11–20 of 27 posts
A more thorough framework to solve problems might come from being familiar with all of the available problem solving techniques in your domain. For instance, if your job is software development, you may want to know all of the problem solving techniques in computer science. Now is the point that I will be a shill for my own book: https://www.manning.com/books/classic-computer-science-probl...
Is... is this waterfall?
Well written content. However, I am not sure if thoroughly complete. The whole article covers areas of shortcomings related to understanding the problem, designing the structure and building it. But fails to address "upgrading current solution" or "optimizing the current solutions" that suits the current market needs.
Of course a 1,000 word web article is not going to be complete. There are dozens of books you can check out for more info, including from Tim Brown CEO of IDEO [1] and from Columbia Business School
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Change-Design-Transforms-Organization... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Solving-Problems-Design-Thinking-Publ...
A more thorough framework to solve problems might come from being familiar with all of the available problem solving techniques in your domain. For instance, if your job is software development, you may want to know all of the problem solving techniques in computer science. Now is the point that I will be a shill for my own book: https://www.manning.com/books/classic-computer-science-probl...
Your book in swift with the same title is awesome as well.
Is... is this waterfall?
I don't know about this author's intention, but in general with design thinking frameworks, the idea is not that each step must be followed rigidly in order and never re-visited. It's more about calling attention to the importance of each part of the framework. Once you know all the inputs needed for creating a great product, you can seamlessly move back and forth among the phases, iterating until you're arrived at t…
In fact, that's the way it should be. There is no human endeavor that does not benefit from an understanding of how something should be done, before it is attempted. I'm not sure why some seem to feel that software engineering is somehow special in this regard. I can't count the number of times we have had people shout down attempts at serious engineering design, often by using the term "waterfall" in a derogatory manner.
If only more / most people understood this. Coding has a finite use. Problem solving (and critical thinking) are universal and possible uses approach infinity. They are the equivalent of the proverbial "learning to fish."
Yeah, usually the hardest problem is to define the problem, or even know that there exists a problem that could be solved. Once you have discovered, understood and defined your problem, solving it becomes easy.
Reminds me of this incredible chart / graph which you can use to apply to a lot of situations. I actively refer to this and show it to teams constantly. The gist of it is that you require many skills and capabilities to create alignment. Without that, you have different outcomes which we may initially experience as frustration / failure. https://intenseminimalism.com/2015/a-framework-for-thinking-...
Hammock Driven Development https://youtu.be/f84n5oFoZBc