An approach to problem solving, through problem framing
Today, the 14th of March, is the birthday of Albert Einstein, one of the greatest minds to have graced this planet, who fundamentally changed our view of space and time and helped reimagine modern physics, relatively speaking.
I recall one of Einstein’s more famous observations, ‘The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existence.’ – especially its marked relevance in an era of unlimited access to answers, aided by advanced Artificial Intelligence algorithms, that question our ability to question, and lull us into accepting answers unquestioningly.
Ever since the dawn of human civilisation, we as a species have understood the world around us only through the power of asking questions. The innate curiosity to discover how the world works and the unique ability to learn and grow from questioning things, have helped us unravel the twisted strands of life, uncover the vastness of the universe, and unlock the potential of technology.
But, while the human ability and right to question will always remain at the core of our eternal quest for knowledge, it is now time to reflect on the very character or anatomy of the question itself. It is not simply about asking questions but asking more and better questions. Especially, as we are poised at the tantalising edge of a whole new dimension with the advent of AI, our ability to ask the most relevant questions is now more critical than ever before.
Which brings us to a discomfiting question. Are we really exposed to the mechanics of good questioning in our formal educational and professional systems, even though we intuitively have the ability to be curious? Probably not. If anything, in most cultures, we are traditionally dissuaded from asking questions. Being curious or seeking clarity is frowned upon as being impolite, inconsiderate, or invasive.
As our inquisitive and knowledge-hungry voices are collectively muzzled, we either lose the ability to question or ask fewer, more insignificant questions. Over time, we become less confident or capable in asking the right questions. Alarmingly, in many cases, we get very comfortable accepting the answers that are provided, without even seeking to view things from another perspective, as even the environment around us is designed to only give answers, not encourage people to ask questions.
In the professional sphere, organisations that discourage a culture of questioning, usually witness a disturbing scenario, where information is hoarded, and the majority of the workforce sticks to the job at hand, with little or no involvement or enthusiasm. In fact, very few will even be willing to take a risk on questioning the status quo. That’s because, in answer-driven organisations, curiosity, taking a risk, challenging the status quo, or even accepting the responsibility to be wrong, are not seen as being admirable qualities to possess and are hence, just not supported.
The prevailing culture at such organisations, either implicitly or explicitly, calls for a rigid outlook, risk averting, self-protectiveness, and defensiveness, while establishing and enforcing compliance of automated and mindless routines and habits. It is no wonder that the work pool at these organisations suffers from lack of confidence, poor teamwork, and incompetent leadership, as over a period of time they become antiquated, anachronistic entities.
For any liberal, progressive, and self-respecting organisation, putting the lid on a culture of questioning is certainly not the way to go. But what exactly are the advantages of promoting a questioning culture?
For one, it encourages a flow of questions, because the point is not really to find an immediate, obvious and ‘correct’ answer, but rather to keep asking, keep learning with each question and keep evolving the answers that are more relevant over time. Eventually, people in such organisations climb the ladder from being reliant on someone to becoming self-reliant, which not only benefits them personally but also the organisation, collectively.
Good questions focus on the ‘quest’ in the question, a mindset that generally suggests importance and care in what is being sought. The act of probing is best served by genuine curiosity and an openness to new possibilities, directions and understanding. Essentially, what counts is what you learn after you know everything.
Besides, questions are always compelling when there isn’t pressure for instant, off-the-cuff responses. In a relaxed state, reflections of the mind are likely to be more in-depth, far-reaching, and credible, as there is a sense of reward, rather than threat, that takes over the mind. In fact, the right question, and the reflection it generates, can have greater power and value, than the responses it generates.
But above all, the most common mistake is the emphasis on finding the right answer, rather than asking the most relevant question. Surprisingly, in many cases, questions are needed not just to seek answers but to motivate and inspire those involved to understand better, respond to the question and provide the impetus to think.
When you consider epochal moments and path-breaking inventions throughout history, one invariably finds that it occurred because the inventor dared to ask a question that had never been asked before. In this context of breakthrough inventions and business ideas, my favourite has to be the Polaroid story.
