Problem Solving
Letter PA process for turning an undesirable situation into a better, verifiable outcome. In UX, it starts by framing the problem, separating causes from symptoms, and choosing the learning or intervention most likely to create real progress.
Updated:
Working definition
Problem solving is the process of turning an undesirable situation into a better, verifiable state. It involves understanding what is happening, defining the change we seek, exploring interventions, and learning from their effects.
It is not the same as producing a solution. A screen, feature, or workshop is a possible intervention; the problem is the gap we are trying to reduce. When teams confuse the two, they can deliver exactly what was requested without improving the experience that motivated the work.
In UX, problem solving coordinates human needs, technical constraints, and business goals. The result does not always eliminate the tension. It may make it manageable, reduce its impact, or support a better-informed decision.
Frame before intervening
A useful problem description states:
- Who experiences the situation and in which context.
- What they are trying to achieve.
- Which observable obstacle blocks or slows progress.
- Which impact it creates today.
- Which evidence supports that reading.
- Which constraints cannot be ignored.
“We need a dashboard” is not a problem; it is a proposed solution. “The team needs two days to detect deviations because information is fragmented and late” opens several possible interventions and gives us a way to judge whether they improve the outcome.
A strong problem statement gives direction without prescribing an answer.
Symptom, cause, and mechanism
A visible signal does not explain what produces it. A high abandonment rate might result from confusing interaction, an unattractive commercial condition, lack of trust, or faulty measurement.
Separate four things:
- Symptom: what we observe.
- Possible cause: the explanation we propose.
- Mechanism: how that cause would produce the effect.
- Required evidence: what else should occur if the explanation is right.
This connects problem solving with critical thinking: an explanation remains a hypothesis until evidence makes it preferable to alternatives.
A practical cycle
- Describe the current state. Record behavior, outcomes, constraints, and perspectives without turning every data point into a cause.
- Define the desired change. State what should improve and how progress would become visible.
- Explore explanations. Compare possible causes, seek contradictory evidence, and mark uncertainty.
- Generate interventions. Consider content, interaction, process, policy, support, and service-level changes.
- Choose for risk and learning. Weigh impact, reversibility, cost, uncertainty, and the information an intervention can produce.
- Test and update the frame. If the intervention does not change the outcome, the problem model may be incomplete.
Puzzle-like and complex problems
Some problems resemble puzzles: the goal is clear, the rules are stable, and an answer can be verified. Others are complex or wicked: they change as people intervene, involve actors with different criteria, and have no single final solution.
Treating a complex problem like a puzzle creates false certainty. Treating every small task as a complex problem wastes effort. Good problem solving includes recognizing the situation and choosing a proportionate method.
Anti-patterns
- Falling in love with a feature before understanding the gap.
- Improving a local symptom while the overall outcome gets worse.
- Applying the same framework regardless of the uncertainty.
- Collecting research without defining which decision it could change.
- Declaring the problem solved when the intervention was merely delivered.
Short definition
Problem solving means building and updating an explanation of a situation while testing ways to improve it. Success is not shipping a solution; it is creating valuable change, recognizing its effects, and learning enough to choose the next step.