Is/is not problem-solving technique

The Is/Is Not technique defines a problem by contrasting where it appears with comparable places, times or conditions where it could appear but does not. The contrast narrows scope and generates testable distinctions instead of letting assumptions expand unchecked. Charles Kepner and Benjamin Tregoe incorporated this logic into their systematic problem-analysis work after establishing their consultancy in 1958.

When to use it

• Use it when a problem is vague, intermittent or surrounded by distracting information.
• Apply it before proposing causes, particularly when similar products, locations or periods do not show the failure.
• Use the matrix with a team to separate observed facts from inference.

Origins

Kepner and Tregoe developed their rational problem-analysis methods after founding a New Jersey consultancy in 1958. Their approach compared a deviation with closely related non-deviations to identify meaningful differences and changes. The simplified Is/Is Not matrix preserves that core diagnostic discipline.

What it is

For each dimension, record verified observations in two columns:

• What: object, defect or outcome affected—and comparable objects not affected.
• Where: geographic or physical location—and where it does not occur.
• When: first occurrence, recurrence and pattern—and comparable times without it.
• Extent: size, frequency or trend—and the plausible extent not observed.

A good “is not” is a close comparison, not an unrelated absence. The difference between the two conditions becomes a clue, not proof of cause.

How to use it

Write one neutral problem statement, then create the first template:

Is/is not template 1

Problem specification:

                                            Is                                Is not

Fill each dimension with evidence and source:

What?          What is affected?                     What comparable thing is unaffected?

Is/is not template 2

Where?         Where is it observed?                 Where could it appear but does not?

When?          When did it begin and recur?          Which comparable periods are unaffected?

Extent?        How large, frequent or severe?        Which expected spread is absent?

Next, identify differences and recent changes between each pair:

Is/is not template 3

Dimension      Is     Is not     Difference     What changed?     Potential causes

Generate causes that explain every “is” and every relevant “is not.” Reject or revise a cause that contradicts the matrix. Seek confirming and disconfirming evidence before acting.

Test           Prediction if cause is true            Observation and result

For a motivation problem, the comparison may reveal that performance changes by task, time, team composition or management intervention. Those contrasts guide inquiry without assuming that motivation is an individual trait.

Decision       Most supported cause                   Corrective action and owner

The technique improves focus, but missing data, poor comparison cases and inaccurate problem statements can still mislead. Update the matrix as new evidence appears.

Top practical tip

Choose “is not” comparisons that are as similar as possible to the failure condition. Their differences are more diagnostically valuable.

Top pitfall

Do not treat a difference as a cause. Use the matrix to generate hypotheses, then test them against evidence and alternative explanations.

Further reading

Kepner, C.H. and Tregoe, B.B. (1997) The New Rational Manager. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Research Press.