We spent 6 weeks trying to figure out what the stakeholders’ problem was.
The actual problem we didn’t foresee was how each of us in the team would define the problem in a different manner and look at different hierarchical levels while defining a sometimes overlapping relevant system pertaining to the problem.
What do you get when you put together engineers, philosophers, psychologists, and technologists?
An existential crisis because people can’t even agree on whether reality itself is real or made up. As such, a “problem” is either a question that needs an answer, a situation that calls for attention to be solved, or an issue you choose to escalate and let bother you. Sometimes a problem isn’t what it seems to be on the surface; other times, problems are as simple as they appear on paper. There are no consistent right answers.
Problems are always context-dependent- always have been. No “real” problem exists in a vaccum and can be perfectly simulated through models and resolved as perfectly in real life. In dealing with socio-technical problems—especially those that take place due to external factors (often technical shortcomings pressured into being resolved due to regulations)—problems branch out far and wide, spreading their tendrils into unexpected crevices and connecting so many components of the environment around us.
“But we can fix this with this calculation as it shows…” blah blah blah. Nobody’s listening. You lost the humanities and social science crowd with your technical-only solution without taking the human side of the equation into consideration.
“Statistically speaking, it could be probable.” The philosophers start thinking that everything is probable; it’s just a matter of adjusting environmental factors. The engineering folks do not care, as statistics isn’t even “real” maths!
So, before we roll up our sleeves and try solving a problem, let’s remember that good intentions don’t take us far when it comes to tackling systemic problems. These problems are sometimes beyond our comprehension as specialists. Wicked problems require a Swiss-knife approach—treating it like a nail because you have the hammer will damage the screw.
If working with others from different disciplines causes conflict, and working within our team of people with similar training is like ants building a colony, then what is the solution?
Transdisciplinary collaboration.
Yes, it requires a little more effort in the beginning to make people from diverse backgrounds and training work together, but the result will be worth it. Yes, people who think differently from you can be annoying (if you lack exposure to diversity), but it would take you a lifetime to acquire the knowledge and specialize in it, while working together can accelerate that timeframe. Also, how fun is it to learn so much in such a short period of time about all the other disciplines while you contribute to solving society’s pressing issues?
Ultimately, we did define a problem, one that was multifaceted, wicked, and on many levels. And we did come up with potential solutions, but none of them would’ve been possible without the open-mindedness and collaborative spirit of all the team members.
Transdisciplinary learning and collaboration has been one of a kind and a truly amazing experience, and I’m happy to see this model being adopted into more teams as we deal with complex, systemic problems.
