree of similarity and difference. Demographic changes in the United States and increases in technology that can bring different people together make it more likely that we will be interacting in more and more heterogeneous groups (Allen, 2011). Some small groups are more homogenous, meaning the members are more similar, and some are more heterogeneous, meaning the members are more different. Diversity and difference within groups has advantages and disadvantages. In terms of advantages, research finds that, in general, groups that are culturally heterogeneous have better overall performance than more homogenous groups (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999). Additionally, when group members have time to get to know each other and competently communicate across their differences, the advantages of diversity include better decision making due to different perspectives (Thomas, 1999). Unfortunately, groups often operate under time constraints and other pressures that make the possibility for intercultural dialogue and understanding difficult. The main disadvantage of heterogeneous groups is the possibility for conflict, but given that all groups experience conflict, this isn’t solely due to the presence of diversity. We will now look more specifically at how some of the cultural value orientations we’ve learned about already in this book can play out in groups with international diversity and how domestic diversity in terms of demographics can also influence group decision making.

International Diversity in Group Interactions

Cultural value orientations such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles all manifest on a continuum of communication behaviors and can influence group decision making. Group members from individualistic cultures are more likely to value task-oriented, efficient, and direct communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as dividing up tasks into individual projects before collaboration begins and then openly debating ideas during discussion and decision making. Additionally, people from cultures that value individualism are more likely to openly express dissent from a decision, essentially expressing their disagreement with the group. Group members from collectivistic cultures are more likely to value relationships over the task at hand. Because of this, they also tend to value conformity and face-saving (often indirect) communication. This could manifest in behaviors such as establishing norms that include periods of socializing to build relationships before task-oriented communication like negotiations begin or norms that limit public disagreement in favor of more indirect communication that doesn’t challenge the face of other group members or the group’s leader. In a group composed of people from a collectivistic culture, each member would likely play harmonizing roles, looking for signs of conflict and resolving them before they become public.

Power distance can also affect group interactions. Some cultures rank higher on power-distance scales, meaning they value hierarchy, make decisions based on status, and believe that people have a set place in society that is fairly unchangeable. Group members from high-power-distance cultures would likely appreciate a strong designated leader who exhibits a more directive leadership style and prefer groups in which members have clear and assigned roles. In a group that is homogenous in terms of having a high-power-distance orientation, members with higher status would be able to openly provide information, and those with lower status may not provide information unless a higher status member explicitly seeks it from them. Low-power-distance cultures do not place as much value and meaning on status and believe that all group members can participate in decision making. Group members from low-power-distance cultures would likely freely speak their mind during a group meeting and prefer a participative leadership style.

How much meaning is conveyed through the context surrounding verbal communication can also affect group communication. Some cultures have a high-context communication style in which much of the meaning in an interaction is conveyed through context such as nonverbal cues and silence. Group members from high-context cultures may avoid saying something directly, assuming that other group members will understand the intended meaning even if the message is indirect. So if someone disagrees with a proposed course of action, he or she may say, “Let’s discuss this tomorrow,” and mean, “I don’t think we should do this.” Such indirect communication is also a face-saving strategy that is common in collectivistic cultures. Other cultures have a low-context communication style that places more importance on the meaning conveyed through words than through context or nonverbal cues. Group members from low-context cultures often say what they mean and mean what they say. For example, if someone doesn’t like an idea, they might say, “I think we should consider more options. This one doesn’t seem like the best we can do.”

In any of these cases, an individual from one culture operating in a group with people of a different cultural orientation could adapt to the expectations of the host culture, especially if that person possesses a high degree of intercultural communication competence (ICC). Additionally, people with high ICC can also adapt to a group member with a different cultural orientation than the host culture. Even though these cultural orientations connect to values that affect our communication in fairly consistent ways, individuals may exhibit different communication behaviors depending on their own individual communication style and the situation.

Domestic Diversity and Group Communication

While it is becoming more likely that we will interact in small groups with international diversity, we are guaranteed to interact in groups that are diverse in terms of the cultural identities found within a single country or the subcultures found within a larger cultural group.

Gender stereotypes sometimes influence the roles that people play within a group. For example, the stereotype that women are more nurturing than men may lead group members (both male and female) to expect that women will play the role of supporters or harmonizers within the group. Since women have primarily performed secretarial work since the 1900s, it may also be expected that women will play the role of recorder. In both of these cases, stereotypical notions of gender place women in roles that are typically not as valued in group communication. The opposite is true for men. In terms of leadership, despite notable exceptions, research shows that men fill an overwhelmingly disproportionate amount of leadership positions. We are socialized to see certain behaviors by men as indicative of leadership abilities, even though they may not be. For example, men are often perceived to contribute more to a group because they tend to speak first when asked a question or to fill a silence and are perceived to talk more about task-related matters than relationally oriented matters. Both of these tendencies create a perception that men are more engaged with the task. Men are also socialized to be more competitive and self-congratulatory, meaning that their communication may be seen as dedicated and their behaviors seen as powerful, and that when their work isn’t noticed they will be more likely to make it known to the group rather than take silent credit. Even though we know that the relational elements of a group are crucial for success, even in high-performance teams, that work is not as valued in our society as the task-related work.

Despite the fact that some communication patterns and behaviors related to our typical (and stereotypical) gender socialization affect how we interact in and form perceptions of others in groups, the differences in group communication that used to be attributed to gender in early group communication research seem to be diminishing. This is likely due to the changing organizational cultures from which much group work emerges, which have now had more than sixty years to adjust to women in the workplace. It is also due to a more nuanced understanding of gender-based research, which doesn’t take a stereotypical view from the beginning as many of the early male researchers did. Now, instead of biological sex being assumed as a factor that creates inherent communication differences, group communication scholars see that men and women both exhibit a range of behaviors that are more or less feminine or masculine. It is these gendered behaviors, and not a person’s gender, that seem to have more of an influence on perceptions of group communication. Interestingly, group interactions are still masculinist in that male and female group members prefer a more masculine communication style for task leaders and that both males and females in this role are more likely to adapt to a more masculine communication style. Conversely, men who take on social-emotional leadership behaviors adopt a more feminine communication style. In short, it seems that although masculine communication traits are more often associated with high status positions in groups, both men and women adapt to this expectation and are evaluated similarly (Haslett & Ruebush, 1999).

Other demographic categories are also influential in group communication and decision making. In general, group members have an easier time communicating when they are more similar than different in terms of race and age. This ease of communication can make group work more efficient, but the homogeneity may sacrifice some creativity. As we learned earlier, groups that are diverse (e.g., they have members of different races and generations) benefit from the diversity of perspectives in terms of the quality of decision making and creativity of output.

