The term “wicked problem” was introduced in 1973 by social planners Horst W.J. Rittel and Melvin M. Webber in their seminal paper titled “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning,” published in Policy Sciences. The concept arose from their observation that traditional approaches to problem-solving and planning were inadequate for addressing the complexity and interconnectedness of certain social issues.
In a world increasingly dominated by complex societal challenges, the concept of “wicked problems” emerges as a critical concern for planners, policymakers, and social professionals. These problems evade simple solutions due to numerous barriers, such as inadequate theories for prediction, insufficient intelligence for implementation, and the impossibility of achieving singular objectives within diverse political landscapes.
Rational approaches often fall short when addressing wicked problems because traditional science and engineering paradigms do not apply to open societal systems. Social professions have mistakenly adopted these paradigms, leading to dissatisfaction among lay customers who feel their issues remain unresolved despite professional intervention. This misconception arises from the erroneous belief that societal issues can be approached in the same manner as scientific or engineering problems.
Wicked problems are inherently different. They are ill-defined, rely on elusive political judgment rather than definitive solutions, and encompass issues such as public policy decisions on freeway locations, tax rate adjustments, school curriculum modifications, and crime confrontations. Unlike “tame” problems, which have clear missions and solutions, wicked problems are complicated by their moral implications and inherent complexity.
Addressing these wicked problems requires a nuanced understanding and approach that transcends traditional scientific and engineering frameworks. Recognizing their unique properties is the first step toward developing more effective strategies to navigate their intricate challenges.
Also Read : Russell Ackoff: A Visionary in Systems Thinking
1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem
Wicked problems are so complex and intertwined with various factors that you cannot fully understand or define them in a fixed, complete manner. Unlike simpler, “tame” problems that can be clearly outlined and solved with a straightforward process, wicked problems evolve and change as you work on them.
To fully grasp a wicked problem, one must anticipate a comprehensive array of potential solutions. For instance, addressing poverty involves considering various factors such as low income, economic deficiencies, lack of skills, education, health issues, and cultural aspects. Defining the problem necessitates identifying its root causes, which simultaneously suggests potential solutions.
Formulating a wicked problem is essentially equivalent to finding a solution. The specification of the problem directs the approach to its treatment, and recognizing aspects of the problem inherently implies corresponding solutions. Traditional problem-solving phases—understanding, gathering information, analyzing, synthesizing, and solving—do not apply to wicked problems. Instead, these issues require a holistic understanding of both the context and potential solution concepts.
Problems and solutions for wicked issues gradually emerge through critical argument and judgment among participants. Optimization models, which typically require defining the solution space, constraints, and performance measures, underscore the wicked nature of the problem. Defining these elements is often more crucial than finding an optimal solution within the established constraints.
2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule
Wicked problems are distinct because they have no stopping rule. Unlike solving a chess problem or a mathematical equation, where clear criteria signal when a solution has been found, wicked problems lack such definitive markers. When dealing with planning problems, the act of solving them is intertwined with understanding their nature. Since there are no set criteria for sufficient understanding and no definitive end to the causal chains connecting various open systems, planners can always strive for a better solution. The decision to stop working on a wicked problem is not dictated by the problem itself but by external factors such as time, money, or patience. Ultimately, the planner might conclude with statements like ‘That’s good enough,’ ‘This is the best I can do within the limits,’ or ‘I am satisfied with this solution,’ indicating that the resolution is more about reaching a practical endpoint than achieving an absolute one.
3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but good-or-bad
When solving equations or determining the structural formula of a chemical compound, there are well-established criteria to objectively decide if the solution is correct or incorrect. These criteria can be independently verified by other experts familiar with them, resulting in clear and unambiguous answers.
However, when it comes to wicked problems, there are no straightforward true or false answers. Typically, multiple stakeholders are involved, each with their own perspective, interests, and values. None of these parties has the authority to set definitive rules for determining the correctness of a solution. Consequently, their evaluations of proposed solutions vary widely, influenced by their group affiliations, personal interests, and ideological beliefs. These judgments are often expressed in subjective terms such as “good,” “bad,” “better,” “worse,” “satisfying,” or “good enough.”
4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.
When solving tame problems, it’s relatively straightforward to assess how effective a solution is. Typically, the evaluation is controlled by a small group of people who are directly involved and interested in the problem.
