※Original blog was written in Japanese. I translated into English with Google translate.
When formulating a strategy, Issue-oriented approach, that is, a task that involves calculating the task backward from the task and turning it toward the achievement by turning the PDCA will be the most efficient and reasonable way of doing the task.
Many people are simple and basic, but they are not thorough, and if this awareness is lost, the task or project they are working on will definitely go in the wrong direction.
The advantage of Issue-oriented approach is that there is no waste, so that you don't have to do what you don't have to do, and you can proceed systematically.
For a given problem, there are innumerable options for solving the problem, and if you broaden the story from the viewpoint that it may be effective, it will literally be a meeting Dances but does not progress. "
(Also, this is a completely personal opinion, but the other problem that can not be solved in a Issue-oriented approach way is that, at least for some tasks and projects, timelines and resources are often limited. So, at that point, the constraints are at stake, so even if it's not task driven, I think it's an illusion that you're choosing from a limited set of options. The decisive weakness is that you can get the answer.)
Generally, after identifying Issue-oriented approach tasks, a series of steps is taken to solve the issues while rotating the PDCA cycle in order to fill the “ideal state” and the “current state”.
Of course, if the Issue-oriented approach setting of ToDo in MECE and taking an action would necessarily solve the current situation? In that regard, it goes without saying that "it is unknown to anyone."
However, it is considered that it is very important to design strategies in a problem-driven manner because they are more likely to succeed than other methods.
Most people will agree with this opinion, albeit with some nuance.
On the other hand, I recently discovered an interesting insight.
As stated by Mr. Kazuhiko Toyama, CEO of IGPI, "Professional consulting is not about providing really sharp analysis. Rather, for example,when you say you want to expand into China. Then, the professional advice you that we'll be running magazines all over China next month”.
Personally, this was a kind of shock.Exactly!!
In other words, the approach described in this example is, in terms of issue-driven, if the client wants to expand into China, the approach that arises as a result of digging in from what issues exist There is a high possibility that there is no such thing.
Why isn't this problem-driven because I can't justify it, but with a logical stack of problem-driven ones, it seems like it can't be reached. (And simply, the approach in this example seems to be difficult with a logical approach because it is simply personal.)
The example that Mr. Toyama gave is a very easy-to-understand example of using a personal connection to give the benefit of a direct connection to the other party. This kind of "leap" means that you may not be able to create it.
However, as Mr. Toyama pointed out, even if this kind of dynamic proposal is made, the value itself is a lot of work up to that point, He said that it could not be done.
As a result, realistically, ordinary people rarely produce "leap", and daily hits can occur if they are standing at bat for a home run of "leap". Lack of trust could lead to a loss of trust.
Nevertheless, there is always room to consider options that have the potential to "leap", even if they are not listed in the discussion table. I try to think of options that can make a big impact.
Tweet© 2020 ZUUHE