In terms of age, for the first time since industrialization began, it is common to have three generations of people (and sometimes four) working side by side in an organizational setting. Although four generations often worked together in early factories, they were segregated based on their age group, and a hierarchy existed with older workers at the top and younger workers at the bottom. Today, however, generations interact regularly, and it is not uncommon for an older person to have a leader or supervisor who is younger than him or her (Allen, 2011). The current generations in the US workplace and consequently in work-based groups include the following:

The Silent Generation. Born between 1925 and 1942, currently in their midsixties to mideighties, this is the smallest generation in the workforce right now, as many have retired or left for other reasons. This generation includes people who were born during the Great Depression or the early part of World War II, many of whom later fought in the Korean War (Clarke, 1970).
The Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, currently in their late forties to midsixties, this is the largest generation in the workforce right now. Baby boomers are the most populous generation born in US history, and they are working longer than previous generations, which means they will remain the predominant force in organizations for ten to twenty more years.
Generation X. Born between 1965 and 1981, currently in their early thirties to midforties, this generation was the first to see technology like cell phones and the Internet make its way into classrooms and our daily lives. Compared to previous generations, “Gen-Xers” are more diverse in terms of race, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation and also have a greater appreciation for and understanding of diversity.
Generation Y. Born between 1982 and 2000, “Millennials” as they are also called are currently in their late teens up to about thirty years old. This generation is not as likely to remember a time without technology such as computers and cell phones. They are just starting to enter into the workforce and have been greatly affected by the economic crisis of the late 2000s, experiencing significantly high unemployment rates.

The benefits and challenges that come with diversity of group members are important to consider. Since we will all work in diverse groups, we should be prepared to address potential challenges in order to reap the benefits. Diverse groups may be wise to coordinate social interactions outside of group time in order to find common ground that can help facilitate interaction and increase group cohesion. We should be sensitive but not let sensitivity create fear of “doing something wrong” that then prevents us from having meaningful interactions. Reviewing Chapter 8 “Culture and Communication” will give you useful knowledge to help you navigate both international and domestic diversity and increase your communication competence in small groups and elsewhere.

Key Takeaways

Every problem has common components: an undesirable situation, a desired situation, and obstacles between the undesirable and desirable situations. Every problem also has a set of characteristics that vary among problems, including task difficulty, number of possible solutions, group member interest in the problem, group familiarity with the problem, and the need for solution acceptance.

The group problem-solving process has five steps:

Define the problem by creating a problem statement that summarizes it.
Analyze the problem and create a problem question that can guide solution generation.
Generate possible solutions. Possible solutions should be offered and listed without stopping to evaluate each one.
Evaluate the solutions based on their credibility, completeness, and worth. Groups should also assess the potential effects of the narrowed list of solutions.
Implement and assess the solution. Aside from enacting the solution, groups should determine how they will know the solution is working or not.
Before a group makes a decision, it should brainstorm possible solutions. Group communication scholars suggest that groups (1) do a warm-up brainstorming session; (2) do an actual brainstorming session in which ideas are not evaluated, wild ideas are encouraged, quantity not quality of ideas is the goal, and new combinations of ideas are encouraged; (3) eliminate duplicate ideas; and (4) clarify, organize, and evaluate ideas. In order to guide the idea-generation process and invite equal participation from group members, the group may also elect to use the nominal group technique.
Common decision-making techniques include majority rule, minority rule, and consensus rule. With majority rule, only a majority, usually one-half plus one, must agree before a decision is made. With minority rule, a designated authority or expert has final say over a decision, and the input of group members may or may not be invited or considered. With consensus rule, all members of the group must agree on the same decision.

Several factors influence the decision-making process:

Situational factors include the degree of freedom a group has to make its own decisions, the level of uncertainty facing the group and its task, the size of the group, the group’s access to information, and the origin and urgency of the problem.
Personality influences on decision making include a person’s value orientation (economic, aesthetic, theoretical, political, or religious), and personality traits (dominant/submissive, friendly/unfriendly, and instrumental/emotional).
Cultural influences on decision making include the heterogeneity or homogeneity of the group makeup; cultural values and characteristics such as individualism/collectivism, power distance, and high-/low-context communication styles; and gender and age differences.
Scenario 1. Task difficulty is high, number of possible solutions is high, group interest in problem is high, group familiarity with problem is low, and need for solution acceptance is high.
Scenario 2. Task difficulty is low, number of possible solutions is low, group interest in problem is low, group familiarity with problem is high, and need for solution acceptance is low.
Scenario 1: Academic. A professor asks his or her class to decide whether the final exam should be an in-class or take-home exam.
Scenario 2: Professional. A group of coworkers must decide which person from their department to nominate for a company-wide award.
Scenario 3: Personal. A family needs to decide how to divide the belongings and estate of a deceased family member who did not leave a will.
Scenario 4: Civic. A local branch of a political party needs to decide what five key issues it wants to include in the national party’s platform.
Group communication researchers have found that heterogeneous groups (composed of diverse members) have advantages over homogenous (more similar) groups. Discuss a group situation you have been in where diversity enhanced your and/or the group’s experience.

Adams, K., and Gloria G. Galanes, Communicating in Groups: Applications and Skills , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2009), 220–21.

Allen, B. J., Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity , 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland, 2011), 5.

Bormann, E. G., and Nancy C. Bormann, Effective Small Group Communication , 4th ed. (Santa Rosa, CA: Burgess CA, 1988), 112–13.

Clarke, G., “The Silent Generation Revisited,” Time, June 29, 1970, 46.

Cragan, J. F., and David W. Wright, Communication in Small Group Discussions: An Integrated Approach , 3rd ed. (St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1991), 77–78.

de Bono, E., Six Thinking Hats (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1985).

Delbecq, A. L., and Andrew H. Ven de Ven, “A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 7, no. 4 (1971): 466–92.

Haslett, B. B., and Jenn Ruebush, “What Differences Do Individual Differences in Groups Make?: The Effects of Individuals, Culture, and Group Composition,” in The Handbook of Group Communication Theory and Research , ed. Lawrence R. Frey (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999), 133.

Napier, R. W., and Matti K. Gershenfeld, Groups: Theory and Experience , 7th ed. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 2004), 292.

Osborn, A. F., Applied Imagination (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959).

Spranger, E., Types of Men (New York: Steckert, 1928).

Stanton, C., “How to Deliver Group Presentations: The Unified Team Approach,” Six Minutes Speaking and Presentation Skills , November 3, 2009, accessed August 28, 2012, http://sixminutes.dlugan.com/group-presentations-unified-team-approach .

Thomas, D. C., “Cultural Diversity and Work Group Effectiveness: An Experimental Study,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 30, no. 2 (1999): 242–63.

Communication in the Real World Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Math Wheels for Note-taking?

Problem Solving Math Wheels

$Help your students improve their problem solving skills using problem solving math wheels$

Problem solving in math, or tackling word problems in math can be challenging for students, whether they’re in early elementary, upper elementary, middle school, or even high school!

Especially if they don’t have any type of strategies to help them know where to start.

I’m not necessarily a fan of using ‘tricks’ or a specific approach every time students approach a problem.

But, there are times when students will feel very ‘stuck’ as to where to start, especially if they have trouble understanding or breaking down the actual text of the problem. They may also have difficulty in middle school if they don’t have a strong problem solving foundation.

