Perspective II

Kristyn Rankin · September 2026

Organizations usually engage an advisor with a problem already defined.

Should we enter this market? How should we respond to this regulation? Which technology should we invest in? How do we reduce this risk? What should our strategy be?

There is value in a clearly defined question. But there is also some risk in accepting it too quickly.

The question an organization asks is often shaped by where the issue first appeared. A regulatory problem may arrive through government affairs or compliance. A supply chain problem surfaces through procurement. A technology decision begins with IT. A sustainability issue lands with the sustainability team.

That may be where the problem became visible. It isn't necessarily where the problem begins or ends.

Some of the most consequential work happens before anyone starts solving the problem. It comes from understanding why the question is being asked in the first place. What decision is actually being made? What assumptions are already embedded in the question? Who else will be affected by the answer? And what happens if we solve exactly what was asked but miss something adjacent to it?

This is also where seemingly straightforward questions become more complex.

A recommendation can satisfy the scope, withstand scrutiny and still miss something important. Not because the analysis was poor, but because the problem was framed too narrowly.

That creates an important responsibility for advisors.

Our job is not simply to answer the question we were given. Nor is it to walk in and redefine the client's problem for them. It is to understand the organization well enough to recognize when the question might need to become broader, narrower or simply different.

Sometimes that means asking an uncomfortable question or bringing another function into the conversation. Sometimes the original problem turns out to be a symptom of something happening elsewhere in the organization. And sometimes, after taking a broader look, the original question turns out to have been exactly the right one.

The distinction matters because good advice is not measured by how efficiently we complete a scope of work. It is measured by whether the work helps an organization make a better decision.

There will always be value in expertise. Organizations need people who understand the technical, regulatory, financial and operational details of difficult problems. But expertise becomes considerably more valuable when it is paired with enough perspective to question the frame around the problem.

Before solving the problem in front of us, it is worth asking one more question:

Is this the problem we actually need to solve?