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• Root cause: Market shift combined with outdated messaging.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.

Problem Solving (Part 1): Understanding the Type of Problem You’re Facing

Leaders solve problems every single day.

Photo by Karla Hernandez on Unsplash

Some are small.
Some are urgent.
Some are predictable.
Some are messy and unclear.

But here’s what most leaders miss:

Not all problems are the same.

One of the most helpful lessons from FM 6-0 (Commander and Staff Organization and Operations) is this:

Before you try to solve a problem, you must first understand what type of problem you’re dealing with.

Because the structure of the problem determines the approach.

---

What Is a Problem?

According to Army doctrine, a problem is:

An issue or obstacle that makes it difficult to achieve a desired goal or end state.

Simple definition. Powerful implications.

If you’re not reaching your desired end state, something is interfering. That interference is the problem.

The complexity of that interference determines whether the problem is:

• Well-structured

• Medium-structured

• Ill-structured

Understanding that distinction is leadership maturity.

---

Well-Structured Problems

Photo by Markus Winkler on Unsplash

These are the most straightforward.

Well-structured problems:

• Are easy to identify

• Have required information available

• Have relatively obvious solution methods

• Have verifiable solutions

They may still be difficult—but they are clear.

Examples:

In Education

• A scheduling conflict

• A grading calculation error

• A bus transportation issue

• A technology malfunction

In Coaching

• Incorrect player alignment

• Practice timing adjustments

• Equipment logistics

In Business

• Budget math

• Supply chain tracking

• Deadline planning

• Project timelines

You know what the problem is.
You know what “done” looks like.
You just need to execute.

For these problems, leaders rely on experience, checklists, procedures, or standard operating processes.

---

Medium-Structured Problems

Now things get more complicated.

Medium-structured problems:

• Are more interactively complex

• Have multiple variables

• Require judgment

• Have more than one possible solution

• Involve disagreement about how to apply principles

The end state may be clear—but how to get there isn’t.

Examples:

In Education

• Improving student engagement

• Addressing behavior patterns

• Raising overall academic performance

• Implementing a new curriculum

In Coaching

• Designing a defensive strategy

• Managing team chemistry

• Adjusting scheme to opponent strengths

In Business

• Entering a new market

• Reorganizing departments

• Responding to competitive pressure

Leaders may agree on the goal—but disagree on the path.

These problems require iteration. Discussion. Adjustment. Sometimes multiple attempts.

There is no formula that works every time.

---

Ill-Structured Problems

These are the hardest.

Photo by Jackson Simmer on Unsplash

Ill-structured problems are:

• Complex

• Nonlinear

• Dynamic

• Constantly evolving

• Difficult to define clearly

• Disagreed upon in terms of both solution and end state

With ill-structured problems, leaders may not even agree on:

• What the real problem is

• What success looks like

• Whether the end state is achievable

Examples:

In Education

• Culture decline

• Community distrust

• Chronic absenteeism

• Long-term performance gaps

In Coaching

• A losing program identity crisis

• Deep internal conflict

• Rebuilding team standards

In Business

• Brand erosion

• Organizational collapse

• Market disruption

• Ethical breakdown

These problems require design thinking, reflection, reframing, and deeper analysis before jumping to solutions.

If you try to apply a checklist to an ill-structured problem, you’ll fail.

---

Why This Matters

Many leadership failures don’t come from poor effort.

They come from misidentifying the problem structure.

Leaders treat:

• Ill-structured problems like well-structured ones

• Medium problems like quick fixes

• Complex issues like math equations

And when the solution doesn’t work, frustration grows.

The first step in problem solving is not solving.

It’s diagnosing.

---

Not Every Problem Needs a 10-Page Plan

Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash

Doctrine makes another critical point:

Not all problems require lengthy analysis.

Some problems can be solved quickly using experience.

Others require a systematic approach.

The real objective isn’t just solving the near-term issue.
It’s solving it in a way that supports long-term success.

Quick fixes that create bigger problems later are not leadership wins.

---

Final Thought

Problem solving is not about being the smartest person in the room.

It’s about asking the right question first:

What kind of problem am I dealing with?

Well-structured?
Medium-structured?
Ill-structured?

Once you understand the structure, the path forward becomes clearer.

In the next post, we’ll walk through the Army’s systematic approach to solving well- and medium-structured problems—and how you can apply it in education, coaching, and business.

Because better problem-solving builds better leaders.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.
JVD

---

Sources & Credits

Concepts in this article are derived from FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, and ADRP 5-0 regarding problem structure and design methodology.