We often see students in middle school who can understand what to do mathematically when presented with a problem situation. But some of those same students kind of freeze when that problem is presented in several sentences…. especially if there’s some extra information in there.

So, I created two different math wheels to help students with:

Deciphering word problems
Problem solving strategies

Problem Solving Math Wheel #1

The first problem solving math wheel includes eight ideas students can use when breaking down a word problem and then solving:

1) Carefully read the problem

2) Identify the question, to be sure about what is being asked

$Help students learn new word problem strategies with problem solving math wheels$

3) Reread. Once students know what the problem is asking, they can reread to find pertinent information.

4) Circle key numbers. By circling key numbers students are taking the time to identify numbers they’ll use in their calculations.

This is helpful:

for identifying numbers that may be in word form
for identifying numbers that are NOT needed for the problem. These would not be circled and could even be crossed out.

5) Locate and box important words

These words don’t necessarily need to be ‘operation’ words, but rather any words that help students understand what is happening in the problem

6) Evaluate, or solve the problem

7) Interpret and label

The mathematical answer may not be the answer to the question (like when interpreting the quotient results in the answer being rounded up or down)
Adding the unit label to the answer

8) Take time to check

Is the answer reasonable? Does it make sense as an answer to the question?

This wheel has a word problem that you can work through with students when discussing these ideas.

Problem Solving Math Wheel #2

The second problem solving math wheel includes some of the well-known problem solving strategies and can be used as a simple reference to remind students that these strategies exist.

$the problem solving wheel$

These problem solving strategies include:

Organized List
Guess and Check
Work Backwards
Make a Table
Draw a Diagram
Write an Equation
Look for a Pattern
Use Logical Reasoning

This wheel would be great for a center or finished early activity, because it doesn’t require direct instruction.

Students can color this problem solving math wheel and then add it to their binders/notebooks and use as a reference throughout the year.
This wheel could also be used in conjunction with the Problem Solving Doodle Notes , which can be used to teach each individual strategy, as explained in this problem solving strategies blog post .

I know your students will love this engaging way to talk about and reinforce math problem solving strategies.

The opportunity to color and add some of their own creative touches will help make the strategies more memorable.

Keeping these finished notes in their math notebooks will give students a reference for the entire school year!

How To Tell If Executive Function Skills Impact Math Performance

$Help keep your easily distracted students engaged in learning with these tips and tricks using math wheels.$

How to Help Easily Distracted Students by Using Math Wheels

$Use these fun daily math activities to help your students retain more math concepts as you incorporate them into everything from daily work to cross-curricular learning.$

Daily Math Activities to Incorporate and Retain More Math Concepts

$Use these fun activities to help teach real life math to your middle school students this year.$

How to Teach Real Life Math Problem Solving Activities

Welcome to Cognitive Cardio Math! I’m Ellie, a wife, mom, grandma, and dog ‘mom,’ and I’ve spent just about my whole life in school! With nearly 30 years in education, I’ve taught:

All subject areas in 4 th and 5 th grades
Math, ELA, and science in 6th grade (middle school)

I’ve been creating resources for teachers since 2012 and have worked in the elearning industry for about five years as well!

FIND IT FAST

Let's connect.

Select the image above to learn more!

Get FIVE days of free math lessons!

Login and registration

Forgot Username?
Forgot Password?

The PDCA cycle or Deming wheel: how and why to use it

Origins of the pdca cycle.

The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle is often associated with W. Edwards Deming, but its origins can be traced through several significant contributions in the field of quality and management.

Walter A. Shewhart : In the 1920s and 1930s, statistician Walter A. Shewhart, then at Bell Laboratories, developed concepts around statistical process control and introduced a preliminary version of the cycle, often referred to as the Plan-Do-See cycle. Shewhart is often considered the "father of statistical quality control".

W. Edwards Deming : Deming, who was a protégé of Shewhart, adopted and adapted these ideas. Although the cycle is often called the "Deming Cycle", he always acknowledged Shewhart for his original contribution. Deming introduced this cycle in Japan in the 1950s, where it became a central element of post-World War II reconstruction and quality improvement efforts. In Japan, it was named the "PDCA cycle" and is sometimes called the "Deming-Shewhart Cycle".

Adoption in Japan : After World War II, Japan sought to rebuild its industry. As part of this initiative, many experts, including Deming, were invited to give lectures and training. The PDCA cycle was embraced by Japanese companies and became a fundamental component of their continuous improvement efforts, especially within the Total Quality Management (TQM) movement.

Over the years, PDCA has been incorporated into many continuous improvement methodologies and frameworks, such as Six Sigma, Lean Management, and other quality management systems.

It's important to note that, although the PDCA cycle is often attributed to Deming, he always emphasized the importance of Shewhart's work and often preferred to call it the "Shewhart Cycle".

Steps of the PDCA cycle

The four steps of PDCA are:

Identify a problem or an improvement opportunity.
Analyze the current situation.
Set specific objectives.
Propose solutions and prepare an action plan.
Implement the action plan on a small scale, in a controlled setting (like a trial or test).
Gather data to analyze the effects of the changes.
Analyze the collected data.
Compare the achieved results with the set objectives.
Identify deviations and the causes of these deviations.
If the objectives are met, standardize the changes and deploy on a larger scale.
If objectives are not met, understand why and return to the "Plan" step to refine or rethink the solution.

The PDCA cycle is designed to be continuously repeated for continuous improvements. By repeating this cycle, organizations can identify and fix issues, improve processes, and ensure that improvements are effective and sustainable.

For which types of problems is the PDCA cycle suitable?

The PDCA is particularly well-suited to the following situations and problems:

Recurring problems : When an issue recurs frequently and its underlying cause is not clearly identified, the PDCA is useful for diagnosing, addressing, and preventing the issue.

Problems requiring incremental improvements : For situations that benefit from continuous adjustments rather than major overhauls, PDCA offers a framework for iterative improvement.

Situations with quantifiable data : The PDCA works especially well when outcomes or impacts can be quantitatively measured. This allows for objective evaluation during the "Check" phase.

Situations requiring a structured approach : For organizations or teams that struggle with addressing issues in a systematic manner, PDCA offers a clear and structured framework.

Changing environments : In situations where the environment is constantly evolving, PDCA enables organizations to adapt swiftly, adjust their plans, and act accordingly.

Quality improvement projects : Given its origins in quality control, the PDCA is naturally suited to efforts aimed at improving the quality of processes or products.

Here are situations where the PDCA cycle might not be the best method:

Urgent problems requiring immediate action : In crisis situations where swift action is needed, the systematic methodology of PDCA might slow down decision-making.

Highly complex problems with many interdependent variables : Although PDCA can be combined with other tools to address complex issues, on its own, it might oversimplify some situations.

Situations requiring radical innovation : PDCA focuses on continuous improvement, which might limit the "outside-the-box" thinking necessary for major innovations.

