Most people in positions of authority believe their job is to fix things. Someone brings a problem, and the reflex is immediate: analyze it, devise a solution, implement it, move on. This approach feels productive and decisive. It’s also frequently wrong.
There’s a counterintuitive skill that separates adequate leaders from exceptional ones. Instead of rushing to solve every problem that crosses their desk, they invest time in naming what’s actually happening. This isn’t semantics or wordplay. It’s a fundamental shift in how leadership and development actually work in complex environments.
The Expensive Habit of Premature Solutions
Organizations waste staggering amounts of time and money solving the wrong problems. Not because people are incompetent, but because they’re solving problems before they truly understand them.
Here’s how it typically unfolds. Someone notices something isn’t working. Sales are down. Employee turnover is up. A project is behind schedule. The observation triggers an immediate scramble for solutions.
Leadership implements new processes. They restructure teams. They launch initiatives. All of this creates the appearance of progress.
But six months later, the fundamental issue remains. The solutions didn’t work because they were addressing symptoms rather than causes, or solving a problem that was never the real problem.
The missing step wasn’t more analysis or better data. It was accurately naming what was happening.
The Three Questions That Lead to Better Names
When faced with a problem that needs naming, three questions help cut through the noise.
What keeps happening despite our efforts to stop it?
This question identifies patterns that have proven resistant to obvious solutions. If you’ve already tried the logical fixes and the problem persists, you’re probably solving the wrong thing.
Maybe you keep telling your team to communicate more, but information still gets lost. The problem isn’t communication. It might be: “We’ve created so many channels that no one knows where to put information anymore.”
What are we all pretending not to notice?
Organizations develop collective blind spots. Everyone can sense something’s wrong, but no one wants to name it because naming it would require uncomfortable conversations.
The project isn’t behind because of technical challenges. It’s behind because the client keeps changing requirements and no one wants to have a boundary conversation. Until you name it, you’ll keep pretending the issue is estimation accuracy.
What would make this problem irrelevant?
This question bypasses the problem entirely and looks at the context around it. Sometimes the best insight isn’t about the problem itself but about why it matters.
You might be agonizing over which candidate to hire when the real issue is: “We’re trying to hire our way out of a retention problem.” If people keep leaving, hiring better people won’t help.
When Not to Name
There are situations where naming isn’t helpful. If something is on fire, you put it out first. True emergencies require immediate action.
There’s also a type of person who uses naming as sophisticated procrastination. They endlessly refine their understanding without ever acting. This is naming as avoidance.
The goal isn’t to name everything exhaustively before taking action. It’s to invest just enough effort in naming to ensure your actions address the actual problem.
Building a Culture That Values Naming
Organizations develop norms around how problems get addressed. In some cultures, the person who acts fastest gets rewarded. In others, careful thinking gets valued.
The best cultures reward accurate naming. They create space for people to say, “I don’t think we understand this problem yet” without being seen as obstructionist.
Leaders build this culture by modeling it. When you stop to name problems carefully before solving them, you give others permission to do the same. When you change course after discovering a better name for what’s happening, you demonstrate that understanding matters more than consistency.
The shift from compulsive problem-solving to thoughtful problem-naming isn’t natural for most leaders. It requires fighting against instincts that have served you well in other contexts.
But in complex environments where problems have multiple causes, naming is the skill that makes everything else possible. It’s the difference between staying busy and making progress.