When Edwin Land snapped a picture of his three-year old daughter on vacation, she wanted to see the picture immediately with all the restless inquisitiveness, impatience and innocence that comes from being a child. The fact that the film needed to be sent for processing in a studio wasn’t something that she was aware of at her age. But her question of “Why should I wait for the picture?” set Land off on an enlightening journey on how to build a darkroom inside a camera. And that flash of inspiration was what helped him invent Polaroid, the world’s first instant film camera.
This is a great story of how a seemingly naive but a relevant and fundamental question challenged Land to think through issues that he had never considered. It made him realise what he didn’t know and what he should be exploring next.
It also has a lesson for us, now, and in the future. In the fast-emerging, all-pervasive era of AI, where the systems become more intuitive and adept at providing answers, the value of human contribution at the workplace is decisively shifting from accessing the available answers to asking the right questions that help generate more relevant answers.
In the not-too-distant past, academics would spend a lifetime poring over reference material in hallowed institutions of learning, seeking answers to the most complex questions. With the advent of generative AI, that veritable vast ocean of knowledge is now digitally available, within seconds, at your fingertips.
Without doubt, AI is an incredible leap forward in the quest for answers. As AI systems continue to surge, they may start asking questions of their own. The larger question is, are the AI generated answers always accurate, valuable, or effective? What if a more cooperative, consultative, and coordinated approach was attempted, with the intuitive genius of the scholar, working in tandem with the incredible computing power of AI, to determine the value and relevance of the answers provided? That would indeed be the best of both worlds, natural and artificial intelligence.
While human intelligence excels in learning through experiences and making rational decisions, AI is designed to mimic human thought processes and behaviours, and may eventually even surpass human capabilities in certain aspects, challenging our preconceived notions and pushing the boundaries of human thought.
But there is a fascinating paradox in the comparison between human and artificial intelligence. AI systems may be engineered for precision and efficiency, but serendipitous path-breaking discoveries are, more often than not, triggered by the innate absurdity or dumb questions of humans. The element of human fallibility is what allows us to venture boldly into the unknown and learn from mistakes, ultimately propelling us forward in our limitless hunt for knowledge.
Is there a way in which the precision and efficiency of AI can integrate the idiosyncrasies of human imperfection and serendipity, so that the perpetual spirit of curiosity can be sustained?
It may be possible, but only if we can understand and accept the differences. Humans coexist with elements of the natural world, so the ability to be curious is innate. AI is merely a product of our understanding of the world, so it lacks the ability to see the bigger picture and correlate things, at least in its current manifestation. So, quite clearly, the key to unlocking the vast and incredible potential of AI lies in combining its phenomenal computing power and efficiency with the human element of unstructured learning that sparks curiosity, critical thinking, and analysis.
More importantly, the spirit of asking more questions and more relevant questions should be assimilated into our everyday lives as well as our educational and professional culture. Instead of scouring guide books for the right answers, students should be encouraged to frame relevant questions that can get them the answers they seek. Imagine an examination where marks are awarded for questions asked at the end of the lesson rather than the answers written for pre-coded questions! Similarly, instead of judging our corporate leaders by the answers they provide, we need to rate them on the quality of their questions.
The only way to change the current environment is to motivate people to ask more and better questions so that they can learn faster. In business organisations, the leaders have a responsibility to teach and coach others to think more strategically and ask deeper questions.
The best strategic thinkers, business leaders and entrepreneurs distinguish themselves by how they frame their thinking, the kinds of questions they ask and their manner of inquiry.
For this, we need to radically change the learning environment. Students need to frame the questions that will help them learn more holistically. Corporate teams need to brainstorm to frame the questions that will provide the best solution, not just brainstorm to find the right answer.
Moreover, the mere presence of a tool is no guarantee that one can find the right solution. A calculator can help you solve a math problem, but you need to know how to solve it. Just as ChatGPT will not have a solution if you don’t know what you want.
Ultimately, as always, and especially in the bold new age of AI, it’s a question of asking the right question. Because the answer to a wrong question can never be the right answer.
The author is Group Chief Executive Officer –India & Chief Strategy Officer – APAC, MullenLowe Lintas Group.
(The article was first published exclusively in ET Brand Equity)