In a thorough problem-solving process you’ll have to build two logic trees: one “why” to find the root cause of your problem and one “how” to identify potential solutions.
Logic trees must be mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive (MECE) and perspicacious. Building them is hard work (if it isn’t, you’re probably doing it wrong). So consider using existing frameworks wherever possible. Just make sure that the frameworks you are considering truly are MECE (they often aren’t) and useful for your problem.
Existing framework typically won’t provide a complete tree; instead, they’ll provide the logical structure onto which you can build your own tree.
Here are a few examples.
The profitability framework helps understand how to improve the financial performance of a product or business unit. It’s also popular in case interviews.
The Marketing 4P’s framework—also called marketing mix—summarizes all the attributes of a marketing concept.
Ohmae’s 3 C’s, McKinsey’s 7S’s and Porter’s 5 forces are useful for corporate strategies. The SWOT analysis can be used in more situations but is also typical of strategic thinking. Finally, Aristotle’s three pillars of persuasion is useful for negotiations.
A framework for a profitability issue tree
A marketing issue tree can be based on the marketing mix framework.
A corporate strategy logic tree can use Ohmae's 3 C's framework.
An alternative framework for a corporate strategy issue tree is McKinsey's 7S.
Porter's 5 forces can be the basis of a industry analysis issue tree.
A SWOT framework can support a wider range of logic trees.
The three pillars of Aristotelean persuasion can serve as the foundation of an issue tree for argumentation.
[...] you’ll be lucky enough to have existing frameworks that you can use to decompose your issue in MECE parts. If one of these is perspicacious enough for [...]
Terrific work! This is the type of information that should be shared around the web. Shame on the search engines for not positioning this post higher!