34.1 Public-Sector Problems
Public-sector cases often involve objectives other than profit. A government agency might want to reduce traffic congestion, improve educational outcomes, increase vaccination rates, or expand access to public services.
Start by clarifying the outcome the organization wants to improve and how success will be measured.
Key considerations: Population affected, service quality, cost, implementation feasibility, equity, regulation, and stakeholder impact.
Do not automatically apply commercial logic. The goal may be maximizing public impact within a fixed budget rather than maximizing financial return.
34.2 Nonprofit Cases
Nonprofits also require disciplined problem solving, but their primary objective may be social impact rather than profit.
Possible questions include how to reach more beneficiaries, raise additional funding, allocate resources, improve program effectiveness, or expand into new regions.
Useful structure: Impact, target population, funding, operating capabilities, delivery model, and implementation constraints.
Financial sustainability still matters because the organization must fund its activities, but money is usually a means to achieve the mission rather than the ultimate objective.
34.3 Organizational Problems
Organizational cases may ask how a company should redesign its structure, improve decision making, reduce duplication, or strengthen accountability.
Relevant areas may include:
- Structure: How are teams and reporting lines organized?
- Roles: Are responsibilities clear?
- Decision rights: Who has authority to make important decisions?
- Processes: How do teams coordinate?
- Capabilities: Does the organization have the necessary talent and skills?
- Incentives: Are people rewarded for the desired behavior?
Important: Connect organizational issues to business outcomes such as speed, cost, quality, or customer performance.
34.4 Sustainability Cases
Sustainability cases may involve reducing emissions, improving energy efficiency, changing materials, meeting environmental targets, or developing lower-carbon products.
A strong structure might consider:
- Baseline: Where does the current environmental impact come from?
- Levers: Which actions could reduce it?
- Economics: What would each initiative cost or save?
- Feasibility: Are the necessary technologies and capabilities available?
- Stakeholders: How might customers, regulators, suppliers, and investors respond?
Key principle: Quantify both environmental and business impact where possible.
34.5 Technology Cases
Technology cases may involve digital transformation, software investment, automation, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, or technology-enabled business models.
Do not begin with the technology itself. Start with the business objective.
Useful questions: What problem is technology solving? How much value could it create? What processes must change? What data, systems, and skills are required? What are the implementation risks?
A technically impressive solution is not necessarily a good business solution if it does not create enough value or cannot be implemented successfully.
34.6 Healthcare Cases
Healthcare cases may involve providers, insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical devices, public-health organizations, or other participants.
Important considerations often include patients, clinical outcomes, reimbursement, regulation, costs, capacity, and access.
Practical approach: Identify who receives the service, who pays for it, who makes purchasing or treatment decisions, and what outcome each stakeholder cares about.
Healthcare can involve more stakeholders than many other industries, so clarifying incentives is especially important.
34.7 Cases with Little or No Quantitative Analysis
Some cases focus almost entirely on qualitative reasoning. You might be asked how to redesign an organization, respond to a regulatory change, improve customer experience, or implement a transformation.
Do not assume that less math means less structure.
Strong qualitative analysis: Break the problem into logical dimensions, identify cause-and-effect relationships, prioritize the most important issues, and evaluate trade-offs.
You can still quantify where useful, but do not force calculations into a problem simply to demonstrate numerical ability.
34.8 Cases That Do Not Fit a Familiar Framework
When you encounter a case that feels unfamiliar, resist the temptation to force it into profitability, market entry, or another memorized template.
Instead, ask:
- Objective: What outcome or decision does the client need?
- Drivers: What factors determine that outcome?
- Stakeholders: Who influences or is affected by the decision?
- Constraints: What limits the possible solutions?
- Evidence: What information would help test the major drivers?
Goal: Build a structure from the actual problem rather than from the label you give the case.
34.9 Applying First Principles When You Have Never Seen the Problem Before
First-principles thinking is your safety net for unfamiliar cases.
Start by defining exactly what success looks like. Then determine what must be true for that outcome to occur. Break those requirements into testable questions, prioritize the highest-impact ones, and use evidence to update your view.
A useful sequence is:
- Define: Clarify the objective and constraints.
- Decompose: Break the problem into major drivers.
- Prioritize: Identify what matters most.
- Analyze: Test the most important drivers.
- Synthesize: Connect findings into a recommendation.
Final principle: Unusual cases are not fundamentally different from familiar ones. They simply remove the comfort of a recognizable template. If you can define the objective, identify the drivers, reason from first principles, and stay focused on the client’s decision, you can handle a case even when you have never seen anything like it before.
