Problem Solving (Part 7): Compare to Decide — Finding the Optimum Solution

Photo by Jason Dent on Unsplash

In Part 6, we talked about analyzing each solution independently.

Now we move to the step most people think they’re doing from the beginning:

Comparison.

This is where you place viable solutions side-by-side and determine which one is optimum—not just acceptable.

The distinction matters.

---

Analysis vs. Comparison

Analysis answers:

“Does this solution meet the standard?”

Comparison answers:

“Which solution best solves the problem?”

If you compare before analyzing, you risk bias.
If you analyze without comparing, you risk indecision.

Both are necessary—but in the right order.

---

What Comparison Actually Means

During comparison, leaders:

• Evaluate each solution against the others

• Use previously defined evaluation criteria

• Identify relative strengths

• Identify relative weaknesses

• Determine the best overall fit

The objective is not perfection.

The objective is optimization.

---

Use a Decision Matrix

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

The most common comparison tool is a decision matrix.

A decision matrix:

• Lists evaluation criteria

• Assigns weights (if appropriate)

• Scores each solution

• Produces a structured comparison

It removes personality from the process.

---

Simple Civilian Example

Problem: Improve student engagement.

Evaluation Criteria:

• Cost

• Time to implement

• Impact on engagement

• Sustainability

Solutions:

• Adjust schedule

• Implement project-based learning

• Increase technology integration

Each solution is scored against each criterion.

If impact is weighted more heavily than cost, that weight influences the final result.

Suddenly, the decision becomes transparent.

---

Coaching Example

Problem: Defensive performance decline.

Criteria:

• Player fit

• Implementation speed

• Risk exposure

• Long-term growth

You score:

• Scheme change

• Personnel rotation

• Conditioning emphasis

The matrix reveals which option best balances effectiveness and sustainability.

---

Business Example

Problem: Market share decline.

Criteria:

• Revenue growth potential

• Cost

• Risk

• Brand alignment

• Speed to market

Options:

• New product launch

• Pricing strategy change

• Market repositioning

The decision matrix forces clarity.

---

Why This Step Builds Credibility

Comparison:

• Shows transparency

• Reduces favoritism

• Protects leaders from accusations of bias

• Strengthens stakeholder trust

• Documents the decision process

Photo by Austin Chan on Unsplash

When challenged, leaders can point to the framework.

Not emotion. Not preference. Not pressure.

Structure.

---

What “Optimum” Really Means

The optimum solution:

• Meets screening criteria

• Achieves benchmarks

• Scores highest against weighted evaluation criteria

• Aligns with mission and values

• Balances short-term and long-term impact

It may not be perfect.

But it is the best fit given available information and constraints.

---

Avoid These Pitfalls

During comparison:

• Do not introduce new criteria

• Do not shift weights to favor a preferred option

• Do not ignore the matrix because you “have a feeling”

• Do not rush because of external pressure

Discipline builds trust.

---

Why Leaders Struggle Here

Because comparison requires commitment.

Once you determine the optimum solution, you must be prepared to:

• Recommend it

• Defend it

• Implement it

Comparison forces ownership.

---

Final Thought

Good leaders generate options.
Great leaders compare them objectively.

Put the solutions side-by-side.
Use your criteria.
Apply your weights.
Make the choice that best achieves the mission.

In Part 8, we’ll cover making and implementing the decision—because analysis without action is just academic.

Leadership moves forward.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding comparing possible solutions and the use of decision matrices.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 6): Analyze Before You Compare

Photo by Luke Chesser on Unsplash

This is where discipline separates strong leaders from reactive ones.

You’ve:

• Identified the problem

• Developed criteria

• Generated multiple solutions

Now comes the step most people rush:

Analyze possible solutions.

And here’s the key principle from FM 6-0:

Analyze first. Compare later.

If you mix those two steps, you undermine the integrity of your decision.

---

What Analysis Actually Means

Analysis is not preference.
Analysis is not voting.
Analysis is not debate.

Analysis means examining each possible solution independently to determine:

• Its strengths

• Its weaknesses

• Whether it meets minimum requirements

• Whether it reaches the desired end state

Each solution stands alone during analysis.

---

Start with Screening Criteria

The first filter is your screening criteria.

Ask:

• Is it suitable?

• Is it feasible?

• Is it acceptable?

• Is it distinguishable?

• Is it complete?

If a solution fails even one critical screening criterion, it is removed from consideration.

No emotional attachment. No defending weak ideas.

This protects your process.

---

Use Benchmarks to Judge Quality

After screening, leaders judge solutions against benchmarks.

Benchmarks define what “good” looks like.

If the raw data meets or exceeds the benchmark, the solution achieves the desired state.

If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.

It’s that simple.

---

Civilian Examples

In Education:

Criterion: Student engagement increase
Benchmark: 10% improvement in participation

If the solution predicts only a 2% improvement, it may fail to meet the benchmark.

---

In Coaching:

Criterion: Defensive improvement
Benchmark: Reduce opponent yards by 20%

If analysis shows only marginal improvement, that solution may not achieve the desired end state.

---

In Business:

Criterion: Revenue growth
Benchmark: 8% quarterly growth

If projections show 3%, it may not meet the standard.

Benchmarks force objectivity.

---

Photo by BoliviaInteligente on Unsplash

Quantitative vs. Predictive Analysis

Some solutions involve measurable data.

You can:

• Compute

• Estimate

• Measure

• Project

Other solutions require forecasting.

In those cases, leaders use:

• War-gaming

• Modeling

• Simulations

• Scenario planning

Translated for civilian life:

• “If we implement this schedule change, what happens next?”

• “If we adjust pricing, how might competitors respond?”

• “If we change practice intensity, how does that affect injury risk?”

You visualize second- and third-order effects.

