When a crisis occurs because of some outside threat, the normal response of the individuals who comprise an organization is to look to the established leadership within that organization for guidance as to what to do.
A good example we can talk about today is the threat of tariffs on goods crossing the border, which, if this happens, could be considered a crisis for most Canadian companies.
When an external crisis occurs, individuals are motivated into action and will generally be inspired by a sense of loyalty. Often there is a short-term opportunity to develop more mutual trust between the parties involved.
The crisis itself will align all interests within the organization on dealing with the problem at hand. As a result, the occurrence of a crisis may allow leadership the luxury to implement policies that have previously been resisted.
In contrast, overcoming a systemic problem within an organization itself can be considerably harder than dealing with an external crisis. Even where the existence of a systemic problem is recognized, there may be a legitimate dispute as to how best to deal with it.
The less urgent nature of a systemic problem (even when severe) allows a greater opportunity for debate and division then does an immediate threat to the existence of the organization.
How ever severe a crisis may seem at the time when it occurs, it is no more then a problem that must be solved. The solution of a given crisis may exceed the resources or abilities of an organization, but this question cannot be resolved unless and until the crisis has been properly analyzed.
Relatively few organizations have developed a systematic approach towards the process of problem solving, even though most organizations are exposed to real and quantifiable risks of encountering hazards that may cause some level of disruption to their operation.
Instead, most organizations concentrate their attention on recovery from such incidents as may occur, rather than on the process of trying to resolve the underlying causes of the problem or developing some method of avoiding the problem entirely.
The risk in such an approach is that of recurrence.
There is thus a considerable benefit to be derived from the implementation of a comprehensive problem management process, as opposed to a more limited management process.
The development of a more managed approach towards problem solving involves a series of inter-related steps:
- Problem identification and immediate response: The most basic step in the process of problem management is to determine the general nature of what has occurred and to attend to those who are immediately affected. This step also includes acting to reduce the impact of the incident and prevent the occurrence of evident follow-on problems.
- Problem categorization: The next most basic step is to determine the specific nature of the problem and, at least in the case of complex problems, its integral parts.
- Problem investigation and diagnosis: This step builds on the previous step of specific identification. It involves the investigation of the problem to locate its root cause(s). This data can then allow the problem management team to identify the resources required to resolve the problem, including any additional planning, co-ordination and communication needs.
- Allocation of responsibility: This step involves specific assignment of duty for correcting the various elements of the problem that have been identified.
The goal at this stage includes two different types of solution, specifically: - At the very least, the development of a workaround process — a solution that allows normal service to be resumed but does not actually resolve the issue that caused the incident in the first place.
- Preferable, the development of a permanent solution that deals directly with the identified problem or some integral element within it and corrects it once-and-for-all so that there is no prospect of the recurrence of that specific problem.
Stephen Bauld is a government procurement expert and can be reached at swbauld@purchasingci.com. Some of his columns may contain excerpts from The Municipal Procurement Handbook published by Butterworths.
Recent Comments