Solution Search Path Step 3 is the focus of creativity in the CSD process flow. Previous steps have set the stage with input from stakeholders about their needs and wants (Step 1), and a compilation of needed and desired qualities of outcome (Step 2) expected from a good solution. Step 3 is where solution options are created, either by picking from existing solution options and/or designing new options from scratch.
The product of Step 3 of the Solution Search Path is a Menu of Solution Options from which the solution for the current phase will be selected. In Phase 1, the solution is a plan for creating needed process in subsequent phases of the project. In Phase 2 the solution is a solution-discovery process for Phase 3, and in Phase 3 the solution to Problem A is determined. For each phase of the project, a good menu of solution options has certain characteristics.
- It spans the entire solution space so that it can be considered representative of the scope of solution space.
- It can be reasonably presumed to contain at least one good solution; better, it contains several in competition.
- It is reasonably concise so the selection process (Solution Search Path Step 4) can be conducted expeditiously.
The menu of solution options is subject to stakeholder concurrence, for both the process by which options are created for the menu, and the completeness and suitability of the set of options on the menu.
Off-the-Shelf or Designed From Scratch?
The process for creating solution options lies somewhere on a range between 100% searching for suitable solutions among existing sources and 100% creating new innovative solutions from scratch. The operating point chosen along that range depends on several factors.
- The availability of off-the-shelf solutions that fit the problem.
- Whether it is important to be safe and conservative at some sacrifice of achieving the highest performance, or incur the risk being forward looking and disruptive in order to attain the max.
- Having the judgement needed to recognize good solutions among the existing, and the skills and resources available for innovative development.
If a single off-the-shelf solution is a suitable option, adding that to the menu is simple. If a solution option is created by assembling various off-the-shelf components, most likely some design work will be necessary to create adapters to link the components together and make adjustments to the components so they fit. As the source of menu options moves more and more toward 100% innovative, of course more original design work will be required.
The Options on the Menu of Solution Options Can Be a Mix of Off-the-Shelf and Innovative Concepts
Creating Solution Options: an Exercise in Design
To decide which options to put on the menu, either from off-the-shelf sources or created from scratch, you have to know what you are looking for. You need a filter to sift out the good choices. Creating that filter is a process of designing one or more top-level solution concepts to guide the search. At this early point in the process for Solution Search Path Step 3, the design product you need is very broad, loose and sketchy, not detailed. For sure you want to be looking in productive areas of solution space, but without narrow limits that might cause you to miss a good possibility at the fringes. Depending on where you choose to be on the spectrum between 100% off-the-shelf options and 100% innovative design, you will do the following.
- Prepare a top-level conceptual image, or architecture, expressing what an acceptable solution would look like over all, as a guide to subsequent solution selection or design
- Design the interconnections that would knit together a solution composed of several existing components, if that approach is selected.
- Design entirely novel solution elements, for either part of or the whole solution.
The benefit of doing preparatory top-level design is illustrated by an example from The Muddle Buster’s experience. Problem A was presented by a school for hearing-impaired children that was forced to seek a new facility. A small team of system engineers including The Muddle Buster analyzed the activities of the school including all the diagnostic and educational services provided for the students, relationships with the student’s families, work spaces and meeting room for staff, fund-raising and administration of the school, and so forth. A general description of the architectural characteristics needed for the school’s facility was developed, including type, size and arrangement of building spaces, and the site surrounding the buildings. This was then used successfully by the school as criteria in their search for a new facility.
The Design Process
Design is typically a top-down process. Start by hypothesizing a plausible overall concept, often called the architecture. Then develop detail, level by level. This is a process of probing the limits, advancing when prospects look favorable, retreating and trying a different path when irreparable difficulties are encountered, The initial pass at this process is to establish feasibility, then favorability, for the conceptual design. If successful at that level, subsequent passes are made to fill in all the details, refining and optimizing along the way, to produce the final design option for comparison with others on the menu.
The Form Follows Function principle us usually good design practice. That means, first determine all the Functions that an acceptable solution must perform to do the required job and avoid undesired outcome. Then, select a Form for the solution that will deliver all those Functions and nothing more. The design process is of course much more than that, so explore the Untangling Complexity branch for additional suggestions about how to do design.
With the Definition of Success from Step 2 of the Solution Search Path as source, determine all the functions needed to deliver the best approximation to full success, while avoiding all the undesired outcomes. In other words, what must the solution DO in order to satisfy the Definition of Success? At this level in the solution-design process, there may already be several alternative function combinations that could do the job. That’s fine. Filter out the better ones and keep them.
Then, for each combination of functions that populate the provisional menu of options, select or create one or more combinations of forms that could perform those functions. Check to be sure each design concept is complete, having all the functions and form elements it needs to do the job. Also check that it is as free as possible of unexpected outcomes. With both its functions and forms selected, each design takes shape as a credible option on the menu.
It is useful to think of each of these top-level combinations of functions and forms as possible Solution Architectures, using that term in the manner of the architecture of a building. It is the broad image of the concept by which the concept is recognized and distinguished from the others, and by which its predominant features are determined.
Suspend the common urge to lunge at whatever solution-forms come immediately to mind before applying the Form Follows Function principle. That path leads to failure. At best it gets the project bogged down in wandering through the weeds of disconnected and inadequate bits of a solution. At worst, it locks in a solution that is both inadequate to do the job but meanwhile delivers undesired and damaging outcomes.
For a simple Problem A and correspondingly simple solution, the design process may follow a single path. More commonly, the complexity of Problem A and its corresponding solution will launch a design process along several parallel and interdependent paths. The project plan, therefore, must include measures to coordinate all those paths
Design is an exacting job that requires expertise, both in structuring the design task itself, and in the applying various technical disciplines that are needed to create the design concepts and flesh them out. Be sure the necessary experts are included in the project team as needed in each phase of the project.
Solution Options for Each Phase of a CSD Project
The type of solution options generated for each phase of a CSD project corresponds to the goal or objective of each phase. For Phase 1, the goal is making a successful start to the project and deciding how to develop the solution-discovery process for Problem A in Phase 2. In Phase 2 it is developing the solution-discovery process for Problem A, and in Phase 3 it is applying that solution-discovery process to Problem A. That leads to the Solution Search Path Step 3 activities for each phase of the project as in the chart below.