Strong leaders think beyond first-order outcomes.

---

Do Not Compare Yet

This is critical.

During analysis:

Do not compare solutions to each other.

Why?

Because comparison introduces bias.

You’ll start saying:

• “Well, this one is better than that one…”

• “At least it’s not as bad as…”

That temptation leads to shortcuts.

Instead, evaluate each solution on its own merits against your standards.

---

Photo by Kai Pilger on Unsplash

Do Not Introduce New Criteria

Another common leadership failure:

Changing the rules mid-process.

If a new criterion suddenly appears during analysis, it compromises integrity.

Criteria were developed earlier for a reason.

If they change, restart the process properly.

Strong leaders protect the structure.

---

What If No Solution Meets the Benchmark?

It happens.

If every solution fails to meet standards, leaders:

• Acknowledge it

• Inform the decisionmaker

• Generate better options

Lowering the benchmark to justify a weak solution is poor leadership.

---

Why This Step Matters

Analysis:

• Removes emotion

• Reduces favoritism

• Increases transparency

• Builds trust

• Protects credibility

• Prevents impulsive decisions

It slows leaders down just enough to avoid regret.

---

Final Thought

Most bad decisions don’t come from bad intentions.

They come from skipping disciplined analysis.

Examine each solution.
Apply your standards.
Use your benchmarks.
Identify strengths and weaknesses clearly.

Then—and only then—move to comparison.

In Part 7, we’ll look at comparing solutions and making the final decision.

Because leadership isn’t about guessing right.

It’s about thinking right.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding analyzing possible solutions and the disciplined application of screening criteria and benchmarks.

This post was drafted with the assistance of AI (ChatGPT) and edited by Mr. VanDusen.

Problem Solving (Part 5): Generate More Than One Solution

Photo by Zac Gribble on Unsplash

Once you’ve defined the problem and developed clear criteria, the next step is deceptively simple:

Generate possible solutions.

And this is where many leaders quietly sabotage themselves.

They develop one idea.
They fall in love with it.
They defend it.
They execute it.

And when it fails, they blame execution—not imagination.

FM 6-0 makes something clear:

Leaders should consider at least two solutions.

Not twenty.
Not one.

At least two.

Because comparison is one of the most powerful decision-making tools you have.

---

Why One Solution Is a Risk

Developing only one option may feel efficient.

It is not disciplined.

One solution:

• Prevents comparison

• Hides assumptions

• Limits creativity

• Increases blind spots

• Raises the chance of unintended consequences

Yes, generating multiple options takes more time.

But fixing a poorly considered solution takes even more.

---

How Many Solutions Should You Generate?

Experience and available time determine the number.

Too many options:

• Waste time

• Create unnecessary analysis

• Confuse the team

Too few:

• Limit perspective

• Reduce creativity

• Increase risk

In most leadership environments—schools, coaching staffs, executive teams—two to four well-developed options are ideal.

---

Use Creativity Intentionally

Doctrine emphasizes creativity.

Often, groups generate better ideas than individuals—if the group understands the problem.

That’s important.

Creativity without understanding is chaos.
Creativity grounded in knowledge produces innovation.

---

Photo by Per Lööv on Unsplash

Brainstorming Done Correctly

Brainstorming is not random discussion. It’s structured.

When leaders use brainstorming, they:

• Clearly state the problem

• Ensure everyone understands it

• Appoint someone to record ideas

• Withhold judgment during idea generation

• Encourage independent thinking

• Aim for quantity, not immediate quality

• “Hitchhike” ideas—build on others’ thoughts

The key rule:

No criticism during idea generation.

Judgment comes later.

---

Civilian Applications

In Education:

Problem: Student engagement is declining.

Brainstormed options:

• Adjust instructional model

• Modify schedule

• Incorporate project-based learning

• Increase student voice

• Change assessment structure

Do not evaluate yet. Just generate.

---

In Coaching:

Problem: Defensive performance is weak.

Options:

• Scheme adjustment

• Personnel rotation

• Conditioning emphasis

• Film-study increase

• Communication restructure

Again—generate first. Evaluate later.

---

In Business:

Problem: Sales are declining.

Options:

• Pricing change

• Marketing pivot

• Customer experience redesign

• New target demographic

• Product modification

Quantity first. Quality later.

---

Screen After Generating

Once options are generated, leaders apply screening criteria.

Some ideas will immediately fail the basic tests of:

• Suitability

• Feasibility

• Acceptability

• Distinguishability

• 

  Photo by Florian Schmetz on Unsplash

  Completeness

Discard those.

But if screening leaves only one viable option, that’s a signal:

You didn’t generate enough creativity.

Go back and develop more.

---

Summarize Solutions Clearly

After generating viable options, leaders document them.

Each solution should be:

• Clear

• Concise

• Actionable

• Understandable

Sometimes a single sentence works.

Example:
“Restructure the master schedule to create intervention blocks for struggling students.”

Other times, more detail is needed:

• Diagrams

• Sketches

• Concept outlines

• Written narratives

Clarity prevents misunderstanding during analysis.

If you can’t clearly explain the solution, you can’t properly evaluate it.

---

Why This Step Matters

This step:

• Expands perspective

• Reduces bias

• Encourages innovation

• Prevents tunnel vision

• Strengthens ownership

Leaders who consistently generate multiple options become more adaptable, more resilient, and less reactive.

They don’t panic when the first plan fails.

They pivot.

---

Final Thought

Problem solving is not about having the fastest answer.

It’s about having the best-informed one.

Generate more than one path.
Document clearly.
Screen thoughtfully.
Prepare for comparison.

In Part 6, we’ll analyze and compare possible solutions—where disciplined thinking separates good leaders from reactive ones.

Because leadership is not about guessing right.

It’s about thinking clearly.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.

JVD