Problem-Solving Framework for Engineers

Problemeering: Engineering the Problem Before the Solution What is it? Problemeering (problem + engineering) is the art and science of identifying, defining, and framing problems so they can be solved more creatively and efficiently. Why it matters Many product launches, business strategies, and even personal projects flop because they target the wrong problem or never define one at all. Problemeering helps you: • Understand the real issue • Avoid premature “band‑aid” fixes • Uncover root causes and hidden opportunities • Frame challenges in a way that sparks breakthrough ideas Key steps Observe & Empathize – Listen to users and spot pain points. Define – State the core problem in one crisp sentence. Reframe – Challenge every assumption: “Is this really the problem?” Explore Context – Map the ecosystem, constraints, and stakeholders. Ask “How might we…?” – Turn the problem frame into innovation prompts. Quick example Late‑delivery complaints in a food‑delivery app. Instead of jumping straight to route optimization, a problemeering mindset asks: • Are customer expectations realistic? • Does the UI overpromise delivery times? • Are restaurants accepting orders they can’t fulfill? Addressing these upstream issues often fixes “late deliveries” more effectively than tweaking maps alone. Origin Not yet in the dictionary it just reminds us: engineer the problem first, then engineer the solution.

🔧 8D Problem Solving: From Symptoms to Solutions 🚀 In quality and operations, we don’t just fix problems—we solve them for good. That’s why the 8D (Eight Disciplines) Problem Solving Process is a cornerstone of effective root cause analysis. It’s not just a checklist—it’s a mindset of teamwork, rigor, and accountability. Here’s how it works: 🧩 D1 – Form a Team   Bring together cross-functional experts who understand the process and can drive change. 📝 D2 – Describe the Problem   Define the issue clearly using facts, data, and impact—no assumptions. 🛡️ D3 – Implement Interim Containment   Protect the customer and process while the root cause is being investigated. 🔍 D4 – Identify Root Cause   Use tools like 5-Why, Fishbone, and 7M to dig deep and validate the true source. 🛠️ D5 – Define Corrective Actions   Develop targeted solutions that eliminate the root cause—not just the symptoms. ✅ D6 – Implement & Validate   Put the fix in place and confirm it works—through testing, monitoring, and feedback. 🔁 D7 – Prevent Recurrence   Update procedures, training, and systems to ensure the problem doesn’t return. 🎉 D8 – Recognize the Team   Celebrate the people who solved the problem and strengthened the process. 💬 I created the visual below to support team huddles, CAPA reviews, and leadership coaching. Feel free to use it, share it, or ask for a version tailored to your industry. Let’s keep building a culture of ownership, excellence, and continuous improvement—one discipline at a time. #8DProblemSolving #RootCauseAnalysis #QualityLeadership #CAPA #ContinuousImprovement #OperationsExcellence #Manufacturing #MedicalDevices #Teamwork #LeadershipDevelopment #VisualThinking

How software engineers solve problems vs how GRC teams solve problems 🔧 Software engineers: → Define the pain point clearly (Trello: "network partitioning causes message loss") → List specific requirements (failover capabilities, throughput needs, latency targets) → Evaluate multiple alternatives systematically (Kafka, SNS+SQS, Kinesis, Redis Streams) → Choose based on technical fit, not features (Kafka met requirements; Redis Streams was unstable) → Implement incrementally (shadow traffic, gradual rollout, measure results) → Build for future scale (anticipate growth, design for reliability) How traditional GRC solves problems: 📋 → Think in project cycles (audit deadlines drive everything) → Optimise for framework coverage over driving down risk → Ignore stakeholder toil ("just fill out this 50-question Google Forms") → Choose tools by feature count (does it have 200+ connectors?) → PoC based on demos not depth of what you actually need → Complain about your tool online → Reset after each audit instead of building iteratively The GRC Engineering difference? We apply software engineering problem-solving methodology to compliance challenges. ✅ Clear problem definition: "Automated evidence collection doesn't scale outside of public cloud specific controls" ✅ Requirements-driven evaluation: What do we actually need vs. what vendors sell vs. what we can build? ✅ Systematic comparison: Technical fit over feature lists ✅ Incremental implementation: Test with low-risk controls first but in production settings ✅ Future-proof architecture: Build systems that can be maintained by the team and can scale to production-grade environments Just like Trello didn't choose Kafka because it had the most features, they chose it because it solved their specific technical requirements. Your GRC program deserves the same engineering rigour. 🚀 #GRCEngineering #SystemsThinking #EngineeringMethodology

