Horst Rittel and “wicked problems”

For today, a fantastic definition of wicked, that is to say, planning problems, from http://www.cleverworkarounds.com/2008/04/11/why-do-sharepoint-projects-fail-part-1/; I find the fourth one especially poignant:

There is no definitive formation of a wicked problem.
•The information needed to understand the problem depends on one’s idea for solving it … Every textbook of systems engineering starts with an enumeration of these phases: "understand the problem or the mission", "gather the information", "analyse the information", "synthesise information and wait for the creative leap", "work out solution", or the like. For wicked problems, however, this type of scheme does not work"

Wicked problems have no stopping rule
• … because (according to Proposition 1) the process of solving the problem is identical with the process of understanding its nature. You can always try to do better as your understanding grows. This leads to the presumption that additional investment of effort might increase the chances of finding a better solution.

Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but good or bad
• Judgements on the effectiveness of solutions are likely to differ widely based on the personal interests, value sets, and ideology of the participants.

There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem
• Any solution, after being implemented, will generate waves of consequences that may yield utterly undesirable repercussions which outweigh the intended advantages.

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.
• "One cannot build a freeway to see how it works"

Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions
• There are no criteria which enable one to prove that all solutions to a wicked problem have been identified and considered

Every wicked problem is essentially unique
• By "essentially unique" we mean that … there always might be an additional distinguishing property that is of overriding importance … one can never be certain that the particulars of a problem are consistent with previous problems already dealt with.

Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem
• As you investigate problem causes, there is a tendency to discover that the current problem is the symptom of a larger problem. The level at which a problem ’settles’ cannot be decided on logical grounds. Rittel implies here that this characteristic makes phase-based problem solving as described in the first characteristic. "Marginal improvement doesn’t guarantee overall improvement. For examine, computerisation of an administrative process may result in reduced cost, But at the same time it becomes more difficult to incur structural changes in the organisation, because technical perfection reinforces organisational patterns and normally increases the cost of change."

The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problems resolution.
• "You might say that everybody picks an explanation of a discrepancy which fits their intentions best"

The planner has no right to be wrong
• This final distinguishing property is not as relevant as the previous ones. Rittel asserts here that when scientists propose a theory in the "search for truth", they do not have to be right. Rather, the theory is validated by its ability to withstand peer review and repudiation over an extended period of time. Wicked problems on the other hand, do not have this luxury. "Planners are liable for the consequences of the actions they generate".

Of course, from my experience anyway there is one missing:

Human beings are by their nature, reactive

• "They won't decide to use your freeway before it's built."