Purpose This study aims at determining the factors that favor a systematic approach to deal with complex operational and strategic problems. Management literature on problem-solving makes a clear distinction between either fixing a problem temporarily by eliminating its symptoms or solving it by diagnosing and altering underlying causes. Adopting a cognitive perspective of the dual-processing theory, this study labels these two approaches intuitive problem-solving and systematic problem-solving (SPS). While the superior effectiveness of SPS in fostering organizational learning is widely documented, existing literature fails to provide an overview of the conditions that support the adoption of SPS. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a systematic literature review to shed light on the main supporting factors of SPS in operational as well as strategic domains. Findings Seven supporting factors of SPS (namely, nature of the problem, time availability, information availability, collaborative culture, transformational leadership, organizational learning infrastructure and environmental dynamism) are first identified and then discussed in an integrative model. Originality/value This work is an original attempt to inclusively address organizational, environmental and problem nature-related factors that favor SPS adoption. By determining the SPS supporting factors, this study highlights why many organizations fail or struggle to implement and sustain SPS over time.

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeAdopting the dynamic capability perspective, this study aims at exploring which problem-solving capabilities result in fundamental solutions with a potentially low likelihood for problems to recur. This can also shed light on why, despite many attempts, process improvement programs often fail to produce such long-term solutions.Design/methodology/approachA case study is carried out to inductively describe and classify problem-solving in companies and to indicate why problem-solving efforts are typically bounded to short-term solutions. The empirical findings are triangulated with findings from the extant literature.FindingsFirst, the authors propose three problem-solving modes with different characteristics and potential impacts on operational performance: intuitive problem-solving, semi-structured problem-solving and systematic problem-solving. Second, by emphasizing dynamic capabilities' micro-foundations and with the focus on learning mechanisms, the authors show that, among these modes, only systematic problem-solving can serve as a dynamic capability with fundamental solutions. Third, based on insights from the case study, the authors address behavioral and organizational impediments that curb dynamic capabilities and limit systematic problem-solving adoption.Originality/valueThis study is an empirically informed attempt to understand systematic problem-solving as a dynamic capability. The authors uncover the micro-foundations and the learning mechanisms through which systematic problem-solving becomes a dynamic capability. By highlighting problem-solving orientation as a hardly investigated dimension of improvement programs, the authors show that a mixture of a static problem-solving approach and a set of impediments at both individual and organizational levels is the major reason of failures of improvement programs over time.

No abstract