Why Your Team Keeps Solving the Wrong Problem | Propel 360 | Jacton Ambalwa | June 30 2026 | Team Dynamics

 

The debate in the boardroom wasn't really about strategy.

It looked like it was. On the surface, four people were arguing about the right way forward — what to prioritize, what to cut, what the data actually meant. Voices rose slightly. Someone repeated themselves for the third time, more slowly, as if volume had failed and clarity might work better.

But underneath the disagreement about strategy was a different disagreement entirely.

Four people in that room were thinking in four completely different ways.

And nobody in the room knew it.

The Argument Beneath the Argument

One person in that meeting wanted to slow down. To ask more questions. To make absolutely sure the team understood the real problem before anyone reached for a solution. To them, the others seemed reckless — jumping ahead, skipping the groundwork, solving for a problem that hadn't been properly defined.

Another person in the room was three steps ahead, already imagining six different directions the project could take. To them, the first person seemed stuck. Overly cautious. Unable to see the bigger picture because they were too busy interrogating the details.

A third person wanted to weigh the options. Compare them properly. Build out the pros and cons before committing to anything. To them, the room felt chaotic — too many ideas, not enough structure, nobody pausing to think it through.

And a fourth person just wanted to move. Pick a direction and go. To them, the entire conversation felt like an unnecessary delay dressed up as diligence.

Each of them left that meeting a little frustrated with the others.

Each of them was right — about their own way of thinking. And each of them had quietly assumed that the way they think is simply the way thinking works.

It isn't.

We Are Not All Solving Problems the Same Way

There is a piece of research that changed how we think about teams at Propel 360, and it began with a simple, almost embarrassingly obvious observation.

Human beings are natural problem solvers. We do it constantly — at home, at school, at work. But we do not all do it the same way.

A distinguished professor at the State University of New York spent years analyzing millions of data points on how people approach creative and collaborative problem solving. What he found was this: roughly eighty percent of us have a clear, consistent preference for a particular way of thinking.

Some of us are natural Clarifiers. We want to understand the problem fully before we move toward solutions. We ask questions. We dig for information. We are, at our best, thorough — and at our worst, prone to analysis paralysis, still gathering data long after everyone else is ready to move.

Some of us are Ideators. We see possibility everywhere. We generate options easily, sometimes faster than anyone can capture them. We are, at our best, expansive and imaginative — and at our worst, scattered, chasing the next idea before the current one has been properly developed.

Some of us are Developers. We like to take a rough idea and refine it. Weigh it. Strengthen it. We are, at our best, rigorous — and at our worst, perfectionistic, unable to let go of an idea until it is flawless, even when flawless was never required.

And some of us are Implementers. We want to act. We are energized by momentum, by getting things done, by seeing an idea become real. We are, at our best, decisive — and at our worst, impatient, moving forward before the thinking behind the idea has had time to settle.

None of these is the right way to think.

All four are necessary. And most teams have all four sitting around the same table — without ever having had the conversation that would let them understand each other.

Why This Matters More Than It Seems To

Here is the quiet cost of teams who don't understand their own thinking preferences.

The Clarifier gets labeled difficult, or slow, or overly cautious — when really, they are protecting the team from solving the wrong problem.

The Ideator gets labeled unfocused, or impractical, or scattered — when really, they are the reason the team has more than one option to choose from.

The Developer gets labeled nit-picky, or perfectionistic, or slow to commit — when really, they are the reason the idea that finally launches has actually been stress-tested.

The Implementer gets labeled impatient, or reckless, or unwilling to think things through — when really, they are the reason anything actually happens at all.

Each of these people, misunderstood, becomes a source of friction. Each of these people, understood, becomes one quarter of a genuinely complete way of solving problems.

The difference between those two outcomes is not talent.

It is awareness.

What Changes When a Team Knows Itself

We have watched this shift happen, again and again, in teams across Kenya's leading organizations.

A team sits down and, for the first time, maps out how each person naturally approaches a problem. And almost immediately, something releases. The frustration that built up over months — why does she always ask so many questions, why does he always want to jump straight to action — softens into something closer to understanding.

Because it was never about right or wrong.

It was about difference. Unnamed, unexamined difference, quietly working against a team that could have been working with it.

When a team understands its own collective thinking profile — who clarifies, who ideates, who develops, who implements — something practical happens. Meetings change shape. The Clarifiers are given room to ask their questions before the room moves to solutions. The Ideators are invited to generate freely before anyone evaluates. The Developers get the space to refine without being rushed. And the Implementers, finally, get a green light that the rest of the team has actually thought it through.

Nobody has to change who they are.

They simply have to understand who everybody else is — and design the way they work together accordingly.

The Question for Your Team This Week

So here is what I want to leave you with today.

Not a framework to implement immediately. Not a workshop to schedule on the spot. Just a question, simple enough to ask in your next team meeting, and honest enough to start a real conversation.

What type of thinker are you — and does your team know?

Because the debate in your boardroom this week, the one that feels like it's about strategy or budget or direction, might actually be about something quieter and far more fixable.

Four people. Four different ways of thinking. And a team that has never had the conversation that would let them finally work with their differences instead of being quietly undone by them.

That conversation is worth having.

It usually changes more than anyone expects.

---

At Propel 360, we use the employ research proven knowledge, Skills, tools and techniques to help teams understand their collective problem-solving style — reducing conflict, building empathy, and helping every voice contribute at full strength.

If this named something your team has been feeling, share it with them.

Let's talk: 360propel@gmail.com | +254 741354292 | propel360Kenya.loveable.app

---

#EngageBetter #Propel360Kenya #WorkplaceWellbeing #TeamCohesion #CollaborativeProblemSolving #Leadership #Studentssupportprogram #Staffsupportprogram