In the problem framing step, we defined the perceived challenge that we need to address. Sometimes, however, this challenge might be just a symptom, and there might be deeper causes underneath it. If we treat the symptom, we might not arrive at a real solution for the problem. Therefore, we might need to dig deeper and understand the real causes of the problem. And this is what this step is about. Income seeking situations we might have a deeper chain of events that leads to the problem we have identified.

So we really need to dig deeper and uncover what lies beneath the surface. In our example, we have the problem of information leakage that might on the surface. Be related to unauthorized access. But digging deeper might lead us to something else, like bad processes, or lack of motivation among employees. And all of these might have completely different solutions. In this step, we use some of the tools that can help us really look for the root causes of the problem.

A popular tool is the five why's analysis. But we can also use SWOT analysis, process analysis or different brainstorming techniques. Let's look at some of them. Let's start with the five why analysis techniques. It is a familiar technique that is also quite simple, but it can lead us to quite a lot of insights. The application of the technique is just asking why?

At least five times in a row Looking at the answers that we come up with, in the first couple of questions, we might come to obvious symptoms of the problem. Like in our example, if we ask why the information leaked, the first obvious answer is because somebody had unauthorized access to the information. But why did he have this unauthorized access? Perhaps because the admin forgot to revoke the access after a support session. Why did the admin forget that? Because he wasn't trained enough to really follow a process of revoking rights after support sessions.

Why wasn't he trained, because his manager was overloaded and couldn't conduct the onboarding session, and so on, and so on. As you can see, we can arrive at really surprising insights that can lead us to one or another solution. In some cases, it might be very helpful to combine these five why analysis with a fishbone diagram so that we can structure the answers in different categories, for example, employees, processes, tools, and so on. In some cases, the SWOT analysis can help us look at the problem from an internal and external viewpoint. SWOT stands for strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. strengths and weaknesses are usually from an internal viewpoint, what we identify as the strong points and the weak points for us in the context of this problem or a project and opportunities and threats point us to the internet.

With the external forces, what are some of the opportunities that we can discover and pull down threats that we have to take care of. In situations when we are framing a problem and working towards a solution, this water nice can help us to identify some assumptions. And later on, we might want to come back to the SWOT analysis we have done initially and validate some of the decision options that we have taken when the problem we have identified is related to a process. value stream mapping, or simple process mapping might be a helpful tool to help us visualize and understand what is happening in the process and where are the key points that we might need to address in value stream mapping What we do is to start from the final value that is produced, it might be a product or some result of an intangible process that we are running.

And then we need to map backwards all the steps that lead to the creation of this result and identify the information the interaction that flows along the process. Then we need to address the potential problems that we discover at each step. One of the less familiar tools that we can use in this step is the so called delfy brainstorming technique. It is originally a forecasting technique that uses expert knowledge to arrive at solutions. In this technique, we have a facilitator that distributes a service To group of experts, they work individually so that their opinions are not impacted from one another. This is a way to avoid the symptom of the so called groupthink or having opinions in the group influenced by the most dominant expert in this group.

So once the experts fill in the survey, they send it back to the facilitator. He or she combines the answers and administers another set of questions to the experts so that they can build on top of the first one. And this is repeated until a consensus is reached or we have a good answer to the questions that we are looking at. So we have framed the problem and we have identified or assumed some of the root causes that lead to the problem. Let's look at how Our team is applying some of the tools we talked about.