Is ‘problem-solving’ overrated?

THE EDITOR, Madam:

We proudly list “problem-solving” as a prized skill on our resumés, flaunting it as a badge of honour and proof of our capability. But have we considered what we actually mean by this? What kinds of problems are we solving? Are they recurring or substantial enough to merit the praise we give ourselves? How often are they genuinely complex, or are they largely the result of poor planning or flawed processes?

The reality is that problem-solving, though necessary, can often be draining and might not contribute to our intellectual development in the way we believe. In fact, over-reliance on problem-solving can arguably lead to what might be termed “intellectual morbidity” – a slow erosion of innovative thought and critical thinking.

Problem-solving, particularly under stressful or high-stakes conditions, is mentally and emotionally exhausting. According to psychologist Dr Barry Schwartz, problem-solving, especially in repetitive or high-pressure contexts, can lead to “decision fatigue”, where our mental resources are so depleted that our ability to make clear, effective choices diminishes significantly over time (Schwartz, 2004).

In workplaces that constantly rely on employees to “put out fires”, this fatigue can stymie creativity and reduce job satisfaction.

Problem-solving is often equated with critical thinking, but there’s an important distinction: critical thinking is an expansive process, encouraging curiosity and reflection; while problem-solving is primarily reactive and geared toward short-term fixes. In many cases, especially in corporate environments, critical thinking is sacrificed for rapid problem-solving.

This approach can discourage innovative thinking and might even result in what scholars describe as a “culture of reactive compliance”, where employees become conditioned to focus solely on immediate issues rather than root causes or long-term improvements (Bailin et al., 1999).

‘INTELLECTUAL MORBIDITY’

By continuously emphasising problem-solving, we risk becoming experts only in dealing with obstacles, rather than in cultivating a proactive, growth-oriented mindset. This state of “intellectual morbidity” is the opposite of intellectual growth: it conditions us to prioritise immediate responses over reflection, reducing our ability to engage with complex, open-ended issues that stimulate true critical thinking.

In the words of Edward de Bono, a renowned thinker on creativity, “There is no doubt that creativity suffers under the pressure of habitual problem-solving,” as we begin to treat every issue as a crisis requiring an immediate solution (de Bono, 1985).

If we aim to build genuine critical thinkers, we need to emphasise intellectual exploration and curiosity, rather than situating problem-solving at the centre of our cognitive toolkit.

Rather than heralding problem-solving as the ultimate skill, we might do better to focus on fostering environments that encourage questioning, creativity, and open-ended exploration.

LEROY FEARON

Acting Dean, Faculty of Education

The Mico University College