The ability to correctly identify the root challenges facing our organizations is a leadership skill that remains all too rarely taught
In leadership teams around the world enormous energy is spent solving problems. Yet many of those problems persist – sometimes for years – despite repeated initiatives, restructures and strategy refreshes. Why?
One answer can be found in the work of the late systems-thinker Russell Ackoff, who argued that organizations rarely suffer from isolated problems. Instead, they experience what he called “messes” – complex sets of interrelated challenges where solving one issue often creates another.
Ackoff believed that the central leadership failure is not poor execution, but poor problem definition. Leaders rush to solutions before fully understanding the system that produces the issue.
In other words, they optimize parts of the organization while the whole system continues producing the same outcomes.
Shifting the system
Traditional management thinking treats challenges as discrete technical issues: improve engagement, reduce turnover, increase productivity. Each becomes a project, owned by a function or team.
But Ackoff challenged this reductionist thinking. The performance of an organization, he argued, depends less on how well each part performs individually, and more on how those parts interact as a system. This means the problem we see is often only a symptom of deeper system design. For example, burnout may not be a wellbeing issue, but a capacity problem. Slow decision-making may not be a leadership issue, but a structural one. Innovation challenges may not be cultural, but tied to incentives and risk tolerance.
The critical point is this: leaders who treat symptoms rarely shift the system.
The discipline of strategic problem structuring
Ackoff proposed a different leadership discipline: strategic problem structuring. Rather than immediately solving problems, leaders should first structure them. This involves following a five-step process that begins with simple, but powerful, steps questions.
1. Start with the real problem What is actually happening in the system
(as opposed to being merely the visible symptoms)?
2. See the system What interactions, incentives, structures or feedback loops are producing this outcome?
3. Define the future state If the organization worked exactly as intended, what would be different?
4. Find leverage points Where might small structural changes shift behavior or performance?
5. Experiment and learn Treat change not as implementation, but as learning.
The goal is not to produce a long list of issues. It is to define one strategic problem that, if solved, would change the performance of the system itself.
The question that matters
One practical way to do this is by framing a problem as a strategic tension: “How do we achieve X when Y is happening, without creating Z?” An example might be: “How do we increase organizational capability when revenue is reducing, without increasing workload and burnout?” This type of question forces leaders to confront real trade-offs rather than pursue simplistic solutions.
Although Ackoff’s insight is rooted in the distant world of the late-20th century economy, it remains deeply relevant today. Organizations face increasing complexity: technological disruption, workforce transformation, and shifting societal expectations.
In such conditions, the most valuable leadership skill may not be strategy design or operational execution. It may be the ability to define the right problem.
Once a problem is properly understood as a system challenge rather than a symptom, entirely new possibilities for change begin to emerge.
And, as Ackoff famously reminded us, leadership is not simply about doing things right – but about doing the right things.
Perry Timms is founder and chief energy officer of PTHR, a consultancy aiming to create better businesses for a better world. He is a TEDx speaker, top-selling author, and a member of HR Magazine’s Most Influential Hall of Fame
