Sriparna Neogi MSCI506 MSc. Business Analytics
Reflective Essay
The primary aim of this essay is to reflect on the nature of problems, the various tools needed
to solve them, along with the effectiveness and usage of those tools in the two case studies
given to us. Another objective of this essay is to summarize the learnings from workshops.
Problems can be classified into two main types: wicked and tame. Problems can also be
categorised as structured, structurable and ill-structured (Walker and Cox, 2006). Structured
problems are the easiest to solve, while ill-structured are the most difficult. Structurable
problems are problems that can be solved, if additional information is made available (Walker
and Cox, 2006). Wicked problems are complex, ill-defined problems that can never be
solved permanently (Rittel and Webber, 1973). For me, the two key ideas were
A. Identification of wicked problems, and
B. Ways to solve them
A good way to identify wicked problems is to ask this: has this problem cropped up
repeatedly over the past few years (or months)? If the answer is yes, then it might be worth
checking to see if it is a wicked problem. Previously, during the Stead McAlpin case session,
I did not realize that we were looking at a wicked problem since the problem was hard to
define, equally hard to solve, and did not have one, “right” solution. But having read more
about wicked problems, I can now identify them and list their resolution techniques. There
are four possible solutions to wicked problems (Ackoff, 1994) and they are
A. Absolution
B. Resolution
C. Solution
D. Dissolution.
Absolution is the worst-case scenario. It is not really a solution since it involves doing
nothing and hoping that the problem would go away eventually. It might be a logical step in
some cases, because “nothing grows ad infinitum” (Mella, 2012, p.67), not even problems. It
could possibly work due to balancing loops being inherent in all systems. But the balancing
loops must be identified, before making the decision. Resolution provides a “good-enough”
solution and must be avoided at all costs. Such satisficing solutions are primarily chosen by
boundedly rational individuals who are limited or bounded by certain factors such as lack of
time to search for more information and to come up with better alternatives and limited
intelligence (Williams, 2002). As a consultant, I must aim to provide a Solution (based on
quantitative analysis) to a client’s problem or better yet, eliminate the problem altogether
Reflective Essay
The primary aim of this essay is to reflect on the nature of problems, the various tools needed
to solve them, along with the effectiveness and usage of those tools in the two case studies
given to us. Another objective of this essay is to summarize the learnings from workshops.
Problems can be classified into two main types: wicked and tame. Problems can also be
categorised as structured, structurable and ill-structured (Walker and Cox, 2006). Structured
problems are the easiest to solve, while ill-structured are the most difficult. Structurable
problems are problems that can be solved, if additional information is made available (Walker
and Cox, 2006). Wicked problems are complex, ill-defined problems that can never be
solved permanently (Rittel and Webber, 1973). For me, the two key ideas were
A. Identification of wicked problems, and
B. Ways to solve them
A good way to identify wicked problems is to ask this: has this problem cropped up
repeatedly over the past few years (or months)? If the answer is yes, then it might be worth
checking to see if it is a wicked problem. Previously, during the Stead McAlpin case session,
I did not realize that we were looking at a wicked problem since the problem was hard to
define, equally hard to solve, and did not have one, “right” solution. But having read more
about wicked problems, I can now identify them and list their resolution techniques. There
are four possible solutions to wicked problems (Ackoff, 1994) and they are
A. Absolution
B. Resolution
C. Solution
D. Dissolution.
Absolution is the worst-case scenario. It is not really a solution since it involves doing
nothing and hoping that the problem would go away eventually. It might be a logical step in
some cases, because “nothing grows ad infinitum” (Mella, 2012, p.67), not even problems. It
could possibly work due to balancing loops being inherent in all systems. But the balancing
loops must be identified, before making the decision. Resolution provides a “good-enough”
solution and must be avoided at all costs. Such satisficing solutions are primarily chosen by
boundedly rational individuals who are limited or bounded by certain factors such as lack of
time to search for more information and to come up with better alternatives and limited
intelligence (Williams, 2002). As a consultant, I must aim to provide a Solution (based on
quantitative analysis) to a client’s problem or better yet, eliminate the problem altogether
