February is celebrating the day of love. Love is a word that many of us take for granted. Love is the same but different, depending on the intention of the one who loves, and the streamline of the loved one. For example, the love that we feel for our brothers and sisters is completely different than the love we ignite with our partners. The love we sense with our community is also distinct from the love we institute with our kids or the love we express to God, the creator of the Universe.

Love is the same, but how we show or express our appreciation differs, according to our intention and the subject of our affection. For those who have loved ones, either a significant mate or friends or family, Saint Valentine´s Day is a lovely time to remind us how beautiful is to hold someone close to our hearts. Consider that we are blessed for that. There are so many people in this world who have lost their loved ones in the middle of a war or do not have anyone who values them, but only God. And just to have someone who cares, who keeps you in his or her prayers, someone who is always standing for you in the middle of a crowd that does not like you, or who at least thinks about you and then his or her day is filled with a sunshine smile. It is an enormous blessing to love and be loved in return.  Happy Valentine´s Day to all.

Let´s dig into our subject of today: Problem-solving in the context of value propositions.
We have prepared the slides that support our strategic reflections of today. As usual, feel free to download, print, and share them.

What is problem-solving?
The meaning of problem-solving, indeed, is very straightforward on the surface: to solve problems. But when we try to mix science-behavior-practice, contexts, and milieus to resolve the correct solution, then problem-solving has different connotations and strategies. In addition, it is extremely dangerous to procure a solution to a problem that has not identified the real cause of it. It is like sailing without a compass, or without any type of technological instrument that can guide us to a safe port.   For the time being, we have prepared slides 5, 6, and 7 to illustrate this point. Randomly, we chose the irradiating perspective from the MIT office for digital learning for this term: “Problem-solving is the process of identifying a problem, developing possible solution paths, and taking the appropriate course of action”(Slide 5). But as the MIT bureau clearly expresses it, the problem-solving strategies are ample and wide. When we search for algorithmic solutions (like a mathematical crypto solution to a social-economic problem, for example: Bitcoin), it is completely irrational to think that Bitcoin will solve the heuristic problem of poverty. Each problem holds a philosophical cause, and so the solutions can´t be black or white, but a mix of greys, sometimes we face more than 50 shadows of gray.

For Eleonora Escalante Strategy, the problem-solving process is a naturally dynamic cycle. It is not an automatic bet to find the solution on the first loop of trial and error. It is not a climb mountain to reach either. And it is not a delicious recipe to repeat. It is also not a matter of probabilities under a technocratic umbrella of data analytics and machine learning. And, it is not a test to answer closed questions either. We understood a long time ago, that our problem-solving mental process is the result of a humble impeccable practice that only comes with experience, of doing it once, and doing it once again, on and on and on, and repeating the cycle as many times until we reach the perfect integrated holistic ethical model in which human and society thrives in love and safety for the future. We have defined a 10-step process that involves the following key elements (look at slide 6 for further explanation):

1. Identify the problem and its real causes
2. Think
3. Contextualize
4. Gather information and experiences (from the past and the present)
5. Analyze
6. Develop solutions under different scenarios
7. Prioritize under certain criteria and select one choice
8. Implement the solution under a course of action
9. Learning on the way
10. Review, evaluate, and reflect strategically

Our philosophy of life matters. The problem-solving cycle is not going to be successful if before starting, we do not understand our own philosophy of life. Each person privileges certain guidance on their thoughts, actions, words, and spirituality. Even if you have never studied philosophy, each of us has a cosmovision that responds to a philosophical structure. Some people are guided by the Bible or their most important religious book for training. Others are steered by profits, and nothing makes sense for them more than the economically profitable outcome. Other individuals are surrounded by a profound sense of solidarity in their communities or surroundings, meanwhile, other societies are more worried about the environment and the effects of climate change.  Each person has been raised under a fundamental set of core values that determine their own philosophy of life. Understanding each of our own philosophies of life is a prerequisite before getting ahead with problem-solving in the context of value propositions. The philosophy of life of the problem-solving designer is as important as the methodology for doing value propositions. In addition, it is crucial to put ourselves in the shoes of the creator of the framework for problem-solving. The author of the framework of reference also has a school of thought under his or her own skin, that is influenced by the center of studies or the advisor or the master that originated his/her research. If the creator of a framework of reference doesn´t evolve in life, his models of analysis will stay as stagnant as when these were created. And that is a sign of trouble for humanity. Nowadays, many citizens, do not even ask themselves what type of philosophy of thinking they hold, but only follow the trends, the fashion, and the archetype of their social-media influencers. 
In consequence, before becoming a problem solver in corporate strategy or business modeling, we must ask ourselves the question of the foundation of our own thoughts and personal idiosyncrasy: what is our own philosophy of thinking? Then, we also need to find out which is our economic philosophy, the school of thought of our university career and professional experience.  We need to understand if our philosophy of life is promoting a “commissioning” system of mercantilism, or if our current “sharing practices” at the level of the new gigantic empires of NAIQIs are simply a platform for collusion. When technological tools become the backbone of our economies, collusion power is at its highest. In the middle of this context, we can´t be good problem-solvers if we don´t understand who we are and what we promote in our thinking skills and competencies.