However, tackling wicked problems is a different story. Once a solution is implemented, it can lead to a series of consequences that unfold over an extended, and often unpredictable, period. The ripple effects may bring about unforeseen issues that overshadow the initial benefits. In extreme cases, the situation could end up worse than it was before the solution was applied.
The challenge with wicked problems is that we can’t fully understand the impact of our actions until all the repercussions have played out. Predicting every possible outcome through all affected lives in advance or within a short timeframe is simply impossible.
Understanding these complexities is crucial for anyone looking to address significant societal, environmental, or organizational issues. It reminds us that while some problems have clear-cut solutions, others require careful consideration of long-term consequences and continuous adaptation.
Also Read : Donella Meadows’ Pioneering Contributions to Systems Thinking and Environmental Advocacy
5. Every solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot operation”; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error, every attempt counts significantly
The Challenges of Tackling Wicked Planning Problems in fields such as science, mathematics, chess, puzzle-solving, or mechanical engineering design, problem solvers have the luxury of experimenting without dire consequences. They can test various approaches without worrying about significant repercussions. For instance, losing a chess game doesn’t typically affect other games or impact non-players.
However, dealing with wicked problems is a different story. Every solution implemented in these scenarios has lasting effects that can’t simply be undone. Unlike a chess game, you can’t just build a freeway, assess its performance, and then easily make corrections if it doesn’t meet expectations. Large public works projects are practically irreversible, and their outcomes often have long-lasting impacts. Many people’s lives may be irreversibly affected, and substantial amounts of money will have been spent—another irreversible commitment.
This principle applies to most large-scale public works and virtually all public service programs. For example, the effects of an experimental curriculum will influence students well into their adult lives.
Whenever actions are essentially irreversible and the consequences have long-lasting effects, every decision matters. Any attempt to reverse a decision or correct undesirable outcomes introduces another set of wicked problems, which come with their own set of dilemmas.
In summary, the complexity and irreversibility of wicked planning problems require careful consideration of each solution, as the impact of these decisions extends far beyond the immediate future.
6. Wicked problems lack a finite set of potential solutions and do not have a clearly defined set of allowable actions for planning.
Wicked problems are messy and complex, making it hard to identify or even prove that all possible solutions have been considered. Sometimes, no solution is found due to conflicting aspects of the problem. For instance, a problem might require two opposite outcomes at the same time. Or, the issue might simply be that the problem-solver hasn’t come up with a viable solution—though someone else might.
When dealing with wicked problems, especially in social policy, numerous potential solutions might arise, while many others remain unthought-of. It takes sound judgment to decide whether to explore more solutions and which ones to implement.
In games like chess and fields like mathematics and chemistry, the rules and operations are clear and finite, covering all possible scenarios. However, this clarity doesn’t exist in social policy. Take crime reduction strategies, for example. There are no fixed rules on what approaches are acceptable. New ideas can always become serious candidates for solving problems like street crime.
Some proposed methods might include disarming the police, as done in England, to make criminals less likely to use firearms. Others suggest changing laws that define crime, such as legalizing marijuana or decriminalizing car theft, effectively reducing crime by altering definitions. Moral rearmament, focusing on ethical self-control instead of enforcement by police and courts, is another idea. Extreme solutions, like executing all criminals or giving free loot to potential thieves to remove their incentive, also come up.
In areas with poorly defined problems and solutions, feasible plans depend on practical judgment, the ability to evaluate unconventional ideas, and the trust between planners and their audience that leads to an agreement on trying new approaches.
7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique.
Wicked problems are complex and unique issues that can’t be solved with a one-size-fits-all approach. Unlike tame problems in mathematics, which can be classified and solved using a set of standard techniques, wicked problems lack such clear-cut solutions.
Each wicked problem has its own peculiarities that make it distinct. Even if two problems share many similarities, there’s always a chance that a significant difference exists, which makes finding a solution more challenging. For instance, while building a subway system in one city might seem similar to another, differences in commuter habits and residential patterns can drastically alter the approach needed.
In the realm of social policy planning, this complexity is even more pronounced. Each situation is unique, and applying solutions from physical science and engineering directly to social issues can be counterproductive, or even harmful. Understanding the unique characteristics of each problem is crucial for effective planning and problem-solving.
Therefore, when tackling wicked problems, it’s essential to remain flexible and open-minded, avoiding premature conclusions about which solutions to apply. Recognizing the uniqueness of each situation ensures that solutions are tailored, context-specific, and ultimately more effective.