In summary, PDCA is a versatile tool suitable for many situations, but it's not universal. It's essential to assess the context and nature of the problem before choosing the best method or approach.

Using PDCA in innovation

PDCA can be employed in innovation, especially when introducing a new product in a production environment or implementing a new production process/equipment. We aren't including the product or process development part, which generally employs more specific methods. Here's how introducing new products or processes in production can be tackled.

Analysis of current capabilities : Examine your current facilities, equipment, and staff skills to determine if any changes are needed to produce the new product or to accommodate the new process/equipment.

Identification of needs : Based on the analysis, identify the requirements in terms of staff training, purchasing additional equipment, or modifications to the facilities.

Resource planning : Create a detailed plan for acquiring the necessary resources, whether it's material, training, labor, or time.

Defining success criteria : Set KPIs (key performance indicators) to measure the success of introducing the new product or process/equipment in production.

Implementation : Acquire the planned resources, train staff if necessary, and start producing the new product or implement the new process/equipment.

Monitoring : During production, ensure you closely monitor operations, especially in the early stages, to quickly identify any issues.

Performance measurement : Use the KPIs established during the planning phase to measure the success of introducing the new product or process/equipment in production.

Feedback collection : Gather feedback from production staff on potential problems, inefficiencies, or areas for improvement. They can often provide valuable insights as they are on the front lines.

Analysis and optimization : Based on measured performance and feedback received, identify areas for improvement or correction. This might include adjustments to machines, changes in workflow, or additional training sessions for staff.

Standardization : Once the new product is efficiently produced or the new process/equipment is fully integrated and working well, document the procedures and train all relevant staff to ensure consistency and efficiency.

Main difference between PDCA and other problem-solving methods

The primary difference between PDCA and other problem-solving methods like DMAIC or 8D lies in two major aspects:

Level of detail and flexibility :

PDCA is a general, flexible framework that can be adapted to a myriad of situations. Its simplicity allows for rapid and reactive deployment.
On the other hand, DMAIC and 8D are more prescriptive methodologies with detailed steps, specifically designed to tackle and solve complex problems using specific tools and analyses.

Type of improvement :

PDCA is oriented towards incremental and continuous improvements, ideal for regular adjustments based on feedback and observations.
DMAIC and 8D, meanwhile, are often used for more radical transformations or to address specific and complex problems that require deep understanding and a structured solution to ensure lasting resolution.

Thus, while PDCA lends itself to regular adjustments and continuous improvements, DMAIC and 8D cater to more specific and complex challenges with a more rigid structure.

You may also access our unique directory of management best practices by function and industry

When you subscribe to the blog, we will send you an e-mail when there are new updates on the site so you wouldn't miss them.

A3 is a principle, not a problem-solving method !!

The 5 whys method: how and when to use it, 5w2h or 5w1h methods: how and when to use them, 8d method (8 disciplines), ishikawa diagram and root cause analysis, comparison of problem-solving methods and techniques, continuous improvement process : a challenge for significant benefits, dmaic process: a methodology to implement six sigma, what is an operational audit of the organisation, improvement and innovation excellence.

Kelso Recommends – The Digital Library

What People Are Saying

Kelso’s Choices has impacted my school site tremendously. The program is engaging and easy to implement.

I highly recommend this program for anyone who works with children.

The students and their teachers love the problem solving skills Kelso teaches them.

We use a non threatening frog puppet to teach children how to solve problems in a peaceful way. Communities need to work together to promote a healthy, nonviolent environment for children from infancy through the teenage years. Teachers who participated in the Kelso’s Choice program during its first year reported a significant decrease in physical conflicts and tattling.

About Kelso

Welcome to the home of Kelso’s Choice, the leading tool for teaching conflict management skills for children Pre-K through 5th grade. Home of the beloved choice wheel, this conflict resolution curriculum teaches children the difference between big problems and little problems. Kelso the frog is a fun and engaging way for children to learn conflict management.

Looking for our best-selling conflict resolution posters, counseling board games, award-winning conflict management curriculum and much more? Click here to see our Products page.

Looking to learn about the history of Kelso’s Choice? Click here . Want to download your free conflict resolution wheel? Click here for your free starter kit.

Click here for more

See Sample Lessons

Click Here to view a sample lesson of our best-selling Conflict Management Curriculum.

Click Here to view a sample lesson from our Character Education Curriculum

Click Here to shop Kelso’s Products

Call us at +1-866-386-0253 +415-541-9901

Cerebellum Corp. 145 Corte Madera Town Center Suite 406 Corte Madera, CA 94925
[email protected]
+ 415-541-9901
1-805-426-8136

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Start typing and press Enter to search

Privacy Overview

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

In this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , Simon London speaks with Charles Conn, CEO of venture-capital firm Oxford Sciences Innovation, and McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin about the complexities of different problem-solving strategies.

Podcast transcript

Simon London: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the McKinsey Podcast , with me, Simon London. What’s the number-one skill you need to succeed professionally? Salesmanship, perhaps? Or a facility with statistics? Or maybe the ability to communicate crisply and clearly? Many would argue that at the very top of the list comes problem solving: that is, the ability to think through and come up with an optimal course of action to address any complex challenge—in business, in public policy, or indeed in life.

Looked at this way, it’s no surprise that McKinsey takes problem solving very seriously, testing for it during the recruiting process and then honing it, in McKinsey consultants, through immersion in a structured seven-step method. To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].

Charles and Hugo, welcome to the podcast. Thank you for being here.

Hugo Sarrazin: Our pleasure.

Charles Conn: It’s terrific to be here.

Simon London: Problem solving is a really interesting piece of terminology. It could mean so many different things. I have a son who’s a teenage climber. They talk about solving problems. Climbing is problem solving. Charles, when you talk about problem solving, what are you talking about?

Charles Conn: For me, problem solving is the answer to the question “What should I do?” It’s interesting when there’s uncertainty and complexity, and when it’s meaningful because there are consequences. Your son’s climbing is a perfect example. There are consequences, and it’s complicated, and there’s uncertainty—can he make that grab? I think we can apply that same frame almost at any level. You can think about questions like “What town would I like to live in?” or “Should I put solar panels on my roof?”

You might think that’s a funny thing to apply problem solving to, but in my mind it’s not fundamentally different from business problem solving, which answers the question “What should my strategy be?” Or problem solving at the policy level: “How do we combat climate change?” “Should I support the local school bond?” I think these are all part and parcel of the same type of question, “What should I do?”

I’m a big fan of structured problem solving. By following steps, we can more clearly understand what problem it is we’re solving, what are the components of the problem that we’re solving, which components are the most important ones for us to pay attention to, which analytic techniques we should apply to those, and how we can synthesize what we’ve learned back into a compelling story. That’s all it is, at its heart.

I think sometimes when people think about seven steps, they assume that there’s a rigidity to this. That’s not it at all. It’s actually to give you the scope for creativity, which often doesn’t exist when your problem solving is muddled.

