When choosing whether to work on goals in the direction of problem solving or interest orientation, most teams (and people) have preferences. In the theory we call these ‘decision premises’. Teams that like to solve problems can be recognised by complaints about the so-called ‘politics’ within the organisation. They believe that a problem is best solved when one views a difficult, complicated and complex task from a factual viewpoint. (If this is done from a social dimension, the task becomes one of furthering interests). On the basis of this decision, one examines the task with regard to the competences, resources and time needed to find a solution. One generates solution variants, analyses the advantages and disadvantages, chooses the most functional one and then implements it. This is the preferred choice, particularly for engineers and scientifically-orientated persons (and teams).
This is followed by a lot of further decisions. These affect the organisation of work processes, meetings, agendas, distribution of tasks and roles, presentations, road maps, the adherence to decisions etc.. Should a team be fixated on the side of problem solving, it is threatened, despite best efforts, with not necessarily being successful. This is because neglecting interests leads to a situation where other teams, persons, organisational units are involved too little, too late, too clumsily or not at all. Where this happens, there is no overview of their concerns, fears, worries about effects, perceptions of competition, envy, jealousy, or the potential to offend. Therefore, what would be the best solution is often not politically enforceable.
Teams require both abilities – problem solving and interest orientation – and they need the competence to decide when, where and how the two are to be applied and executed. But for this there are no rules, it is situation dependent.