Transform Your Thinking
Join our Systems Thinking certification to unlock innovative solutions for complex challenges.
8. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.
Wicked problems are tricky issues that often point to other underlying problems. They can be seen as gaps between “what is” and “what should be.” Solving a wicked problem starts with figuring out what’s causing the gap. But fixing that cause tends to reveal another problem, making the original issue just a symptom of something bigger.
For instance, “crime in the streets” might be seen as a result of moral decay, permissiveness, lack of opportunity, wealth, poverty, or whatever explanation you prefer. The level at which we address a problem often depends more on the analyst’s confidence than on any logical basis. There’s no “natural” level for tackling a wicked problem. The higher the level, the broader and more general the problem becomes, making it harder to solve. However, addressing only the symptoms isn’t effective, so it’s best to aim for the highest level possible to find a solution.
Incrementalism, or taking small steps to improve things, also has its pitfalls. Tackling a problem at too low a level might make the higher-level issues even harder to address. For example, focusing on reducing healthcare wait times by adding more chairs in the waiting room or streamlining the check-in process might provide short-term relief. However, these measures could make it more challenging to implement necessary structural changes, as they don’t address underlying issues like staff shortages or outdated technology. As a result, those improvements may lock in existing inefficiencies and increase the cost of comprehensive reform. Additionally, stakeholders who benefit from the incremental changes might resist future efforts to overhaul the system.
In organizations, it’s common for members to see problems at a level just below their own. For example, if you ask a hospital administrator about the challenges their hospital faces, they might highlight the need for better medical equipment rather than tackling broader issues such as inadequate staffing levels or inefficient healthcare policies.
9. The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem’s resolution
The process of defining and explaining a wicked problem is crucial because it shapes how we attempt to resolve it. Different perspectives lead to different approaches, each with its own set of potential outcomes and challenges. Crime in the streets can be attributed to various factors such as:
- Insufficient police presence
- High number of criminals
- Inadequate laws
- Excessive policing
- Cultural deprivation
- Lack of opportunities
- Abundance of guns
- Biological factors
Each factor suggests a different approach to tackling crime. But which one is correct? Unfortunately, there’s no clear way to determine the right answer. Wicked problems, like crime, have more ways to refute a hypothesis than in traditional sciences.
In science, the process is straightforward. In dealing with wicked problems, arguments are richer and more varied than in scientific discourse. Due to the unique nature of each problem and lack of rigorous experimentation, it’s hard to definitively test any hypothesis.
Ultimately, the choice of explanation is subjective and influenced by personal beliefs. People choose explanations that seem most plausible to them and align with their intentions and available actions. The analyst’s “world view” is the strongest determining factor in explaining a discrepancy and, therefore, in resolving a wicked problem
10. The planner has no right to be wrong.
In scientific research, the principle of proposing solutions as hypotheses to be refuted is fundamental. This approach, as Karl Popper describes in “The Logic of Scientific Discovery,” means that scientists are not blamed for suggesting hypotheses that are later disproven. They are simply contributing to the ongoing quest for knowledge.
However, this principle does not apply to the world of planning, especially when dealing with complex, “wicked” problems. Unlike scientific hypotheses, planners’ decisions have immediate and significant impacts on people’s lives. Thus, the stakes are much higher.
Wicked problems are inherently difficult to define and solve because they are entangled in complex causal webs and varying public opinions. For example, urban planners may struggle to address issues like traffic congestion or affordable housing, as these problems involve numerous variables and stakeholders with conflicting interests.
Ultimately, planners must navigate these ambiguities and conflicting values without the luxury of being wrong. Their responsibility is to make decisions that improve the world we live in, even when those decisions are fraught with uncertainty.
Also Read : Jay Wright Forrester: The mastermind behind system dynamics
Conclusion
Understanding the ten properties of wicked problems is crucial for anyone involved in tackling complex societal challenges. These properties highlight that there are no one-size-fits-all solutions and that every wicked problem requires a unique approach. By acknowledging the inherent complexity and interconnected nature of these issues, we can better prepare to navigate the uncertainties and contradictions they present. As we continue to grapple with the multifaceted problems of our time, embracing the principles outlined by Rittel and Webber can guide us toward better strategies, ultimately leading to more effective and sustainable outcomes.
