Sometimes I start with the hardest problem, but sometimes I like to start with a really easy problem. Why do I do that?Why would it be a good idea to start with the easiest problem? What kind of risk are you trying to pay down in a given situation?
Here are some reasons that would justify breaking the "hardest problem first" rule:
- If you need to gain experience in a new domain, starting with something easy can help you get experience before tackling the harder problems.
- If the world has changed out from underneath an existing system in an unpredictable way, starting with changing something easy or predictable can help you observe the source of the chaos.
- If you are sharing work, handing the easy work items out to others based on their learning goals can help them learn better.
- If tackling a hard problem will take a very long time, and others are waiting for you, then picking an easier part of the problem can help ease integration while still letting you engage on the hard problem.
The kind of risk you want to pay down first is important. Here are the kinds of risk that would be payed down by the above behaviors:
- risk of getting lost while learning
- risk of being unable to bring order to a chaotic system
- risk of assigning impossible tasks to someone who just wants to ramp up
- risk of high integration costs because of trying to change too much at once
Most of the time, the risk caused by the uncertainty inherent in solving a hard problem is the most important risk to pay down first. But sometimes, there are other factors at play, and other subtle variables that need to be managed to achieve a successful group outcome.
Thank you to Michael Nelson for his instructive collaboration on this topic.