"Hi Coert,
Just been reading some of your articles. how ever I did not find any critism for the approach. Could you highlight some for me please
Israel"I think the question is interesting and fair and I would really like to get some responses from you, reader, to this question. I will, after some time, also try to answer the question.
One question that often pop-up is the one about the long lasting effect of the solution if you don´t know the cause of the problem (you can´t really solve the problem if you don´t really understand it´s causes).
ReplyDelete//Magnus Ström, Sweden
I suspect a weakness is that the solution-focused approach might lead you to believe it is always the best way, whereas there will be circumstances where it is ineffective. Perhaps the discipline could benefit from being clear about where it is the right approach and where it is not.
ReplyDeleteThe SF-approach assumes that you yourself have a knowledge of the causes of the problem, and the way to achieve a solution. It encourage you to take little "experiments" to achieve that solution.
ReplyDeleteThe problem and the solution is thereby "anchored" in a specific context and possible very personal view. This can be viewed at as a weakness.
The SF approach handles this weakness with the little "experiments", and adaption different viewpoints (how would xxx see any difference regarding yyy) . This may take time though.
So the weaknesses I see, are :
- Problem and solution operate in a very specific context
- Reaching a solution may take some time
Not very big issues in my opinion.
Another possible criticism might be that relying on past experience or experimentation for solution finding may not always be the most efficient technique. Gaining input from someone with deeper or wider experience of solving problems may result in speedier problem solving especially if the 'expert' is capable of presenting solutions in a way that is consonant with the individual's areas of familiarity.
ReplyDeleteThat's a very interesting thread, and an important one for every SF practitioner. Reading the comments I wonder if it is by coincidence that the weaknesses of SF are perceived as to its effectiveness of problem solving - which is not what SF is about in the first place, as far as my understanding goes.
ReplyDeleteAnd I have a question as to David's comment: "Perhaps the discipline could benefit from being clear about where it is the right approach and where it is not."
How do you do that? And - why would this be a weakness specific to SF? Isn't this true for EVERY method?