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

Problem Solving (Part 4): Develop Criteria Before You Pick a Solution

Photo by Carson Masterson on Unsplash

One of the biggest mistakes leaders make is choosing a solution before deciding what “good” actually
looks like.

They jump from problem to answer.

FM 6-0 gives us a better way.

After identifying the problem, the next step in disciplined problem solving is:

Develop criteria.

A criterion is simply a standard or test used to judge something. It’s the measuring stick.

If you don’t define your measuring stick before evaluating options, your decision becomes emotional, political, or rushed.

Strong leaders decide how they will judge solutions before choosing one.

---

Two Types of Criteria

Army doctrine identifies two types:

1. Screening Criteria

2. Evaluation Criteria

They serve different purposes.

---

Screening Criteria: The Baseline Test

Screening criteria answer a basic question:

Does this solution even deserve consideration?

If it fails here, it’s out.

Leaders commonly test solutions against five screening questions:

1. Is it Suitable?

• Does it actually solve the problem?

• Is it legal?

• Is it ethical?

A solution that doesn’t address the root cause is not suitable.

---

2. Is it Feasible?

Photo by Sigmund on Unsplash

• Do we have the time?

• Do we have the money?

• Do we have the people?

• Do we have the capability?

A brilliant plan without resources is fantasy.

---

3. Is it Acceptable?

• Is the cost worth the benefit?

• Is the risk reasonable?

Every decision has trade-offs. Acceptability forces you to weigh them.

---

4. Is it Distinguishable?

• Is this solution meaningfully different from the others?

If it’s just a reworded version of another option, it doesn’t add value.

---

5. Is it Complete?

• Does it address the problem from start to finish?

Half-solutions create repeat problems.

---

Civilian Translation

In schools:

• Does this discipline plan actually improve behavior?

• Can we implement it with current staffing?

In coaching:

• Does this scheme adjustment fit our roster?

• Is the risk worth the reward?

In business:

• Does this strategy solve the market problem?

• Can we sustain it financially?

Screening criteria prevent you from wasting time.

---

Evaluation Criteria: Differentiating Good from Better

Once solutions pass the screening test, leaders must determine which one is best.

This is where evaluation criteria come in.

Well-defined evaluation criteria include five elements:

Photo by Ian Taylor on Unsplash

1. Short Title – What is being evaluated?

2. Definition – What does this criterion mean?

3. Unit of Measure – How is it measured?

4. Benchmark – What does “good” look like?

5. Formula – How do we judge improvement?
   

---

Example: Hiring a New Staff Member

Criterion: Experience

• Definition: Years of relevant leadership experience

• Unit of Measure: Years

• Benchmark: Minimum 5 years

• Formula: More experience is better

Criterion: Cost

• Definition: Salary and benefit package

• Unit of Measure: Dollars

• Benchmark: Within budget allocation

• Formula: Lower cost is better (within reason)

Now the decision becomes structured—not emotional.

---

The Power of Benchmarks

Benchmarks define the desired state.

Without benchmarks, you can’t objectively analyze a solution.

Doctrine outlines four common ways leaders establish benchmarks:

1. Reasoning – Based on experience and judgment

2. Historical Precedent – Based on past success

3. Current Example – Based on an existing desirable condition

4. Averaging – Based on mathematical averages (least preferred)

Strong leaders avoid relying purely on averages because comparison without standards creates weak decisions.

---

Photo by Elena Mozhvilo on Unsplash

Weighting Criteria: Not All Standards Are Equal

In real life, not all criteria matter equally.

Time may matter more than cost.
Risk may matter more than speed.
Long-term impact may matter more than short-term gain.

Leaders assign weights to criteria to reflect importance.

Example:

• Student safety = high weight

• Cost = moderate weight

• Convenience = low weight

Weighting prevents minor factors from dominating major decisions.

---

Why This Matters

Without criteria:

• The loudest voice wins.

• The quickest idea wins.

• The safest answer wins.

