THE EFFECTIVE PROBLEMSOLVER #090
There’s a phrase I hear all the time in problem-solving discussions:
“What needs to happen is...”
It’s followed closely by its cousin,
“The only way to fix this is...”
These statements feel definitive, authoritative, and solution-oriented, but here’s the uncomfortable truth: they’re almost never true.
The first trap is “Need.”
People say, “We need to do X before we can do Y,” as if there’s a single, non-negotiable sequence of steps to solving complex problems.
But the truth is, nothing needs to happen—not in the rigid, deterministic sense we often imply.
Complex systems, whether they’re about homelessness, workforce development, or organizational change, don’t work in straight lines.
Outcomes emerge from a web of interactions, not a preordained set of steps.
When we say something “needs” to happen, we close the door to alternative paths that could lead to equally effective—or better—solutions.
The second trap is “Only.”
This is the insistence that “The only way to fix this is…” or “This can only happen if Y happens first.”
These statements aren’t just limiting; they’re paralyzing.
They reflect a linear, essentialist view of change, one that assumes we can predict exactly how a solution (like Housing First) will unfold.
But life doesn’t work that way.
Problems are messy, environments shift, and the conditions we depend on can change overnight.
When we cling to “only,” we ignore the possibility that there are countless other ways to achieve progress.
I’ve fallen into both traps before—believing that my way was the “only” way or that a specific action “needed” to happen first.
It’s a seductive mindset because it gives you clarity and control, but it’s also dishonest. Complex problems don’t follow a single script, and we do a disservice to the people we aim to help when we insist that they should.
A different mindset
So, what’s the alternative?
It’s simple: stay open.
Instead of asking, “What needs to happen?” or saying, “This can only happen if…” try asking,
“How many ways could this change?”
“Under how many different conditions could progress emerge?”
“What actions could I take, and what effects might they create?”
“Should” → “Could”
These questions invite us to move beyond rigid ideas of how change should happen and instead explore how it could happen.
They open the door to creativity, letting us consider multiple pathways and adapt as we go.
We don’t have to control every variable or rely on false certainties.
Instead, we can stay curious, responsive, and engaged with the complexity of both the problem and its environment.
In my experience, this mindset isn’t the “only” way, nor is it something that you “need” to do—because staying open to possibilities is a choice you actively have to make every day.
But honestly, it’s made me a better problemsolver.
What could happen if we embraced this approach together?
See you in two weeks.
