Week 4:4

A few weeks ago I was introduced to the idea of Wicked problems.  I may even have mentioned it in the context of Tyrone Pitsis’ inaugural lecture.  And now, while reading a big pile of papers to prepare for a meeting tomorrow I come across the term again and I have to dig a little deeper.

Not too deep mind; time is not my friend.  Wiki is my friend.

“Wicked problem” is a phrase originally used in social planning to describe a problem that is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize. The term ‘wicked’ is used, not in the sense of evil, but rather its resistance to resolution. Moreover, because of complex interdependencies, the effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other problems.

So says Russell Ackoff in “Systems, Messes, and Interactive Planning”, way back in 1974.  More recently, in “Strategy as a Wicked Problem”, John C. Camillus says

A wicked problem has innumerable causes, morphs constantly, and has no correct answer. It can be tamed, however, with the right approach.

When I get into discussions about the size of the universe and where it might end, that is the worst kind of wicked problem.  While it seems conceivable that I can send out spaceships to check every corner of the universe and make it known, even if I map the whole donut of space time, all of the “out there” equivalent of Terra incognita – what about the bits that I did not set out to map.

Terra incognito.

To some extent wicked problems sound like raising children.  Where situations arise where the only way out is to say, “Because I say so”.