You’re solving problems that shouldn’t exist. Most teams optimise what’s already there. Elon Musk questions whether it should exist at all. That’s the difference between incremental and transformational. Say what you want about him, but this framework is worth borrowing. His 5-step framework for solving problems: 1. Make the requirements less dumb Question the requirement before solving the problem. Most teams accept constraints as fixed. Great operators ask: Does this need to exist at all? If not, you just saved months. 2. Delete the part or process Remove everything possible. The rule: If you're not forced to add back 10% of what you delete, you didn't delete enough. Delete until something breaks. Then add back only what's essential. 3. Simplify and optimise Only optimise what survives deletion. Otherwise, you’re just making bad systems more efficient. Simplify first, then optimise. 4. Accelerate cycle time Once simplified, move faster. But not before steps 1-3. Speed on the wrong thing just gets you to failure faster. 5. Automate Automation comes last. Why? Automating a bad process makes it permanent. First make it necessary, then simple, then fast. The most important thing with this framework is: ➝ First solve the problem that unlocks everything else. ➝ Then optimise everything around that one constraint. Instead of thinking about how other people solve the problem, start thinking: What are you actually trying to solve/achieve, and what’s the simplest path to get there? Average leaders copy solutions. High-performing leaders question whether the solution should exist. Before solving the problem, ask: Should this problem exist at all? ♻️ Repost if you’ve ever realised the real win was deleting the problem, not solving it. ➕ Follow Samuel Knight for practical frameworks that help you think more clearly, move faster, and build smarter.

Complex problems don’t need complicated solutions. They need 7 simple questions: 5W2H. Most problems stay unsolved for one reason. We jump to fix them before we truly know them. The fix? Use the 5W2H Framework. It’s a simple set of 7 clear questions: → What is the issue? → Why does it happen? → Where does it occur? → When does it show up? → Who is involved? → How is it done? → How much does it cost? Here’s an example: Problem → Late project deliveries → What? Deadlines slip 2–3 weeks → Why? Bad time estimates → Where? IT dev team → When? Last 4 sprints → Who? PMs + devs → How? No buffer in sprint plans → How much? $5k fines per delay Now the issue is clear: “Inaccurate sprint estimations are causing repeated project delays and financial penalties for the IT team.” Why use 5W2H? → Clears foggy thinking → Catches missing details → Builds team unity → Creates doable plans Tips for success: → Keep answers short → Use plain words → Get team input → Update when needed Where to apply it? → New projects → Workplace issues → Process reviews → Action plans *** 🔖 Save this post for later. ♻️ Share to help others solve problems with clarity, not chaos. ➕ Follow Sergio D’Amico for more on continuous improvement. P.S. Next time you face a messy issue, don’t guess. Ask 5W2H and watch clarity spark action. Would you use this with your team?

This is the exact framework I used to answer system design questions in interviews at Microsoft, Google, Walmart & 5 other MAANG+ companies. I landed at Microsoft, and 6 years later, I still use these principles when designing systems at scale. 1️⃣ Define the Problem First → Don't jump into design, ask the right questions first. → Define scale, trade-offs (latency vs. consistency vs. cost), and scope. 2️⃣ Explain It Like You Would to a Junior Engineer → Break it down step-by-step before diving into databases or scaling. → Keep it simple first, complexity comes later. 3️⃣ Deep Dive Where It Matters → Focus on key areas: scaling, availability, real-time processing. → Don't waste time on unnecessary details. 4️⃣ Identify Bottlenecks Early → What breaks first? Single points of failure? Traffic spikes? → Address issues before your interviewer asks. 5️⃣ Summarize Trade-offs Like a Pro → Justify design choices, why this DB, why this architecture? → Show that you think like an architect, not just a coder. (I’ve written a detailed version of this framework, here’s the link, go read and apply it ↓) https://lnkd.in/dSHZZM6e