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

The Ethical Triangle: A Simple Framework for Better Decisions

Leadership gets complicated fast.

Photo by said alamri on Unsplash

Pressure builds.
Information is incomplete.
Emotions run high.
Stakeholders disagree.

And somewhere in the middle of all that, you have to make a decision.

The problem isn’t usually a lack of intelligence. It’s a lack of structure. When ethical decisions get messy, leaders need a framework that forces clarity.

That’s where the Ethical Triangle comes in.

The Ethical Triangle examines decisions from three angles:

1. Principles-Based Ethics

2. Values-Based Ethics

3. Consequences-Based Ethics

Instead of reacting emotionally or impulsively, the triangle forces leaders to pause and analyze from multiple perspectives before acting.

Let’s break it down.

---

1. Principles-Based Ethics — What Rules or Duties Apply?

Principles-based ethics focuses on duties, laws, rules, and moral obligations.

This approach asks:

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

• What policies apply here?

• What laws govern this decision?

• What professional standards must I uphold?
  

• What commitments have I made?

In education, this might involve student privacy laws or district policy.
In business, it might involve contracts or compliance regulations.
In leadership, it might involve professional codes of conduct.

Principles create boundaries. They prevent chaos and ensure fairness.

However, principles alone do not solve every ethical dilemma. Sometimes rules conflict. Sometimes they don’t fully address complex human situations.

That’s why the triangle has two other sides.

---

2. Values-Based Ethics — What Aligns With Our Core Beliefs?

Values-based ethics focuses on identity and character.

It asks:

• Who are we as an organization?

• What do we claim to stand for?

• Does this decision reflect integrity?

• Does it align with our mission?

This approach connects directly to organizational values—whether that’s honesty, service, loyalty, respect, accountability, or excellence.

If principles are the guardrails, values are the compass.

A decision might technically follow the rules but still violate the spirit of your organization’s stated beliefs. When that happens, trust erodes.

Values force leaders to ask:
Is this consistent with who we say we are?

---

3. Consequences-Based Ethics — Who Is Affected and How?

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

Consequences-based ethics examines outcomes.

It asks:

• Who benefits from this decision?

• Who might be harmed?

• What are the short-term impacts?

• What are the long-term ripple effects?

• Does this create more good than harm?

In schools, this might mean considering student morale or parental trust.
In business, it might mean evaluating employee impact or customer confidence.
In leadership, it might mean weighing reputation and culture.

Consequences force leaders to think beyond the immediate moment and consider broader impact.

---

Why You Need All Three

If you rely only on principles, you risk becoming rigid.
If you rely only on values, you risk inconsistency.
If you rely only on consequences, you risk justifying questionable actions for “the greater good.”

The strength of the Ethical Triangle is balance.

Strong leaders examine decisions from all three perspectives before acting.

When a decision aligns with:

• Sound principles

• Core values

• Responsible consequences

It becomes defensible, transparent, and credible.

---

How the Ethical Triangle Applies Everywhere

In Schools

• Discipline decisions

• 

  Photo by 愚木混株 Yumu on Unsplash

  
  Grading disputes

• Parent communication

• Policy enforcement

In Coaching

• Playing time decisions

• Conflict resolution

• Team standards

• Injury management

In Business

• Hiring and firing

• Budget allocation

• Competitive strategy

• Crisis management

The framework slows you down just enough to make better decisions without becoming paralyzed.

---

A Free Decision-Making Tool

To make this practical, I created an Ethical Triangle Decision-Making Framework that walks leaders through each side step-by-step.

It’s available FREE here:
👉 https://johnvandusen.com/books%2Fjournals%2Fproducts/ols/products/ethical-triangle-decision-making-framework

Use it for leadership meetings.
Use it for staff development.
Use it for personal reflection.

Ethical clarity builds organizational strength.

---

Final Thought

Ethical decisions rarely come with flashing warning signs. They arrive quietly—often disguised as pressure, urgency, or convenience.

The Ethical Triangle gives leaders structure in moments that matter most.

Examine the principles.
Test against your values.
Evaluate the consequences.

That’s how trust is built.
That’s how integrity is protected.
That’s how leaders stay credible—even under pressure.

Teach it. Coach it. Lead.
JVD

Understanding Culture: Edgar Schein’s 3 Levels Explained

 Every organization has a culture.

You can feel it when you walk into a building.
You can sense it in meetings.
You can see it in how people talk to each other.

