Problems are an inherent part of life. The world in which we live often presents us with complex situations that we have to deal with, and which provide an opportunity for the development of our potentialities.

However, we also know that difficulty in solving problems is one of the main risk factors for the development of emotional disorders. How we deal with them is therefore important for well-being.

Today there are methods of training in decision making that have extensive evidence on their functioning in multiple areas of life, and whose application is a key piece in many psychological treatment programs.

In this article we will review Nezu and D’Zurilla’s model, as it is one of the best known and most effective. It was conceived with the aim of adapting to diverse contexts, in contrast to others whose range of application is more limited.

Nezu and D’Zurilla Decision Making Training

The problem-solving program of these authors is a structured and sequential model, which stands out for its simplicity. It consists of 5 different steps, and there is the possibility of going back to some of the stages already completed when certain circumstances are met, as will be detailed. This intervention is included in the category of cognitive-behavioural treatments , and although it is easy to understand, achieving mastery of it requires practice.

The method is based on the rigorous analysis of behaviours and coping strategies of people with excellent problem-solving skills; but presented in operational, clear and reproducible terms. In this section we will review all the steps, detailing their characteristics.

Phase 1: Perception of the problem

The authors of this problem-solving model stress the need to define exactly what the problems are and what the solutions are, as well as the different styles that people use to cope with the circumstances that create stress. The understanding of these concepts is an essential previous step to integrate the rest of the phases that make up the program , so they are detailed below.

What is a problem

A problem is understood as any life situation that generates an adaptive response and that sets in motion the coping resources to find its solution. Thus, we can consider as such the occurrence of a negative event, the loss of that which is valued or esteemed, conflicts (decisions that are apparently opposed or in which the selection of one alternative implicitly implies the renunciation of another or others) and frustration (the appearance of obstacles that prevent the achievement of a goal).

The authors defend the idea that, at this stage, it is important to develop a perspective on the problems that implies considering them as a challenge , and not as a threat.

What is a solution

Solutions are all those behaviours that aim to give an answer to a problem. Most of life’s situations do not have a perfect solution , but the best of all possible ones, being this the one that is intended to be located and applied through training in decision making. Objectively modifiable situations will require direct actions, but those that are not will imply placing emphasis on their emotional consequences.

What are the basic coping styles

Three basic coping styles can be distinguished: impulsive (a quick decision is made without weighing up in depth all the possible angles of the problem or without foreseeing the consequences of the solution), avoidant (the implementation of a solution is delayed, delaying coping or denying the existence of the problematic fact) and rational (it assumes a balance between the two previous ones and is the one pursued with the application of the programme).

Other aspects to consider

The choice of a possible solution must be made by considering not only the benefits and prejudices on the person, but also the impact that the decision taken may have on the environment .

Sufficient material resources must also be made available for its implementation, and a level of commitment must be assumed that is commensurate with the size of the problem. It is recommended that it be applied first to simple situations, progressively increasing the demand for it.

Phase 2: Problem definition

A well-defined problem is a half-solved problem . Therefore, the first step to be taken is to write on a sheet of paper (or similar physical support), using as simple a sentence as possible (maximum twenty words), the problem we want to address. This is a process in which we reflect on the situation in order to grasp all its nuances. At this point we must evaluate not only the what, but also the how, when and why.

With this step we will succeed in translating a complex situation, which is often difficult to define, into more operational and less ambiguous terms. We will manage to reduce uncertainty and be able to observe the facts in terms of greater objectivity. Achieving a wording that fits the reality of the problem can be difficult at first, but we must take the time to consider that the written words reflect with sufficient precision what is happening to us.

Along with the problem, we can also write the objective being pursued, using simple terms and realistic expectations (otherwise the risk of abandonment will increase). If the goal we are pursuing is too complex or its resolution takes too long, it is useful to break it down into smaller logical steps whose achievement brings us closer to it.

Phase 3: Generation of alternatives

In this phase, a brainstorming is done, through which we elaborate all the action alternatives that we can think of to face the detected problem. This process is based on three principles: quantity (as many alternatives as possible), variety (approaching the situation from all fronts) and delay in judgment (indiscriminate selection of “anything that comes to mind”).

Phase 4: Selection of an alternative

At this point, we should have a written problem and a more or less long list of possible alternatives . Some of them may have seemed stupid to us while we were thinking about them, but we must remember that this is the time reserved for their detailed evaluation, and not before. What we must do now is to evaluate them using two coordinates: the positive/negative aspects and the short/long-term consequences.

To make it easier we can draw a cross on a landscape sheet, letting each line cross it completely and divide the space into four equal parts for each corner, namely: top left (short-term positives), top right (long-term positives), bottom left (short-term negatives) and bottom right (long-term negatives). In these spaces we will write everything we can think of, thinking in detail.

Each alternative will require its own grid , as all will have to be evaluated in the four possibilities mentioned. It is essential to bear in mind that we must incorporate into this process of reflection the potential consequences of the decision on third parties and/or on oneself, as well as the economic or material viability of the possible solution being reflected upon. It is key to dedicate the necessary time to this step.

Phase 5: Implementation of the alternative and evaluation

In phase 5 we will have a written problem, together with all the alternatives that we came up with during the brainstorming and the consequent process of reflection on the positive and negative aspects of these, in the short and long term. The time has come to make a decision, and to choose a plan of action . There are two concrete strategies for this, one quantitative and the other qualitative, but they are not exclusive (both should be used to reach the final choice).

Quantitative analysis

This phase is aimed at obtaining an “objective” assessment of each alternative, which may give a clue as to its quality. Starting with a score of zero (neutral), we will add one point for each positive aspect detected and subtract one point for the negative ones . So, if an option has three good ones and two bad ones, it will be given a score of one. This analysis offers only a raw score, which needs a complementary qualitative view.

Qualitative analysis

For this analysis we will make a personal assessment of the pros and cons, since the weight of each of them is subject to the values and goals of each of the people who develop the technique. It is important to ensure that they are consistent with the objectives we set at the beginning of the exercise. The decision does not have to coincide with the quantitative evaluation , although the one chosen tends to be the best evaluated from both perspectives.

So what’s next?

Once the alternative has been selected, it is necessary to commit to its implementation, since the previous analysis has been based on rationality and there is a high probability that it will be the best of all possible alternatives. It is very important to carry out a periodic evaluation of the consequences that the chosen solution is having on the development of the situation, and whether the resulting events satisfy the objective initially proposed or not.

It is possible that we may observe that the alternative chosen, after some time, is not giving the expected results . In this case we have two options: to keep it while we try to combine it with the second best option, or to decide to remove it and simply continue with the next one on the list. In the case that this new decision does not seem to be useful either, we can continue with the next one, until we find the appropriate one or we notice that it does not appear in the list.

If we come to the final conclusion that none of the options provided can improve the problem, we will return to phase 3 (search for alternatives) and resume the process from this point. This will allow us to work out new possible solutions, with the added advantage that having gone deeper into the problem we will have experience that we did not have before, so we will improve on this second occasion.

If after this circumstance we run into a blocking situation again, it might be time to restart the process from the beginning . It may be that the problem is not exactly described, or that the goal is unrealistic. In any case, even if the solution seems elusive, as long as we persist in our search we will acquire greater skill in the procedure and we will manage to automate the sequence of which it is composed.

Bibliographic references:

  • Anzel, G. (2016). Problem-Solving Training: Effects on the Problem-Solving Skills and Self-Efficacy of Nursing Students. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 64, 231-246
  • Nezu, A. and Nezu, C. (2001). Problem Solving Therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 11(2), 187-205.