Wicked problems & negotiated knowledge
Horst Rittel and associates developed the construct of ‘wicked problems’ in the late 1960s at the University of California at Berkeley. They were concerned about the social fact that technically ‘brilliant solutions’ in public architecture can provoke controversies and political reactions. The Sydney Opera House is an archetypal case study.
You may find the classic article ‘Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning’ (1973) online using Rittel wicked problems as key words in Google. This article contrasts wicked problems with tame problems.
Closed analytical sets (‘tame problems’) can be defined and bounded so known algorithms can be selected or valid algorithms created; and then applied to produce a correct solution.
Figure: the generalised tame problem-solving process
Attributes of wicked problem spaces
Wicked problem spaces have attributes that violate the rule-based ‘tame’ problem-solving process that is quite appropriate for closed analytical sets. In wicked space, problems
- cannot be defined so all stakeholders agree on the problem to solve
- discussions about the problem typically trigger contention about what terms, concepts and levels of abstraction are desirable or permissible
- discussions about the nature of the problem and the processes for developing possible solutions have no clear stopping rules
- possible solutions do not have ‘objective’ – i.e. stable and generally agreed – success measures
- so no solution can be ‘correct’ or ‘right’, ‘incorrect’ or ‘wrong’
- but (however) solutions may be better or worse
- creating any solution requires an iterative pathway to integrating different interests – and each step takes time, has a cost, and may prejudice options
- there are no given alternative solutions – these must be discovered along alternative iterative pathways, and
- the pursuit of better solutions in wicked problem spaces often involves encounters with perturbing moral, political or professional-ethical considerations.
The wicked problem construct now pervades professional practice in public policy, strategic planning and complex software development.
Experts with well-developed intuition based on an internalised professional framework can find wicked problem spaces frustrating or even infuriating.
In transformational learning exercises, we suggest that experts reflect on these four propositions.
- Sustaining our own motivation and working relationships with other parties is a challenge in wicked problem spaces
- Patience and the ability to reframe perturbing surprises as opportunities may be rewarded
- The techniques used to create issues structures and package alternative packages of trade-offs and the iterative approach of action research may be useful
- Solutions in ‘wicked problem’ spaces often map into establishing and sustaining action coalitions that can make things happen
