Solving Complex Problems Begins Now!

Note: After watching the webinar I was feeling less positive about my progress. I’ve started over again here.
Note2: After watching more videos, I realize this is just how Complex Problems progress…

I’m choosing employment as my problem topic. Briefly, I have an undergraduate degree in graphic design, but technology changed everything. Now I work in food service. For the past seven years I’ve worked my way up in food service from working in the kitchen to assistant manager responsibilities in the office. Its more in line with my background, but in this economy I’ve struggled to stay there. I mostly understand what it takes to get a job, but the process is so fraught with peril it makes for a great problem!

Actor Table

Below is my take on the Actor Table method–modified slightly. I’ve added two more columns. Now the one table reads like a narrative of the actors: ‘wish’ and ‘crisis’, the gap between them, and the dilemma. Feel free to comment if you think I’ve misinterpreted any actor’s position.

The problem is Getting a Job has so many elements. Top on the list is of course writing an effective resume. However, as a job seeker its your task to sort through all the job resources to find the one your industry uses to advertise positions the most. Landing an Interview is the first sub-category of this complex topic where actors become stakeholders and directly influence the outcome of your endeavor.

Problem Statements

What is a good problem statement for all the actors you have identified, including your client?

How does a job seeker effectively market themselves, when employers don’t tell you why they didn’t hire you?

How does a job seeker effectively communicate when the hiring process is closed to feedback?

Note! This is a hypothetical scenario and not a real analysis of a client’s request. All entries in the Actor table are fictitious and for educational purposes only. If an actor position sounds too kitschy or thin, please post your ideas and I will add them to the table.

Figure 1-1. Hiring Process. (SCP_Hiring_Process.pdf)

I started working on the Goal Tree, but I found it too difficult to avoid detailing the Process of hiring. To resolve this tension I created this simple Process diagram. It reveals four opportunities for feedback. Of these, half of the time you won’t receive feedback. In exceptional cases it’s as much as seventy-five percent no feedback–none, zip.

Goal Network

This time I kept asking the operative question, “What does this mean?” and then the ideas just started to flow. The trouble is I didn’t end up with the Goal Tree as instructed; causality is missing. However, I captured some of the elements for other actors previously vacant from my imagination when constructing the Actor Table.

The real head spinner was ‘termination without prejudice’. This basically means we’re letting you go, but you could come back later. Where exactly does this fit with the actors? It’s a real problem for employees, because they’re still ‘fired’, or ‘terminated’. This raises doubt in the next employer, because many applications ask, Why did you leave your last position? The firm will unlikely explain the reason to anyone’s satisfaction. The bomb was realizing even in this case, where there’s no claim of fault towards the employee, there’s no place to connect it back to the positive modes of communication. You’ll notice three of the most connected to nodes are ‘firm’, ‘resume’, and ‘reputation’. How do you tell your next employer, who is acting in the best interest of their firm, this ‘event’ was all the firms problem? Not my fault?

I’ve included these three versions of the Goal Network, because I question its effectiveness. Better to really give this tool its paces before I look for something else. Networks are very good at exploring meaning. On the other hand, the course teaches the Goal Tree as pursuant to correlations and causes. The problem is I don’t know how do this efficiently right now. Although, I am certain I’ve eliminated the verbs. Baby steps.