Most people chase quick fixes. Here's how experts actually solve problems. The blueprint for solving problems effectively: 1. IDEAL Framework ↳ Identify the problem ↳ Define the context ↳ Explore possible strategies ↳ Act on the best strategy ↳ Look back and learn 2. 5 Whys Technique ↳ Ask "Why?" repeatedly ↳ Dig deeper beyond surface symptoms ↳ Find root causes of problems 3. Design Thinking ↳ Empathise with user needs ↳ Define the problem clearly ↳ Ideate creative solutions ↳ Prototype low-fidelity versions ↳ Test and refine with feedback Expert frameworks for structured problem-solving: PDCA Cycle ↳ Plan: Identify and analyse ↳ Do: Implement solutions ↳ Check: Evaluate results ↳ Act: Standardize or restart OODA Loop ↳ Observe: Collect information ↳ Orient: Analyse and synthesise ↳ Decide: Choose action ↳ Act: Follow through Kepner-Tregoe Method ↳ Situation Appraisal ↳ Problem Analysis ↳ Decision Analysis ↳ Potential Problem Analysis The biggest mistake isn't trying to solve problems. It's not using a systematic approach when needed. ♻️ Reshare to help others solve problems better. 🔔 Follow Luke Tobin for more problem-solving insights.

Most teams fix problems. Few build systems that prevent them. Problem-solving isn’t about throwing tools at symptoms. It’s about choosing the right framework for the job and using it with precision. After 20+ years building fintechs and scaling operations across 3 continents, I’ve learned this: ➟ Teams that scale fast don’t rely on guesswork. ➟ They rely on repeatable decision systems. Here are 13 frameworks that separate reactivity from real resolution: 𝟭. 𝗣𝗗𝗖𝗔 → Build, test, refine in cycles 𝟮. 𝗗𝗠𝗔𝗜𝗖 → Fix process at the root 𝟯. 𝗖𝗜𝗥𝗖𝗟𝗘𝗦 → Structure product decisions 𝟰. 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗼 → Solve the 20% that cause 80% of chaos 𝟱. 𝗥𝗖𝗔 → Go beyond symptoms 𝟲. 𝗦𝗪𝗢𝗧 → Analyze from all sides 𝟳. 𝗟𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗝𝗮𝗺 → Solve in under an hour 𝟴. 𝗢𝗢𝗗𝗔 → Adapt faster than the context 𝟵. 𝗞𝗲𝗽𝗻𝗲𝗿-𝗧𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗼𝗲 → Decide with logic, not noise 𝟭𝟬. 𝟴𝗗 → Solve recurring problems cross-functionally 𝟭𝟭. 𝗧𝗥𝗜𝗭 → Invent beyond the obvious 𝟭𝟮. 𝗦𝗖𝗤𝗔 → Communicate with clarity under pressure 𝟭𝟯. 𝗙𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗯𝗼𝗻𝗲 → Visualize root causes in one shot Problem-solving isn’t a soft skill. It’s an operating advantage. 📌 Save this for your next offsite, sprint, or product review. ♻️ Repost to raise the bar on how teams solve what matters. 🔔 Follow Nadir Ali for strategy, leadership & productivity insights.

𝐎𝐍 (𝐎𝐥𝐝 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦) 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 🎯 One of the questions that comes up a lot in my discussions with colleagues is how to problem solve with speed and accuracy ? The only consistent answer to that in my experience is to diagnose the problem and seek help from the right quarters. The better your issue identification and help seeking algorithm, the more efficient you can be. Increasingly, the delay seems to be due to weak help seeking algorithms . The 𝐎𝐍 (𝐎𝐥𝐝 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦) 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 has been fairly useful for me :- 👉 𝙊𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙗𝙡𝙚𝙢, 𝙤𝙡𝙙𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙤𝙡𝙪𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 - All problems related to human beings viz health, motivation, productivity, happiness, communication, alignment etc are classical Old Problems. An accurate solution or learnings around what not to do exist with your Mentors, Bosses and peers. Seek opinion and take a few but immediate action to see slow but long terms gains. Results are usually assured if done well. 👉 𝙉𝙚𝙬𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙗𝙡𝙚𝙢𝙨, 𝙣𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙘𝙝𝙞𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙜  - Challenges around tools ,technology, costs & navigating topics such as uncertainty , execution gaps etc fall in this bucket of New Problems. And while the temptation to 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥 + 𝐂 & 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥 + 𝐕 solutions from another organisation is tempting (Enter the consulting firms), IMHO it is best to be patient before arriving at solutions. Iterating in a small cross functional team and ensuring that all hypothesis are proved or disproved with data is a far better approach to solving problems in this bucket. Think before you leap and build conviction in the method of leap. 👉 𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 - Many problems will look like they're falling at the cusp of new and old. For eg what about an execution gap which comes down to lack of training in the workforce ? It's an Old Problem. Force yourself to fit them into one of the two buckets. Makes the solutioning sharper. What are some of the techniques you use for decision making ? Would love to hear #productivity #decisionmaking #workforce #timemanagement #teammanagement