Simon London: You were just talking about the seven-step process. That’s what’s written down in the book, but it’s a very McKinsey process as well. Without getting too deep into the weeds, let’s go through the steps, one by one. You were just talking about problem definition as being a particularly important thing to get right first. That’s the first step. Hugo, tell us about that.

Hugo Sarrazin: It is surprising how often people jump past this step and make a bunch of assumptions. The most powerful thing is to step back and ask the basic questions—“What are we trying to solve? What are the constraints that exist? What are the dependencies?” Let’s make those explicit and really push the thinking and defining. At McKinsey, we spend an enormous amount of time in writing that little statement, and the statement, if you’re a logic purist, is great. You debate. “Is it an ‘or’? Is it an ‘and’? What’s the action verb?” Because all these specific words help you get to the heart of what matters.

Want to subscribe to The McKinsey Podcast ?

Simon London: So this is a concise problem statement.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah. It’s not like “Can we grow in Japan?” That’s interesting, but it is “What, specifically, are we trying to uncover in the growth of a product in Japan? Or a segment in Japan? Or a channel in Japan?” When you spend an enormous amount of time, in the first meeting of the different stakeholders, debating this and having different people put forward what they think the problem definition is, you realize that people have completely different views of why they’re here. That, to me, is the most important step.

Charles Conn: I would agree with that. For me, the problem context is critical. When we understand “What are the forces acting upon your decision maker? How quickly is the answer needed? With what precision is the answer needed? Are there areas that are off limits or areas where we would particularly like to find our solution? Is the decision maker open to exploring other areas?” then you not only become more efficient, and move toward what we call the critical path in problem solving, but you also make it so much more likely that you’re not going to waste your time or your decision maker’s time.

How often do especially bright young people run off with half of the idea about what the problem is and start collecting data and start building models—only to discover that they’ve really gone off half-cocked.

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah.

Charles Conn: And in the wrong direction.

Simon London: OK. So step one—and there is a real art and a structure to it—is define the problem. Step two, Charles?

Charles Conn: My favorite step is step two, which is to use logic trees to disaggregate the problem. Every problem we’re solving has some complexity and some uncertainty in it. The only way that we can really get our team working on the problem is to take the problem apart into logical pieces.

What we find, of course, is that the way to disaggregate the problem often gives you an insight into the answer to the problem quite quickly. I love to do two or three different cuts at it, each one giving a bit of a different insight into what might be going wrong. By doing sensible disaggregations, using logic trees, we can figure out which parts of the problem we should be looking at, and we can assign those different parts to team members.

Simon London: What’s a good example of a logic tree on a sort of ratable problem?

Charles Conn: Maybe the easiest one is the classic profit tree. Almost in every business that I would take a look at, I would start with a profit or return-on-assets tree. In its simplest form, you have the components of revenue, which are price and quantity, and the components of cost, which are cost and quantity. Each of those can be broken out. Cost can be broken into variable cost and fixed cost. The components of price can be broken into what your pricing scheme is. That simple tree often provides insight into what’s going on in a business or what the difference is between that business and the competitors.

If we add the leg, which is “What’s the asset base or investment element?”—so profit divided by assets—then we can ask the question “Is the business using its investments sensibly?” whether that’s in stores or in manufacturing or in transportation assets. I hope we can see just how simple this is, even though we’re describing it in words.

When I went to work with Gordon Moore at the Moore Foundation, the problem that he asked us to look at was “How can we save Pacific salmon?” Now, that sounds like an impossible question, but it was amenable to precisely the same type of disaggregation and allowed us to organize what became a 15-year effort to improve the likelihood of good outcomes for Pacific salmon.

Simon London: Now, is there a danger that your logic tree can be impossibly large? This, I think, brings us onto the third step in the process, which is that you have to prioritize.

Charles Conn: Absolutely. The third step, which we also emphasize, along with good problem definition, is rigorous prioritization—we ask the questions “How important is this lever or this branch of the tree in the overall outcome that we seek to achieve? How much can I move that lever?” Obviously, we try and focus our efforts on ones that have a big impact on the problem and the ones that we have the ability to change. With salmon, ocean conditions turned out to be a big lever, but not one that we could adjust. We focused our attention on fish habitats and fish-harvesting practices, which were big levers that we could affect.

People spend a lot of time arguing about branches that are either not important or that none of us can change. We see it in the public square. When we deal with questions at the policy level—“Should you support the death penalty?” “How do we affect climate change?” “How can we uncover the causes and address homelessness?”—it’s even more important that we’re focusing on levers that are big and movable.

Would you like to learn more about our Strategy & Corporate Finance Practice ?

Simon London: Let’s move swiftly on to step four. You’ve defined your problem, you disaggregate it, you prioritize where you want to analyze—what you want to really look at hard. Then you got to the work plan. Now, what does that mean in practice?

Hugo Sarrazin: Depending on what you’ve prioritized, there are many things you could do. It could be breaking the work among the team members so that people have a clear piece of the work to do. It could be defining the specific analyses that need to get done and executed, and being clear on time lines. There’s always a level-one answer, there’s a level-two answer, there’s a level-three answer. Without being too flippant, I can solve any problem during a good dinner with wine. It won’t have a whole lot of backing.

Simon London: Not going to have a lot of depth to it.

Hugo Sarrazin: No, but it may be useful as a starting point. If the stakes are not that high, that could be OK. If it’s really high stakes, you may need level three and have the whole model validated in three different ways. You need to find a work plan that reflects the level of precision, the time frame you have, and the stakeholders you need to bring along in the exercise.

Charles Conn: I love the way you’ve described that, because, again, some people think of problem solving as a linear thing, but of course what’s critical is that it’s iterative. As you say, you can solve the problem in one day or even one hour.

Charles Conn: We encourage our teams everywhere to do that. We call it the one-day answer or the one-hour answer. In work planning, we’re always iterating. Every time you see a 50-page work plan that stretches out to three months, you know it’s wrong. It will be outmoded very quickly by that learning process that you described. Iterative problem solving is a critical part of this. Sometimes, people think work planning sounds dull, but it isn’t. It’s how we know what’s expected of us and when we need to deliver it and how we’re progressing toward the answer. It’s also the place where we can deal with biases. Bias is a feature of every human decision-making process. If we design our team interactions intelligently, we can avoid the worst sort of biases.

Simon London: Here we’re talking about cognitive biases primarily, right? It’s not that I’m biased against you because of your accent or something. These are the cognitive biases that behavioral sciences have shown we all carry around, things like anchoring, overoptimism—these kinds of things.

Both: Yeah.

Charles Conn: Availability bias is the one that I’m always alert to. You think you’ve seen the problem before, and therefore what’s available is your previous conception of it—and we have to be most careful about that. In any human setting, we also have to be careful about biases that are based on hierarchies, sometimes called sunflower bias. I’m sure, Hugo, with your teams, you make sure that the youngest team members speak first. Not the oldest team members, because it’s easy for people to look at who’s senior and alter their own creative approaches.

