Question the Question: When You Shouldn’t Ask “Why”
--
Children ask “why?” all the time. In doing so, they rarely settle for a single answer, creating long “why-chains”. Best case such a chain results in a satisfactory answer. But more often it’s stopped by a “Therefore!” or “That’s the way it is!” or “Stop asking questions!”. Later in our lives, we keep asking “why”, especially when analyzing or solving a problem.
Asking “Why” for Complicated Problems
The “five why” technique is a popular tool for problem analysis from lean manufacturing. Starting with a problem, ask “Why?” five times. Each answer is the starting point for another “why” question.
Wikipedia provides us with an example:
An example of a problem is: The vehicle will not start.
Why? — The battery is dead. (First why)
Why? — The alternator is not functioning. (Second why)
Why? — The alternator belt has broken. (Third why)
Why? — The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and not replaced. (Fourth why)
Why? — The vehicle was not maintained according to the recommended service schedule. (Fifth why, a root cause)
After about five such questions (you have to stop somewhere, right?) we encounter the root cause. We can now eliminate this as the cause of the problem, as the original problem was merely a symptom. One measure would be to have the car serviced in a workshop and letting it undergo regular maintenance.
Here we base our analysis on a causal-mechanical model of explaination. The observers can analyze causes and effects and the problem can be reliably reproduced.
Similar problems could be:
- Air conditioning stopped working
- The office kitchen ran out of coffee beans
- A software behaves the wrong way
“Why” questions are useful here because they uncover the chains of causality that have led to the problem (or symptom) from its original trigger. One could say that the problem contains its own cause.
Distinguishing Complex from Complicated Problems
Systems theory defines those problems as simple or complicated and it distinguishes those from complex problems — in contrast to their usage in everyday language, when something complex is a shorthand for “particularly complicated”. The difference between complex and complicated contexts is that complex behaviors are unpredictable, because there are more interdependent and interacting variables and actors than we can practically comprehend. Understanding single parts of the problem doesn’t allow the understanding of their connections, interactions and dynamics between them: the whole system behavior.
Complex problems can only be explained in retrospect, but can’t be reproduced, so they are hard to fix. Sometimes they even develop a life on their own and lose the information about their initial cause altogether. Problems that include relations and interactions between people fall into the area of the complex. More precisely, we can categorize them as complex adaptive problems, because they adapt (and change) while we encounter and try to solve them.
Whenever we use “why” questions on complex (adaptive) problems, it’s likely we create new ones.
“Why” Questions Create Problem Carriers
The language of “why” can lead us quickly and unintendedly on the wrong path. “Why are you doing this?” “I’m doing that, because…” We quickly end up in situations where we feel we have to defend and justify ourselves. It targets our behavior, that results from adaption to our environment, not our intentions. “Why” questions create problem carriers. People get defensive and worried about what the questioner’s hidden agenda may be. The feeling of trust in the questioner inevitably decreases. Not a good basis to tackle problem solving, let alone in a creative and collaborative manner.
There Are More Perspectives Than Our Own
There are often multiple perspectives or “truths” for one problem, there are more perspectives than our own. Not all people have the same informations at all times. We judge, a lot. The Guardian ran an advertisement in 1986, which shows this wonderfully:
There Are More Realities Than Our Own
In addition, humans are not machines with linear, reasonable and causal-mechanical behaviors. We filter informations and facts through our senses and in our brains. We test and transform them based on our values, truths and previous life experiences. We build a different version of reality than other people do. There are more realities than our own. And we keep alternating our reality as we go. Your reality will be something else after reading this article.
A Better Question for Complex Problems
Now what? There is no prescriptive process or technique for dealing with complex adaptive problems. But we can do two things to wiggle to a solution:
- Ask for the purpose
- Find alternative behaviors for that purpose
- Observe, orient, decide, act (repeat)
Ask “What For”
For the problem (or problematic behavior) X ask a person: “What is X good for?” or “What purpose serves X?” You can repeat it for the answer until you understand the purpose of their behavior.
Find Alternative Behaviors for That Purpose
Now that you’ve got the intended purpose for the person’s behavior: What could be an alternative behavior to fulfill that purpose? You can give ideas and options, but the person will know what’s best. If the person is not convinced yet: what about a trial period for the new behavior?
Observe, Orient, Decide, Act (repeat)
The concept, also known as OODA, allows you to react to complex adaptive behaviors. While the person tries out the new behavior: What do you observe? Maybe you need to orient yourself to the new situation, decide what to do and act on it. Repeat. If you find another problematic behavior, repeat with asking “what for”. Always have good intentions yourself, because people will notice.
What happened?
Our questions decoupled behaviour from intention. The behaviour may seem bad or reckless, but the intention has been good. With their good intentions in mind, it’s easier for us to see the good in people even if they act wrong or harmful. People will feel that. And that’s a good foundation to work on the fact-based (rather than relationship-based) problem-solving approach.
Save Your Energy
Asking “what for” also leads away from the negativity of problems, so we can spend our time and energy working on a solution. When there is a problematic behavior it will be easier to work on an alternate, more appropriate behavior when we find and agree on a positive purpose before. Find solutions not from the problem, but from the purpose.
There Are No Good or Bad Questions
Like all tools, asking why is neither “good” nor “bad.” Depending on the context (complicated or complex), “why” questions are useful or useless. The saw is not useful for hammering nails and the hammer is not useful to split pieces of wood — even if some might try. We should be aware: What is in front of me? A nail or a piece of wood? Complicated or complex? Then we pick the right tool for the job.