• The most comfortable option wins.

With criteria:

• Decisions become transparent.

• Bias decreases.

• Risk becomes visible.

• Leaders gain credibility.

You move from “I like this option” to “This option best meets our standards.”

---

Final Thought

Good leaders don’t just choose solutions.

They build a system to evaluate them.

Define what matters.
Set your standards.
Establish your benchmarks.
Weight what’s important.

Then decide.

In Part 5, we’ll move into generating and analyzing solutions using these criteria.

Because disciplined thinking produces disciplined leadership.

Teach it. Coch it. Lead.

JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, Chapter 4, regarding screening and evaluation criteria in systematic problem solving.

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

Problem Solving (Part 3): Identifying the Real Problem — Not Just the Symptoms

Photo by Simone Secci on Unsplash

Most leaders don’t struggle because they can’t solve problems.

They struggle because they solve the wrong one.

FM 6-0 makes a critical distinction:
A problem exists when the current state differs from—or prevents achieving—the desired end state.

That sounds simple.

But the gap between “what is” and “what should be” is where most leaders lose clarity.

Before you generate solutions, you must clearly define the problem.

And that means digging past symptoms.

---

Where Problems Come From

Leaders identify problems from multiple sources:

• Guidance from higher headquarters (or upper leadership)

• Directives from decisionmakers

• Input from subordinates

• Personal observations

Translated into civilian life, that might mean:

• A new district mandate

• Executive guidance

• Employee feedback

• Data trends

• What you see happening on the ground

But here’s the trap:

What first catches your attention is often a symptom—not the root cause.

---

Photo by Omar Ramadan on Unsplash

Symptoms vs. Root Cause

Symptoms are visible.

Root causes are structural.

Example in education:

• Symptom: Student behavior is declining.

• Root cause: Lack of consistent expectations across classrooms.

Example in coaching:

• Symptom: Team morale is low.

• Root cause: Role confusion and unclear communication.

Example in business:

• Symptom: Sales are dropping.

• Root cause: Market shift combined with outdated messaging.

If you treat the symptom, the problem comes back.

If you fix the root cause, the system improves.

---

How Leaders Identify the Root Cause

Doctrine outlines a disciplined approach.

1. Compare Current State to Desired End State

Ask:

• Where are we now?

• Where do we want to be?

• What gap exists?

Clarity begins with comparison.

---

2. Define the Scope

Boundaries matter.

Is this:

• A team-wide issue?

• A department issue?

• A single-process issue?

• A culture issue?

Without defining scope, leaders either overreact or underreact.

---

3. Ask the Core Questions

Leaders must answer:

• Who does the problem affect?

• What exactly is affected?

• When did it begin?

• Where is it occurring?

• Why did it occur?

These questions force depth over assumption.

---

4. Determine the Obstacles

What is blocking movement from current state to desired state?

Is it:

• Policy?

• Culture?

• Skill gaps?

• Communication breakdown?

• Resource limitations?

Obstacles reveal causes.

---

5. Write a Draft Problem Statement

Photo by Yongsu Go on Unsplash

This is where discipline matters.

A problem statement should clearly describe:

• The gap

• The affected area

• The impact

Example:
“Student engagement has declined 20% over the past semester, preventing the school from achieving its academic performance goals.”

That’s clearer than:
“Students aren’t trying.”

Precision improves solutions.

---

6. Focus Information Collection

Once the problem is drafted, information gathering becomes targeted.

Leaders refine:

• Facts

• Assumptions

• Scope

• Contributing factors

As new information comes in, they update their understanding.

Problem statements are living documents—not permanent declarations.

---

Submit for Clarity When Necessary

If the problem originated from higher authority, leaders confirm their understanding before proceeding.

In civilian terms:

• Clarify expectations with supervisors

• Confirm understanding with stakeholders

• Ensure alignment before investing time and resources

Nothing wastes effort faster than solving the wrong problem confidently.