Valiant learning as a problem solver competency. Each of the 10 steps that I have mentioned in slide 7 requires a courageous degree of valiant learning. Otherwise, please don´t intend to become a problem-solver for business owners, enterprises, or difficult society challenges.

Valiant learning means the capacity to pre-comprehend that each of the solutions that we prioritize and select is two sides of the same coin: as problem solvers, we can gain immense success during the first loop of the problem-solving cycle or we can face a lucky failure. The latter possibility is the best that could happen to a problem-solver (or a problem-solving team). Why? Because that is the way to dismiss out what is not well thought, and it is outrageously better to get rid of it on the first intent. If at the implementation step (look at slide 7) we reach success, we also shouldn´t be happy: it is well likely that we can fall into the trap of collusion, or manipulation of marketing practices.  Evidently, those who are doing great problem-solving, during the first loop, are usually in the category of “something in between”, and that is the best thing that could happen to us when we are implementing problem-solving. It is the only way to learn and continue improving, easing, and perfecting our problem-solving competencies using design thinking.

Why is problem-solving a skill that comes with practice? No one is born with the solutions in hand. Not even the best problem-solving masters who have outlived us and double or triple our age. Each problem has its own merits and edges, and each challenges us. Not even one solution to a problem can be repeated following a formula of  “the fairy Godmother” or the “Alladin” hocus pocus.

Problem-solving is not for the youngsters alone. There is a learning curve that requires the best brainiac multidisciplinary teams to work alone and together in cycles of different timings and contexts, particularly during forced economic transitions. Or when we wish to fix the problem of global poverty for example.  Of course, there is a philosophy of teaching problem-solving in which the instructors provide, first, the problem-solving option to the pupil who knows nothing about theory or historical content; by doing it first, the probability of a “productive failure” is almost imminent, which usually occurs. But these experiences occur in the classroom (under laboratory conditions), never and foremost in real life. Once learners have fallen, the coach or teacher proceeds with his or her lecture, and the students can exclaim “Aaahh, that is why we failed”. The discovery and self-realization of the pupils about the causes of their unsuccessful solutions are understood and coined forever in their brains. It is like applying Montessori for problem-solving in the classroom.

Is education helping us to become masters in problem-solving?
As it is now, education is being manipulated at its core by the NAIQI _{(Nanotechnology, Artificial Intelligence (including robotics and automation), Quantum support, and the Internet disruptive technologies)}. Why? Because we are leaving our developing process of problem-solving in the hands of third-party people that anyone can find on social media or YouTube platforms, instead of being actors of our own self-exploration, research, and guidance. Students become unable to do their own sensing exploration and cherish the respect for the role of their educators. Teachers have been degraded to a level of wannabes of YouTube videos. Real-life educators are transferring their honoring power to social media speakers. Is this a good education for problem-solving? I doubt it. Don´t get me wrong, I also utilize certain videos of music to accompany our work, but I am not looking for this video to replace my written interventions with you. Can you notice the difference?

Now let´s extrapolate from the classrooms to problem-solving in the real world. Any good master of problem-solving knows that each challenge is a new issue, that is unrepeatable, and not even a frame of reference is unique for the heroic potential of solving something. Each framework is simply a guide, but not the norm.  Our current digital education is also not helping us to understand that sometimes the solution is found by pursuing our intuition. By following data analytics under technological machinery, we are not training our intuitive brain side, and it is dormant. It is still there, but it is sleeping… with digital education, our spontaneous insightful spirit is hibernating, and our creativity is merely redundant under the ocean of irrelevant tech products and services that are not doing any good to our sacred brain.

