>The idea that there is a "science of problem-solving" leaves me wondering what role
this implies for intuition, politics, networking and all manner of equally
valid but
"unscientific" means for solving organizational problems.
I strongly object to the idea that all means of solving problems are equally
valid. Validity is the degree to which predictions from a theory are confirmed.
Within the science of problem-solving are many different means, some of which
have been confirmed in some contexts and some of which have not (never tested,
tested but disconfirmed, not yet confirmed, etc.). Intuition, politics,
networking, psychic hotlines, voodoo, tarot cards, mysticism, and critical
deconstruction are NOT valid until their predictions are confirmed. In my
teaching, I find select examples of networking and politics that appear to have
led to organizational solutions and advise students that these tools may be
used, but carefully, since they can lead to disaster as well. On the other
hand, intuition has been shown to lead to disaster at least as often as to
success, which indicates low validity. Flipping a coin is as good or better and
not recommended either.
All means of problem solving should be in the solution space which one
searches, but that does not mean that they are all equally valid. Personal
values and ethics may help select among the more valid means, the less valid
(or not yet proved valid) means arguably ought to be left for future
consideration when more and better evidence has been made available.
--
Prof. John L. Naman naman+@pitt.edu http://www.pitt.edu/~naman