Problem-solving has
always been an issue for me. I have never considered myself a good problem
solver at work or in my personal life. As a child, I would sit in front of
puzzles for long periods of time before finally giving up and walking away. In
high school, I would look at my complex algebra word problems and think to
myself, “Nope. Never going to happen.” Before I started the leadership program,
I would read my girlfriend’s work with an overwhelming feeling of never being
able to “solve the problem” defined in the prompt. Some of the constraints that
have been roadblocks to creative problem solving are fear of failure, panic,
lack of self-confidence, the need to be perfect, and lack of imagination. To
one day be a creative problem solver, I must reduce these constraints.
I believe my biggest
constraint to creative problem solving is my lack of self-confidence due to
fear of failure. The fear of failure has a habit of creating mental blocks that
stifle my problem-solving abilities before I start. I get in my own head and
convince myself that I have no answers. I have such a large fear of failure
that I would rather not even try to solve the problem than do something wrong.
The leadership program has been a huge boost of self-confidence when it comes
to self-doubt. There are times when I will read a prompt, start to get
overwhelmed, and have an inner monologue littered with self-doubt, but when I
begin to use the skills I have learned thus far, I overcome the issue.
Another constraint
that sometimes gets in the way of my creative problem solving is my need to be
perfect. This need is also linked to my fear of failure. I am not sure why I
have such a need to be perfect, but when I am not, I become hard on myself and
get in my own way. This process causes me to give up on the problems and shut
down. The need to be perfect is a constraint I must push through during the
process of creative problem solving.
Whetten & Cameron
(2016) described the following four approaches to creativity: (a) imagination,
(b) improvement, (c) investment, (d) and incubation. The one approach I
struggle dearly with is imagination. Imagination is the creation of new ideas
and drastic approaches to problem solving. Whetten & Cameron (2016) stated
that problem solvers who use imagination are experimenters, speculators, and
entrepreneurs who use creativity to develop new ideas. One problem I endure in
problem solving is having a one track mind. As an accountant, things are very
right or wrong, yes or no. I have issues breaking away from that personality
when solving problems. I have had several people tell me that I could not solve
a problem because I could not alter my thought process.
Lipcamon (2013)
stated that the four types of conceptual blocks are (a) constancy, (b)
commitment, (c) compression, and (d) complacency. Constancy is looking at a
problem in a single way and using only one way to define and solve the problem
(Lipcamon, 2013). As previously mentioned, I struggle dearly with complacency.
My mind is a creature of habit, so I tend to use the same style of problem-solving
for every problem. Just like many things in life, not all problems can be
solved in one singular manner. I need to begin to incorporate imagination into
my problem-solving routine. I also suffer from the conceptual block of commitment
where I am committed to one solution or point of view and will not deviate from
that point of view.
In 2011, I was
promoted to Accountant II of the DSC Foundation. If I have not mentioned
before, I was self-confident, but the first several months went okay.
Fast-forward about nine months to the first audit under my reign. I ran into a
problem where two reports that the auditors requested did not match. I began
looking into all of the criteria that go into the report hoping to resolve the
problem. When that did not work, many constraints began to act as roadblocks in
the problem-solving process. I began to panic thinking that I did not post a
journal entry or maybe entered something wrong. I then went through the
constancy stage of running the reports over and over thinking that would solve
the problem.
I became so committed
to solving the problem one way that I was not able to think outside of the box
to resolve the issue. I wasted too much valuable time trying to resolve the
problem. Eventually, after I had thought I had gone through every possible
scenario, I went to my supervisor for help. She solved the problem in about 5
minutes. There was a prompt clicked in one report and not the other. I looked
over the criteria a countless number of times, but had convinced myself that
was not the issue, so I never realized the criteria was different. I think
about that scenario often, and use it as a learning experience. Like my dad
used to always tell me, I made a mountain out of a molehill.
I learned that I need
to think outside of my reasoning to solve a problem. I wasted time and energy
going around and around when the problem could have been solved much easier by
just taking a step back and thinking differently. Whetten and Cameron (2016)
defined vertical thinking as “defining a problem a single way and then pursuing
that definition until a solution is reached” (p. 150). In this instance, I
could have benefitted from getting away from vertical thinking to solve the
problem.
References
Lipcamon, J. (2013, April 03). Four
obstacles to creative problem solving. Retrieved from
http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/blog/four-obstacles-creative-problem-solving
Whetten, D. & Cameron, K. (2016). Developing management skills (9th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Pearson
No comments:
Post a Comment