Rethink Problem Solving: How Human-Centered Design Leads to Effective, Efficient Solutions
If you work in the nonprofit world, chances are you’re called to help others. It’s extremely rewarding to know that your work improves lives–it’s why we love this work.
While we have the best intentions trying to solve problems for others, it’s important to first get to know the people we serve along with their exact needs, desires, and aspirations. When we make assumptions about what communities need without directly collaborating with them, we might miss the mark and create larger problems.
How does traditional problem solving go wrong?
There was once an international development organization who wanted to provide support to a village in rural Ghana. The village’s residents had been drinking from a specific well for many years, but the well posed health risks to the community, as the water was unpurified. The well was also only accessible by a long, dangerous path, making it difficult to obtain water.
When the agency stepped in, they spent lots of money on a new water treatment facility. The facility was located closer to the village, making it more accessible than the original well. It provided clean water that resolved the health risks associated with the well water.
Problem solved? Unfortunately, that was not the case.
Though the organization had the best intentions when building the facility, it soon created more problems than the original well. Although the water supply was now closer to the village, the path leading to it was even more dangerous. The water was distributed in large wooden crates, which were heavy and difficult to transport. The facility also was not open during convenient hours for the citizens, so they could not find time to get their water.
But perhaps the biggest problem was that the agency failed to understand the significance of the original well. The well was an important cultural and spiritual symbol for the village, having been used for many decades. The water treatment facility disrupted the village’s connection to the well even though it provided better water. As a result, the village did not end up using the treatment facility; they instead opted for the original well, which was more familiar and meaningful to them despite its potential risks. The agency wasted thousands of dollars by creating the water treatment facility which ultimately only exacerbated the problems.
What went wrong in this scenario? How did the agency encounter so many problems despite wanting to help the village? You may think this is an isolated incident, but unfortunately this cycle is common in organizations that use traditional problem solving.
The Shortcomings of Traditional Problem Solving
In this scenario, the agency failed to respect the wisdom and listen to the insights of the people in the village, which would have led to an accurate understanding of their water challenges. The leaders of the organization were disconnected from the community’s needs, yet they made all the decisions in finding a solution. Understandably, this led to dire consequences.
The diagram below shows the cycle of traditional problem solving and how it can create unexpected issues, like the ones the agency encountered. We start at one end of the loop as an organization with good intentions of helping others. Then, we gather wealthy, powerful people to gain resources and identify what’s “wrong” with the community we’re aiming to serve. The organization then puts money toward the problem and builds more agencies to fix the issues. However, this is often when larger problems arise–we might encounter unforeseen obstacles or fail to realize certain cultural practices within the community. Our frustration may create a toxic environment, in which we blame the community for not using our contributions effectively.
To break this loop, we need to behave differently. When problem solving, it’s important to ask two key questions:
- Who is making the decisions?
- Who has the power?
In our water treatment scenario, the agency held all the power and made all the decisions. But in every scenario like this one, the people who are most affected by the problem hold the deepest understanding of what isn’t working. Therefore, they are the most valuable asset in finding solutions.
Hoarding the power when solving problems creates distance between the “problem solvers” and the community that is being “served,” and a lack of understanding and empathy. But when we break the cycle and put the communities we aim to serve at the center of our work, we open a world of possibilities.
A Better Path Forward: Human-Centered Design
At ROI, human-centered design is at the basis of all our work. This process is a way of problem solving that begins with humans impacted by the problem and ends with solutions that are designed with their real needs, wants, and limitations in mind. This way of thinking gives decision making power to the communities we serve.
The graphic below shows the three key components of human-centered design. We begin by building empathy and trust with the community by observing, talking to, and listening to them. We then analyze their unique challenges and opportunities, making sure they feel heard. Then we focus on making solutions with their needs in mind. From there, we will test these solutions and find the ones that work best.
When we put our audience at the center of our work, we can not only help them solve problems more efficiently, but also save ourselves from wasting time and money on solutions that aren’t effective. Therefore, human-centered design offers benefits to everyone–recipients feel seen and heard, and organizations can be proud of the work they’ve done.
If your organization is stuck in the loop of traditional problem solving, human-centered design might be an answer. If you have questions about this way of thinking, reach out to our co-founder, Seth Saeugling at seth@ruralopportunity.org to revolutionize the way your organization works within communities.