Hugo Sarrazin: It’s helpful, at that moment—if someone is asserting a point of view—to ask the question “This was true in what context?” You’re trying to apply something that worked in one context to a different one. That can be deadly if the context has changed, and that’s why organizations struggle to change. You promote all these people because they did something that worked well in the past, and then there’s a disruption in the industry, and they keep doing what got them promoted even though the context has changed.

Simon London: Right. Right.

Hugo Sarrazin: So it’s the same thing in problem solving.

Charles Conn: And it’s why diversity in our teams is so important. It’s one of the best things about the world that we’re in now. We’re likely to have people from different socioeconomic, ethnic, and national backgrounds, each of whom sees problems from a slightly different perspective. It is therefore much more likely that the team will uncover a truly creative and clever approach to problem solving.

Simon London: Let’s move on to step five. You’ve done your work plan. Now you’ve actually got to do the analysis. The thing that strikes me here is that the range of tools that we have at our disposal now, of course, is just huge, particularly with advances in computation, advanced analytics. There’s so many things that you can apply here. Just talk about the analysis stage. How do you pick the right tools?

Charles Conn: For me, the most important thing is that we start with simple heuristics and explanatory statistics before we go off and use the big-gun tools. We need to understand the shape and scope of our problem before we start applying these massive and complex analytical approaches.

Simon London: Would you agree with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: I agree. I think there are so many wonderful heuristics. You need to start there before you go deep into the modeling exercise. There’s an interesting dynamic that’s happening, though. In some cases, for some types of problems, it is even better to set yourself up to maximize your learning. Your problem-solving methodology is test and learn, test and learn, test and learn, and iterate. That is a heuristic in itself, the A/B testing that is used in many parts of the world. So that’s a problem-solving methodology. It’s nothing different. It just uses technology and feedback loops in a fast way. The other one is exploratory data analysis. When you’re dealing with a large-scale problem, and there’s so much data, I can get to the heuristics that Charles was talking about through very clever visualization of data.

You test with your data. You need to set up an environment to do so, but don’t get caught up in neural-network modeling immediately. You’re testing, you’re checking—“Is the data right? Is it sound? Does it make sense?”—before you launch too far.

Simon London: You do hear these ideas—that if you have a big enough data set and enough algorithms, they’re going to find things that you just wouldn’t have spotted, find solutions that maybe you wouldn’t have thought of. Does machine learning sort of revolutionize the problem-solving process? Or are these actually just other tools in the toolbox for structured problem solving?

Charles Conn: It can be revolutionary. There are some areas in which the pattern recognition of large data sets and good algorithms can help us see things that we otherwise couldn’t see. But I do think it’s terribly important we don’t think that this particular technique is a substitute for superb problem solving, starting with good problem definition. Many people use machine learning without understanding algorithms that themselves can have biases built into them. Just as 20 years ago, when we were doing statistical analysis, we knew that we needed good model definition, we still need a good understanding of our algorithms and really good problem definition before we launch off into big data sets and unknown algorithms.

Simon London: Step six. You’ve done your analysis.

Charles Conn: I take six and seven together, and this is the place where young problem solvers often make a mistake. They’ve got their analysis, and they assume that’s the answer, and of course it isn’t the answer. The ability to synthesize the pieces that came out of the analysis and begin to weave those into a story that helps people answer the question “What should I do?” This is back to where we started. If we can’t synthesize, and we can’t tell a story, then our decision maker can’t find the answer to “What should I do?”

Simon London: But, again, these final steps are about motivating people to action, right?

Charles Conn: Yeah.

Simon London: I am slightly torn about the nomenclature of problem solving because it’s on paper, right? Until you motivate people to action, you actually haven’t solved anything.

Charles Conn: I love this question because I think decision-making theory, without a bias to action, is a waste of time. Everything in how I approach this is to help people take action that makes the world better.

Simon London: Hence, these are absolutely critical steps. If you don’t do this well, you’ve just got a bunch of analysis.

Charles Conn: We end up in exactly the same place where we started, which is people speaking across each other, past each other in the public square, rather than actually working together, shoulder to shoulder, to crack these important problems.

Simon London: In the real world, we have a lot of uncertainty—arguably, increasing uncertainty. How do good problem solvers deal with that?

Hugo Sarrazin: At every step of the process. In the problem definition, when you’re defining the context, you need to understand those sources of uncertainty and whether they’re important or not important. It becomes important in the definition of the tree.

You need to think carefully about the branches of the tree that are more certain and less certain as you define them. They don’t have equal weight just because they’ve got equal space on the page. Then, when you’re prioritizing, your prioritization approach may put more emphasis on things that have low probability but huge impact—or, vice versa, may put a lot of priority on things that are very likely and, hopefully, have a reasonable impact. You can introduce that along the way. When you come back to the synthesis, you just need to be nuanced about what you’re understanding, the likelihood.

Often, people lack humility in the way they make their recommendations: “This is the answer.” They’re very precise, and I think we would all be well-served to say, “This is a likely answer under the following sets of conditions” and then make the level of uncertainty clearer, if that is appropriate. It doesn’t mean you’re always in the gray zone; it doesn’t mean you don’t have a point of view. It just means that you can be explicit about the certainty of your answer when you make that recommendation.

Simon London: So it sounds like there is an underlying principle: “Acknowledge and embrace the uncertainty. Don’t pretend that it isn’t there. Be very clear about what the uncertainties are up front, and then build that into every step of the process.”

Hugo Sarrazin: Every step of the process.

Simon London: Yeah. We have just walked through a particular structured methodology for problem solving. But, of course, this is not the only structured methodology for problem solving. One that is also very well-known is design thinking, which comes at things very differently. So, Hugo, I know you have worked with a lot of designers. Just give us a very quick summary. Design thinking—what is it, and how does it relate?

Hugo Sarrazin: It starts with an incredible amount of empathy for the user and uses that to define the problem. It does pause and go out in the wild and spend an enormous amount of time seeing how people interact with objects, seeing the experience they’re getting, seeing the pain points or joy—and uses that to infer and define the problem.

Simon London: Problem definition, but out in the world.

Hugo Sarrazin: With an enormous amount of empathy. There’s a huge emphasis on empathy. Traditional, more classic problem solving is you define the problem based on an understanding of the situation. This one almost presupposes that we don’t know the problem until we go see it. The second thing is you need to come up with multiple scenarios or answers or ideas or concepts, and there’s a lot of divergent thinking initially. That’s slightly different, versus the prioritization, but not for long. Eventually, you need to kind of say, “OK, I’m going to converge again.” Then you go and you bring things back to the customer and get feedback and iterate. Then you rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. There’s a lot of tactile building, along the way, of prototypes and things like that. It’s very iterative.

Simon London: So, Charles, are these complements or are these alternatives?