Photo by Haseeb Jamil on Unsplash

But culture isn’t just “vibes.” It’s layered, complex, and powerful.

One of the most useful frameworks for understanding culture comes from organizational psychologist Edgar Schein, who described culture as operating on three distinct levels:

1. Artifacts

2. Espoused Beliefs and Values

3. Underlying Assumptions

If you want to lead change, improve morale, or strengthen performance, you must understand all three.

Let’s break it down.

---

Level 1: Artifacts — What You Can See

Artifacts are the visible parts of culture.

They include:

• Dress code

• Office layout

• Classroom setup

• Rituals and traditions

• Language and jargon

• Slogans on the wall

• Awards and recognition systems

• How meetings are run

Artifacts are easy to observe—but often difficult to interpret.

For example:

• An open-door policy sign is an artifact.

• A mission statement on the wall is an artifact.

• A team chant before a game is an artifact.

But artifacts alone don’t tell you whether those values are actually lived out.

Artifacts show you what the organization says and displays. They do not automatically reveal what the organization truly believes.

---

Level 2: Espoused Beliefs and Values — What We Say We Believe

This level includes the stated values, philosophies, and strategies an organization claims to uphold.

Examples:

• “We value teamwork.”

• “Students come first.”

• “Safety is our top priority.”

• “We are customer-focused.”

• “We believe in accountability.”

Photo by Beau Carpenter on Unsplash

These beliefs shape policies, expectations, and decision-making.

But here’s the leadership challenge:

Sometimes what organizations say they believe does not match what they actually reward or tolerate.

When artifacts and espoused values align, trust grows.
When they don’t, cynicism spreads.

---

Level 3: Underlying Assumptions — What We Actually Believe

This is the deepest level of culture.

Underlying assumptions are the unconscious beliefs that truly drive behavior.

They are rarely written down.
They are often invisible.
But they are incredibly powerful.

Examples:

• “Conflict should be avoided.”

• “Leaders shouldn’t admit mistakes.”

• “Results matter more than relationships.”

• “New ideas are risky.”

• “Change is dangerous.”

These assumptions shape daily decisions without people even realizing it.

If you want to change culture, you must uncover these assumptions. Adjusting artifacts without addressing assumptions is like painting over rust.

---

Why This Matters for Leaders

Many leaders try to change culture by changing artifacts.

They redesign the office.
They update the logo.
They rewrite the mission statement.
They introduce new slogans.

But if underlying assumptions stay the same, nothing meaningful changes.

Real cultural change requires:

• Honest conversations

• Alignment between words and actions

• Leaders modeling the values they claim

• Systems that reinforce the right behaviors

• Consistency over time

Culture is not built by posters. It’s built by patterns.

---

How This Applies to Schools, Teams, and
Businesses

In Schools

Artifacts: classroom décor, grading systems, staff meetings.
Espoused values: “We care about students.”
Assumptions: Do we truly believe every student can succeed?

In Athletics

Photo by Austin Distel on Unsplash

Artifacts: uniforms, slogans, pregame rituals.
Espoused values: “Team first.”
Assumptions: Do we reward selfish play if it wins games?

In Business

Artifacts: company branding, office perks, leadership messaging.
Espoused values: “People are our greatest asset.”
Assumptions: Are decisions actually made based on short-term profit over people?

Alignment across all three levels builds credibility.

---

If You Want to Diagnose Your Culture

Ask these three questions:

1. What do we display? (Artifacts)

2. What do we say we believe? (Espoused Values)

3. What behaviors are consistently rewarded or tolerated? (Underlying Assumptions)

Where there is alignment, culture is strong.
Where there is misalignment, culture fractures.

---

See It in Action

I recently presented on culture and climate for M.J. Electric, walking through Schein’s framework and how it applies to real organizations under pressure.

You can watch a clip that describes a potential artifact here:
👉 https://youtu.be/VGvS9pUOH1s?si=nwTAmceqLTY4VG0M

---

Final Thought

Culture is not accidental.
It is built layer by layer.

Artifacts show the surface.
Beliefs explain the strategy.
Assumptions reveal the truth.

If you want to strengthen your organization, don’t just adjust the visible pieces. Go deeper. Align all three levels.

That’s how real culture change happens.

Teach. Coach. Lead.
JVD

---

Sources & Credits

The Three Levels of Organizational Culture framework was developed by Edgar Schein and outlined in his work Organizational Culture and Leadership (Jossey-Bass).

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