---

Reverse Planning Your Timeline

Once the problem is identified, leaders plan the problem-solving timeline.

They:

• Allocate time to each step

• Establish internal deadlines

• Use reverse planning

• Periodically assess progress

Pressure does not justify skipping steps.

Disciplined leaders adjust timelines—but they do not abandon the process.

---

Why This Matters

The temptation in leadership is speed.

But speed without clarity creates churn.

When leaders:

• Misdiagnose the problem

• Treat symptoms

• Skip root cause analysis

• React emotionally

They create cycles of repeated issues.

Strong leaders slow down just enough to identify correctly.

---

Final Thought

You cannot solve a problem you haven’t properly defined.

Before you fix it, label it.
Before you act, diagnose it.
Before you decide, clarify it.

Symptoms are loud.
Root causes are quiet.

The leader’s job is to hear the quiet.

In Part 4, we’ll move into developing criteria and generating effective solutions once the real problem is defined.

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 identifying problems and root cause analysis.

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

Problem Solving (Part 2): The Systematic Process Leaders Should Be Using

In Part 1, we talked about identifying what type of problem you’re facing—well-structured, medium-structured, or ill-structured.

Photo by Volodymyr Hryshchenko on Unsplash

Now we move to the next question:

Once you know the problem structure, how do you actually solve it?

FM 6-0 outlines a clear, systematic approach leaders can use when formal operational planning tools (like MDMP) aren’t appropriate.

This process works just as well in classrooms, locker rooms, offices, and boardrooms as it does in tactical formations.

Here are the steps:

1. Gather information and knowledge

2. Identify the problem

3. Develop criteria

4. Generate possible solutions

5. Analyze possible solutions

6. Compare possible solutions

7. Make and implement the decision

Let’s walk through it.

---

Gather Information and Knowledge

You cannot solve a problem you do not understand.

This step never really stops. Leaders continue collecting and refining information throughout the process.

In schools, that might mean:

Photo by Gabriella Clare Marino on Unsplash

• Reviewing grade data

• Talking to students

• Examining attendance trends

• Looking at discipline records

In coaching:

• Watching film

• Studying opponent tendencies

• Assessing player health

• Reviewing practice performance

In business:

• Analyzing financial reports

• Reviewing customer feedback

• Studying market data

• Talking with team members

Before you jump to solutions, you gather.

---

Facts vs. Assumptions vs. Opinions

This is where leadership maturity shows up.

Facts

Facts are verifiable. They have objective reality.

Examples:

• The budget decreased by 10%.

• Student attendance dropped 8%.

• Sales declined in Q3.

• Practice reps were missed.

Facts form the foundation of sound decisions.

---

Assumptions

An assumption is something you accept as true without full proof—because you need it to continue planning.

Good assumptions are:

• Valid (likely to be true)

• Necessary (essential to move forward)

If you don’t need the assumption, discard it.

Leaders must constantly test their assumptions.

---

Opinions

Opinions matter—but they are not facts.

They may come from experience and expertise, but they must be evaluated objectively.

Strong leaders ask:

• Is this data?

• Is this an assumption?

• Or is this an opinion?

Confusing the three leads to weak decisions.

---

Organizing and Sharing Information

A solution is only as good as the information behind it.

Leaders:

• Verify information

• Cross-check facts when possible

• Share relevant information with stakeholders

• Coordinate with those affected

This step prevents blind spots.

In business, that may mean looping in finance or HR.
In education, it may mean consulting support staff.
In coaching, it may mean checking with assistant coaches.

Coordination reduces unintended consequences.

---

Final Thought

Leaders don’t rise because they avoid problems.

They rise because they handle them systematically.

Gather.
Clarify.
Evaluate.
Decide.
Adjust.

Problem solving is not about speed alone—it’s about disciplined thinking under pressure.

Subscribe for Problem Solving (Part 3): Identifying the Real Problem — Not Just the Symptoms

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, and related doctrine discussing systematic problem solving.

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