Charles Conn: I think they’re entirely complementary, and I think Hugo’s description is perfect. When we do problem definition well in classic problem solving, we are demonstrating the kind of empathy, at the very beginning of our problem, that design thinking asks us to approach. When we ideate—and that’s very similar to the disaggregation, prioritization, and work-planning steps—we do precisely the same thing, and often we use contrasting teams, so that we do have divergent thinking. The best teams allow divergent thinking to bump them off whatever their initial biases in problem solving are. For me, design thinking gives us a constant reminder of creativity, empathy, and the tactile nature of problem solving, but it’s absolutely complementary, not alternative.

Simon London: I think, in a world of cross-functional teams, an interesting question is do people with design-thinking backgrounds really work well together with classical problem solvers? How do you make that chemistry happen?

Hugo Sarrazin: Yeah, it is not easy when people have spent an enormous amount of time seeped in design thinking or user-centric design, whichever word you want to use. If the person who’s applying classic problem-solving methodology is very rigid and mechanical in the way they’re doing it, there could be an enormous amount of tension. If there’s not clarity in the role and not clarity in the process, I think having the two together can be, sometimes, problematic.

The second thing that happens often is that the artifacts the two methodologies try to gravitate toward can be different. Classic problem solving often gravitates toward a model; design thinking migrates toward a prototype. Rather than writing a big deck with all my supporting evidence, they’ll bring an example, a thing, and that feels different. Then you spend your time differently to achieve those two end products, so that’s another source of friction.

Now, I still think it can be an incredibly powerful thing to have the two—if there are the right people with the right mind-set, if there is a team that is explicit about the roles, if we’re clear about the kind of outcomes we are attempting to bring forward. There’s an enormous amount of collaborativeness and respect.

Simon London: But they have to respect each other’s methodology and be prepared to flex, maybe, a little bit, in how this process is going to work.

Hugo Sarrazin: Absolutely.

Simon London: The other area where, it strikes me, there could be a little bit of a different sort of friction is this whole concept of the day-one answer, which is what we were just talking about in classical problem solving. Now, you know that this is probably not going to be your final answer, but that’s how you begin to structure the problem. Whereas I would imagine your design thinkers—no, they’re going off to do their ethnographic research and get out into the field, potentially for a long time, before they come back with at least an initial hypothesis.

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

Hugo Sarrazin: That is a great callout, and that’s another difference. Designers typically will like to soak into the situation and avoid converging too quickly. There’s optionality and exploring different options. There’s a strong belief that keeps the solution space wide enough that you can come up with more radical ideas. If there’s a large design team or many designers on the team, and you come on Friday and say, “What’s our week-one answer?” they’re going to struggle. They’re not going to be comfortable, naturally, to give that answer. It doesn’t mean they don’t have an answer; it’s just not where they are in their thinking process.

Simon London: I think we are, sadly, out of time for today. But Charles and Hugo, thank you so much.

Charles Conn: It was a pleasure to be here, Simon.

Hugo Sarrazin: It was a pleasure. Thank you.

Simon London: And thanks, as always, to you, our listeners, for tuning into this episode of the McKinsey Podcast . If you want to learn more about problem solving, you can find the book, Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything , online or order it through your local bookstore. To learn more about McKinsey, you can of course find us at McKinsey.com.

Charles Conn is CEO of Oxford Sciences Innovation and an alumnus of McKinsey’s Sydney office. Hugo Sarrazin is a senior partner in the Silicon Valley office, where Simon London, a member of McKinsey Publishing, is also based.

Explore a career with us

Strategy to beat the odds

Five routes to more innovative problem solving

Problem wheel

Examples from our community, 10,000+ results for 'problem wheel'.

“Wheel of Fortune” Contestant Shocks Audience with Swift Puzzle Solve

I t was a moment of television gold when an Wheel of Fortune participant astounded everyone with a rapid puzzle decipher. The man of the moment, Alex Harrell , a Stafford, Virginia native, left viewers and Pat Sajak , the show’s host, in awe with his puzzle-solving prowess.

On a fateful Wednesday night airing, April 24, Alex Harrell had the kind of run on the show that contestants dream of. He wasn’t just any contestant; this U.S. Marine Corps Osprey pilot stationed in San Diego dazzled his family and the nation by outsmarting his competition, featuring Betty Hunter and Kaley Keller .

Harrell’s prize haul prior to the final round included a cruise, a $9,000 trip to Aruba, and a hefty $27,105 in cash from the Express Round.

Yet, nothing compared to the jaw-dropping Bonus Round where Harrell outdid himself immensely.

Pat Sajak acknowledged the military man’s hot streak with admiration. However, the real spectacle unfolded in the Bonus Round.

Settling on Food and Drink as his final category, Harrell picked additional letters H, G, P, and O to aid in the final challenge. The puzzle, “T _ P _ O _ _ / P _ _ _ _ N G,” stood between him and an unknown prize.

The show’s host ribbed Harrell about his nerves, but the Marine showed no signs of tension, immediately guessing “Tapioca Pudding” as the clock ticked. The correct guess netted him an additional $40,000, ratcheting his total earnings up to $67,150, along with his previously won trips.

Fans were quick to commend Harrell’s performance during the intense bonus round in online comments, and many extended their congratulations for his substantial victory.

Fans can catch Wheel of Fortune on NBC, weeknights at 7 PM, with Pat Sajak’s tenure as host nearing its end.

Note: The date for Pat Sajak’s last episode once he steps down as host of Wheel of Fortune is yet to be announced.

FAQ Section:

Q: Who is Alex Harrell?

A: Alex Harrell is a U.S. Marine Corps Osprey pilot from Stafford, Virginia, who recently stunned viewers with his rapid puzzle-solving skills on Wheel of Fortune .

Q: How much did Alex Harrell win on Wheel of Fortune ?

A: Alex Harrell won a total of $67,150 in cash, plus a cruise and a trip to Aruba valued at over $9,000.

Q: What was the correct answer that won Alex Harrell the Bonus Round on Wheel of Fortune ?

A: The correct answer was “Tapioca Pudding.”

Q: When does Wheel of Fortune air?

A: Wheel of Fortune airs weeknights at 7 PM on NBC.

Q: Is Pat Sajak leaving Wheel of Fortune ?

A: Yes, Pat Sajak is expected to step down as host of Wheel of Fortune , but his final episode’s date has not been announced.

Conclusion:

The remarkable feat of Alex Harrell on Wheel of Fortune will surely be remembered by the show’s fans for years to come. His incredible bonus round solve is a testament to both his sharp mind and cool demeanor under pressure—two attributes that serve him well in both game shows and his career as a Marine. Regardless of Pat Sajak’s impending departure, the enduring appeal of Wheel of Fortune lies in these exceptional moments that thrill and inspire audiences. Alex’s victory reminds us that sometimes, the wheel turns in our favor when we least expect it.