The case of AI for problem-solving. Sorry for what I will articulate to the group of investors that are shaking the world with the Artificial Intelligence group of technological advancements: AI demeans the human mind. AI is replacing our mental work. And I am not talking about the ethical or the social implications in the economy (jobs will be gone in every single industry and economic sector if we continue in this direction), what I am writing here is that our brains are being hurt and it will take several generations to fix this disaster.  Not only we are going backward to the times before the Renaissance, but it seems to me that humans are trying to leave everything in the machines because humans already know that we are not going to be able to do problem-solving anymore. Our life cycles of problem-solving with love (and the soul) will be barren from our civilization, and guess what: probably, sooner or later, an AI-powered button of a machine will destroy the core of the planet Earth, leaving nothing behind.

What is the purpose of problem-solving?
The purpose of problem-solving is not to make our life easier. It is to find the truth about how we can raise the bar of our thoughtful endeavors to act on love for God, love for others, and ourselves. Problem-solving guided only by profits is like “prostitution”. Prostitution is the oldest profession and the lowest of the activities of humans throughout all our history. Not even miserable slavery is below that, but the action of “the unworthy or corrupt use of one’s talents for the sake of personal or financial gain”. We believe that meanwhile, humans continue in the race of “prostituting” corruptedly their talents in exchange for money, it is impossible that we can generate or create a lovely future for our planet and ourselves.  Collusion in a value proposition can extend to a mega level of our political-economic systems, and this action is unworthy. It is shameful. If collusion between stakeholders of the business model value chain is utilized as the foundation of the digital economy, then we are already promoting the social evil of “the talent prostitution” of our future generations. Sadly we are teaching our kids, teens, and young adults to become digital beggars, and that is a high degree of offensive corruption to the next generations. Look at it: this is a systemic problem that we need to solve as soon as possible.

Why have we chosen the Value Proposition Canvas of Osterwalder-Pigneur?
I invite you to read slides 9, 10, and 11. All are self-explanatory.  I would like to add that I am not benefiting in any way by choosing the Value Proposition Canvas methodology of the Osterwalder-Pigneur advisory firm. I have not had any previous contact with the firm Strategizer, nor with anyone who works there. This saga is not a paid advertisement, neither an endorsement nor a promotion of the Osterwalder-Pigneur toolkit. It is not a paper review of their method either. For the sake of maintaining transparency and trust with my adorable audience, all our content follows the academic spirit, and all my opinions and strategic reflections personal, are genuine and not biased by any type of external interest.

The reason why we selected the Value Proposition Canvas methodology is simple: It is commonly utilized in the milieu of entrepreneurship, and it has been rolled out for more than 15 years. Remarkably and additionally, this framework has been utilized because of its simplicity in the milieu of many big corporations, SMEs, and for different purposes. Read slide 10 again, please. Our aim is to help our audience understand that each framework of analysis can be positioned in a matrix path of integrity/excellence. See slide 11. Our interest is to kick off the consciousness of exploration with a constructive progressive voice. We truly and genuinely wish to contribute to the amelioration of this framework, because we can´t continue using it without certain core improvements that are going to be required in the present and the future of business modeling.

We will stop here today. Enough for today. We will continue this coming Friday. See you then.

Announcement.
This spring saga will last 16 episodes plus the grand finale, from January 22nd to May 6th. We will publish only on Fridays (occasionally, if required we will add more additional episodes on Tuesdays), at the latest before 11:59 pm (CST). Our next episode will be the beginning of the theoretical explanation of the value proposition canvas. We will explore the section of the customer profile, Gains, and pains.

Musical Section.
This saga is about improvement, amelioration, upgrading, and the advancement required in the theory and practice of value propositions. Value propositions are the first step in our business modeling frameworks. If the value proposition is improper, then our business model is mistaken. Therefore, we will also share the music of classical progress that marked a before and after in the composer´s headway. Today we wish to show you a beautiful discovery that helped music to evolve during the Middle Ages. Two instruments are being played by Daniel and Pablo Zapico: the theorbo and the archlute. The piece is an excerpt called Chaconne: Dance For Chinese Man And Woman, from “The Fairy Queen (Semi-Opera Z. 629)” by Henry Purcell (1692). 

Thank you for reading http://www.eleonoraescalantestrategy.com. Blessings see you on our next episode.

Sources of reference and Bibliography utilized today. All are written in slide 12.

Disclaimer: Eleonora Escalante paints Illustrations in Watercolor. Other types of illustrations or videos (which are not mine) are used for educational purposes ONLY. All are used as Illustrative and non-commercial images. Utilized only informatively for the public good. Nevertheless, most of this blog’s pictures, images, or videos are not mine. I do not own any of the lovely photos or images unless otherwise stated.