My clients often ask me for quick-fix hacks.
“What’s your #1 tip for greater impact that I can do right now?”
And normally I demur.
With complex problems, there aren’t silver bullets or right answers that will just solve the problem tomorrow.
What you need to do instead is embrace an adaptive learning mindset and gain deep problem understanding.
It’s the best way to make effective decisions again and again.
Even so, popular changemakers and activists are forever promoting the solution du jour – the next great idea that’s finally going to change everything.
How should you respond to these utopian claims?
In today’s issue I’m going to give you 3 essential questions for every change proposal.
Asking them is the best hack I know for bringing rigor and critical thinking to changemaker groupthink.
Let’s dive in.
We love our own solutions
Contemplating the trade-offs involved in decision-making can be challenging, especially when you’re enamored with a particular idea.
It’s human nature to focus on the positives, on the potential outcomes we desire.
This same principle holds true when it comes to constructing arguments about potential solutions.
It’s a formidable task to scrutinize your own beliefs with the same rigor that you might apply to an opponent’s viewpoint.
Even more demanding is the ability to approach differing opinions with an open mind and genuine consideration.
I struggled with both of these tasks until I found a simple way to inject curiosity and rigor into every problem solving discussion.
It’s a practical three-question litmus test developed by renowned economist Thomas Sowell.
He recommended that every political proposal should be able to answer these questions before implementation.
As problemsolvers, we can apply these three questions to our evaluation of any suggested policies or solutions.
1) “What is the hard evidence supporting this?”
In the era of information overload, it’s easy to fall victim to the allure of anecdotal evidence or sweeping claims without empirical support.
However, asking for evidence forces us to rely on data, research, and facts to justify the need for change.
In the case of complex social problems, such as poverty, homelessness, and global warming, evidence helps us understand the scope and severity of the issue.
It separates conjecture from reality and lays the foundation for informed decision-making.
For instance, when tackling homelessness, advocates often state that their favored approach – Housing First – is “evidence-based” and a “proven” way to end homelessness.
Usually these statements are referring to a handful of studies in which permanent supportive housing has been shown to provide long-term housing stability for some homeless individuals.
But evidence showing that an intervention has worked for some individuals does not mean that the same intervention, when scaled, will work for entire communities.
To that point, despite widespread adoption and implementation of Housing First in many places for many years, we see nationwide homelessness up roughly 11% from 2022.
As author Stephan Eide explains:
“Housing First advocates’ rhetoric that investing in permanent supportive housing will end homelessness raises hopes of ending homelessness at the community or national level. …Scholars who have studied the community-level effects of increased investment in permanent supportive housing have found that: (1) governments may need to create as many as 10 units of permanent supportive housing in order to reduce the local homeless population by one person; and (2) a certain “fade-out” effect is observed whereby the reduction is only temporary. There is no scholarly consensus as to the weakness of Housing First on community-level rates of homelessness. But it does show that scholarship conforms to people’s experiences: more investment in [permanent supportive housing] does not necessarily lead to less homelessness.”
Only through ongoing research and data collection about current practices can we develop effective policies and strategies to mitigate homelessness.
2) “At what cost?”
Change proposals often come with a price tag, and understanding the costs involved is essential.
It’s not just about financial costs but also the potential social, economic, and environmental consequences.
Complex social issues, like poverty and homelessness, require resources for interventions, but we must weigh these costs against the expected benefits.
To use a recent example from Minneapolis, a report by city staff found that implementing a proposed rent control policy would cost the city approximately $1M per year.
Not too expensive if it solves the affordable housing crisis, right?
Well, according to the report, the policy would also result in 25,000 fewer new rental units to be constructed over the next 10 years.
That’s a super high price to pay to reduce rent for “a small percentage of renters.”
Balancing primary and secondary costs ensures that change proposals are both sustainable and efficient.
3) “Compared to what?”
Complex social problems seldom have one-size-fits-all solutions.
Therefore, it’s crucial to explore alternatives.
“What other options can we put on the table?”
Specifically, you should explore if there are any other ways the same ends could be accomplished.
To my examples earlier, Housing First isn’t the only (or best) way to address homelessness.
Nor is rent control the only (or best) way to increase housing affordability.
By considering multiple approaches, we can evaluate the pros and cons of each and choose the most effective and ethical option.
Assessing these alternatives allows us to tailor our strategies to the specific needs and circumstances of those affected, increasing the likelihood of success.
TLDR
Sometimes asking questions is the best problem solving hack:
- What evidence do you have?
- What does it cost?
- What are the alternatives?
See you next week.
==
Whenever you’re ready, there are two ways I can help you:
→ I’m a strategic advisor for the toughest societal problems like poverty, crime and homelessness. People come to me when they want to stop spinning their wheels and get transformative, systems-level change.
→ I’m a coach for emerging and executive leaders in the social and public sectors who want to make progress on their biggest goals and challenges.
Let’s find out how I can help you become transformational.