IMAGES

problem solving process wheel
problem solving wheel free printable
problem solving process wheel
PBIS Problem Solving Wheel by Social Emotional Learning Coach
Problem Solving Wheel What Can I Do
Problem Solving Wheel: Help Kids Solve Their Own Problems

COMMENTS

Problem Solving Wheel: Help Kids Solve Their Own Problems
A problem-solving wheel also known as the wheel of choice or solution wheel is a great way to give students a visual of choices to help them either calm down when they are upset or to help them solve a problem with a classmate. It is best to use the problem-solving wheel when students are dealing with a "small" problem.
Deciphering the Problem Solving Wheel
The Problem-Solving Wheel is used to address and solve problems effectively. It encourages critical thinking and systematic resolution of issues. Importance of problem definition: The first step in the problem-solving wheel is defining the problem. This step is crucial as it sets the stage for the problem-solving process. Brainstorming solutions
The Wheel Shop
In the problem The Wheel Shop, students use algebraic thinking to solve problems involving unknowns, equations, and simultaneous constraints. The mathematical topics that underlie this problem are variables, inverse operations, equations, equalities, inequalities, and simultaneous systems. In each level, students must make sense of the problem and persevere in solving it (MP.1).
How Bill Gates Approaches Problem Solving: Don't Reinvent the Wheel
The best way to solve a problem or achieve a goal is to find people who have actually solved that problem or achieved that goal. Start from the end, the solution or achievement, and then work ...
The Wheel of Choice
The Wheel of Choice. Focusing on solutions is a primary theme of Positive Discipline, and kids are great at focusing on solutions when they are taught the skills and are allowed to practice them. The wheel of choice provides a fun and exciting way to involve kids in learning and practicing problem-solving skills, especially when they are ...
CREATE Week: Using the Problem-Solving Wheel to Prioritize ...
The problem-solving wheel graphic has been an essential tool for my school teams to attack educational issues related to student achievement and program evaluation. Many times teams gather to admire the problem and often get derailed with discussing the issues rather than prioritizing the solution through a process of performance measures and documentation.
Problem Solving Wheel
Problem Solving Wheel. This classroom management tool helps with getting younger students to make good decisions by themselves. If their behavior needs to be corrected they have options on the wheel and can decide for which one is the better option that goes with their particular situation. The "Problem Solving Wheel" has many options the ...
Solution Wheel: A Simple Way To Help Kids Solve Problems
Using a solution wheel is a great resource to help them figure out different ways to solve a problem. One of the reasons I do like this lesson is because it's working on solving problems AND you can also make it a crafts project. Yay!! What you'll need: Solution Wheel (in the printable) Arrow (in the printable) Construction Paper. Metal Brad ...
The McKinsey guide to problem solving
May 18, 2023 - Is it time to throw out the standard playbook when it comes to problem solving? Uniquely challenging times call for unique approaches, write Michael Birshan, Ben Sheppard, and coauthors in a recent article, and design thinking offers a much-needed fresh perspective for leaders navigating volatility.
Positive Discipline: The Wheel of Choice
The Wheel of Choice below is from a program created by Lynn Lott and Jane Nelsen (illustrations by Paula Gray). It includes 14 lessons to teach the skills for using the Wheel of Choice. Click Here to get a more complete description and to order your own Wheel of Choice: A Problem Solving Program.
Choice wheel
As the name suggests, it's a simple wheel that presents children with choices. Nine, to be exact! The Kelso's Choice Conflict Management Kit is a system for children in grades K-5 to become empowered to solve their own problems. First, the system helps you teach them the difference between a big problem and a little problem.
14.3 Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups
Step 2: Analyze the Problem. During this step a group should analyze the problem and the group's relationship to the problem. Whereas the first step involved exploring the "what" related to the problem, this step focuses on the "why.". At this stage, group members can discuss the potential causes of the difficulty.
Problem Solving Math Wheels
The first problem solving math wheel includes eight ideas students can use when breaking down a word problem and then solving: 1) Carefully read the problem. 2) Identify the question, to be sure about what is being asked. 3) Reread. Once students know what the problem is asking, they can reread to find pertinent information. 4) Circle key numbers.
Teaching Our Learners How to Problem Solve
The Problem Solutions Wheel offers several ideas of ways in which kids can solve a problem on their own, without adult interference. The wheels will be posted in several locations on our playground, as well as in a central location in our building. ... Parents, if you'd like a copy of the wheel to use at home, please let your child's teacher ...
The PDCA cycle or Deming wheel: how and why to use it
Main difference between PDCA and other problem-solving methods. The primary difference between PDCA and other problem-solving methods like DMAIC or 8D lies in two major aspects: Level of detail and flexibility: PDCA is a general, flexible framework that can be adapted to a myriad of situations. Its simplicity allows for rapid and reactive ...
PDF The Wheel of Choice: A Problem-solving Program
The Wheel of Choice empowers children to solve their own problems instead of putting pressure on the teacher or parent to be the sole problem-solver. In the process, they learn respect for others, cooperation, problem-solving skills, and confidence in their own capabilities. 1. On the last two pages you will find a color Wheel of Choice and a black
Kelso's Choice
Welcome to the home of Kelso's Choice, the leading tool for teaching conflict management skills for children Pre-K through 5th grade. Home of the beloved choice wheel, this conflict resolution curriculum teaches children the difference between big problems and little problems. Kelso the frog is a fun and engaging way for children to learn ...
PDF inside + x = ÷ Inside mathematics Problem Solving The Wheel Shop
—Inside Problem Solving: The Wheel Shop — Inside Problem Solving: The Wheel Shop | © 2021 The Charles A. Dana Center at The University of Texas at
How to master the seven-step problem-solving process
To discuss the art of problem solving, I sat down in California with McKinsey senior partner Hugo Sarrazin and also with Charles Conn. Charles is a former McKinsey partner, entrepreneur, executive, and coauthor of the book Bulletproof Problem Solving: The One Skill That Changes Everything [John Wiley & Sons, 2018].
Kelso's Wheel of Problem Solving Choices
Our favorite frog, Kelso, is back to show us his Wheel of problem solving choices (along with hand motions). Watch with us as we learn 9 different choices y...
The Problem-Solving Process Wheel
The PSP wheel breaks down managers problem-solving activities into eight defined areas, much like a map. The eight areas of the PSP wheel are: identify problem, gather data, analyse data, generate solutions, select solutions, plan, test and rehearse, and action. These eight areas provide reference points to manage their problem-solving journey.
Problem solving wheel
by Lsavelson. Speech and Language. Random but fun questions Spin the wheel. by 800000149. G6 random but fun question wheel. Math Problem Solving Group sort. by Lcruz4. Math. The Problem Solving Process Match up.
Problem wheel
Problem Solving Speaking cards. by Pfreeman. Affirmation wheel 1-10 Spin the wheel. by Chavezk1. K Affirmation Wheel Social. Thanksgiving Social Problem Solving Spin the wheel. by Mollislp. Problem solving secondary level Spin the wheel. by Sandirichy.
"Wheel of Fortune" Contestant Shocks Audience with Swift Puzzle Solve
The man of the moment, Alex Harrell, a Stafford, Virginia native, left viewers and Pat Sajak, the show's host, in awe with his puzzle-solving prowess. On a fateful Wednesday night airing, April ...