TOO MANY PROBLEM SOLVERS

Take Advantage of Opportunities

The US school system has done a great job in preparing curricula regarding problem solving. It is debatable if students are enjoying any great success with problem-solving curricula and it does offer great amounts of fodder for discussion.

One reason why there is so much emphasis on math and science is because they are easily measurable by standardized tests. Those fields of study lend themselves nicely to factual “right or wrong” test questions that can measure one student’s ability to remember over another. Once test scores are verified, a litany of statistics can be applied to support or defend educational programs.

As a county, we adore problem-solvers and reward those people with high paying jobs and in the case of the military, medals. After all, who doesn’t like the idea that the “good cowboy” is riding into town to deal with the “bad cowboys?” How often was GE’s Jack Welch placed on the pedestal as the company’s great problem-solver? George Patton is romanticized as the “kick butt” get it done general.

The issue is that education, K-16, is producing too many problem-solvers (coupled with technology taking over the role of problem solving) that leaves too many people out of work. Companies regularly use robots or computers during the manufacturing process to eliminate errors and create perfect outcomes at much higher levels than human workers could ever hope to perform. The result is better products but less highly educated people working.

Businesses have found that “leaner” payrolls eliminate middle management problem solvers; sadly these people are not missed. Too many problem solvers tend to cost business money, not make it. The few dollars saved by a more efficient process pales against the loss of customers flocking to a new product and company. A good example is the US auto industry.

This is not to say that business would do well to toss out all the problem solvers. There still needs to be a high degree of input because many problems arise every day. It is just that companies find that they don’t need as many problem solvers as the school systems are churning out on a yearly basis.

The real value for business comes when employees seek to exploit opportunities. They read about new trends that will increase sales or create new designs to attract new customers. The car company Toyota has often said that it is a design company that just happens to make cars.

So education needs to teach entrepreneurial thinking: finding opportunities and how to present them to decision-makers. This class would combine the elements of all school courses: art, science, English grammar, reading, math and so on. An entrepreneur combines the energy and thinking of many different disciplines to make their point.

The problem is not how you measure creative thinking but keeping it confined to the time efficiencies that schools demand. You can measure creative thinking using many traditional methods such as structuring proposals, networking, use of grammar and art and many other measurable factors. It is just not as easy to measure as a multiple choice test and certainly not as efficient. Lack of time in school is the enemy of creative thinking

Overall, isn’t this what business is asking for in their new recruits: to be able to think critically and creatively? Isn’t this the kind of education that makes people valuable and less likely to suffer the indignity of unemployment or working as an over-qualified worker at minimal wage? To prepare students for the future, schools need to take knowledge and show students how it applies to innovation.

Problem solvers abound in every walk of life. What is not as likely to be found is the person who uses good thinking to create opportunities and teach others how to capitalize. That in turn makes more profit for the company and more opportunities for employment.

Potpourri

1) According to American Demographics Magazine, the average US household spends almost $90 per day on goods and services. That translates to $32,850 per year in spending. It also means that the average household needs to earn about $30 per hour to spend at that level (factoring in taxes, insurance and capital spending such as appliances).

2) According to the “2006 Life After College” study, most college graduates stay at their first job for less than 2 years. During the first year, 36 percent report leaving and another 42 percent leave during the second year. About 5 percent haven’t worked since graduating. Newly hired teachers leave after 2 years at a rate of about 50 percent.

Visit www.3MinuteLearning.com

GROWTH <> LEADERSHIP <> EXCELLENCE

© 2006 3 Minute Learning LLC