Q: Why work hard at digging up the root cause of a problem when a simple problem-solving heuristic might alleviate its symptoms and put off having to actually fix it for, like, forever?
A: Tsk tsk, you don't really expect an answer, do you? A better question would be:
Q: Why do IT professionals settle for simple 'rules of thumb' in solving technical problems rather than work to find the authentic solutions that fix their root causes?
A: When (otherwise rational) people, under time pressure to solve a practical problem, judge that the properly calculated solution might be too time-consuming or complex for them to figure out, they often (irrationally) apply easier, more familiar, but less appropriate problem-solving behaviors. They resort to habitual rituals that have "worked" for them in solving other problems over the years, or fire up some troubleshooting tool or method they've used successfully before, or substitute some simpler analysis of the problem in place of the harder one. In effect, rather than solve the problem at hand, they imagine a simpler one and solve that instead.
"Successful" (that is, more "adaptive") IT professionals can be very good at playing this game. Their solutions may not be "real" ones, but they're often good enough approximations to mask the problem's symptoms for a while, long enough to close a ticket, merit a brisk pat on the back, maybe even earn a bonus.
Sound delusional? Well, it is, but the imagined reduction in the "pain" associated with a superficially addressed problem is often counted as a victory over it, and the resulting short-term kudos, however undeserved, can feel just as satisfying as arriving at the real answer.
This is a cognitive bias called attribute substitution, and it's the root cause of many errors in judgment in Information Technology.
To help illustrate attribute substitution, try solving this example problem: together, a toy bat and ball cost $1.10. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
Did you quickly arrive at ten cents for the ball? Most people do. Rather than dredge up memories of High School algebra, most people would rather simply subtract the $1 difference in cost between the bat and the ball from the $1.10 total figure, concluding -- incorrectly -- that the ball costs a dime.
Here's the correct answer: Bought separately, the ball costs five cents, the bat costs $1.05, totalling to $1.10 and satisfying the constraint that the bat costs a dollar more than the ball. Attribute substution probably costs the average SAT test-taker 100 points on their math score.
What's the "cure" for attribute substitution?
Where possible, Information Technology managers, leaders, and supervisors need to relax the push to fix things quickly in favor of emphasizing the value of solving problems fundamentally. Do you measure the resolution of technical problems in your organization? Where possible, your metrics should reflect the depth of those solutions.
For their part, IT professionals need to question their own reasoning and emotional motivations in solving technical problems. Do you feel driven to announce a solution first? When someone else solves a problem before you do, do you feel as though you've "lost?" You're prone to attribute substitution if you answered "yes" to either of those questions.
Working on solving a problem? Force yourself to ask "why" at least five times. Probing iteratively is hard work and time consuming, but it arrives at real answers.
No comments:
Post a Comment