Table of Contents >
   Part B. Community Assessment, Agenda Setting, and Choice ... >
      Chapter 3. Assessing Community Needs and Resources >
         Section 5. Analyzing Community Problems >
             Main Section - Introduction, what, why, when, who, and how. >

Analyzing Community Problems

  

Main Section

 Contributed by Bill Berkowitz Edited by Phil Rabinowitz

Communities have problems, just like people

What is a community problem?

What is analyzing community problems all about?

Why should I analyze a community problem?

How should I analyze a community problem?

When should I analyze a community problem?

Going beyond the basics -- does analysis really work?



Communities have problems, just like people


Problems are part of life -- they go together with being alive. And every community has problems, too; they go together with being a community. That's just a fact of community life.

Two more basic facts:

  • Communities, like people, try to solve their problems.
  • And analyzing those problems helps in their solution.

Example: A community problem

The downtown area of a community is declining. Stores are closing, and moving out; no new stores are moving in. We want to revitalize that downtown. How should we do it?

Our thinking here is simple:

  • We'd be better off analyzing why that decline is taking place, why the problem is occurring, rather than simply jumping in and trying to fix it.
  • A good analysis will lead to better long-run solutions. And therefore:
  • A good analysis is worth taking the time to do.

So this section explains what analyzing community problems is about, and why it can be helpful -- and then how to do it.


What is a community problem?


Some Examples

This covers a lot of ground. There's a long list of nominees. And you probably know the main contenders. Can you name the leading problems in your own community? Chances are you can at least start the list.

Below are types of problems that might appear on many community lists, in alphabetical order:

Example: Community problems

Arson, child abuse, child neglect, corruption, crime, domestic violence, drugs, elder care, emergency services, ethnic conflict, graffiti, health, housing, hunger, inequality, jobs, noise, nothing to do, overwork, poverty, public services, racism, rats, safety, schools, sexism, stress, teenage pregnancy, transportation, trash collection, vandalism

What others would you add?

Some Criteria

But rather than aim for a complete problem list, here are some criteria we can use for definition:

  • The problem occurs frequently. (frequency)
  • The problem has lasted for a while. (duration)
  • The problem affects many people. (scope, or range)
  • The problem is disturbing, and possibly intense. (severity) (It disrupts personal or community life.)
  • The problem deprives people of legal or moral rights. (legality)
  • The problem is perceived as a problem. (perception)

This last criterion -- perception -- is perhaps the most important one. If people perceive the streets as unsafe, that is a problem, regardless of what crime statistics say.

If people think that the schools are rotten, that is a problem, no matter what objective facts are offered. A problem can be a psychological fact; it doesn't have to be based on hard evidence.

And what is seen as a problem can vary from place to place, and from group to group in the same place. Community A may see new immigrants, or absentee landlords, as problems; while Community B, with the same percentages of new immigrants and absentee landlords, may not have given either one a serious thought. Back in Community A, teen-agers might say their biggest problem is nothing to do; but their overloaded parents might wish for that same problem, devoutly.

There's no official definition of a community problem; but the criteria above should give you a start.


What is analyzing community problems all about?


In a nutshell:

Analyzing community problems is a way of thinking carefully about a problem or issue before acting on a solution. It first involves looking for possible reasons behind a problem, and checking out whether those reasons are true. Then (and only then) does it involve identifying possible solutions, and implementing the best ones.

The techniques for analyzing community problems are easy to state. They require simple logic, and sometimes the collection of evidence. But sometimes these techniques elude us in practice. We act on impulse rather than logic; or we neglect the evidence. A careful analysis of the problem can put us back on course.

Okay, but let's make sure I understand this...


Why should I analyze a community problem?

* To better identify what the problem or issue is....

Kids gather on a street. Sometimes they drink; sometimes they get rowdy. What is the problem here? The drinking? The rowdiness? The gathering itself? Or, the possible fact that kids have nowhere else to go? Before looking for solutions, you would want to clarify just what is the problem (or problems) here. Unless you are clear, it's hard to move forward.

* To understand what is at the heart of a problem....

A problem is usually caused by something; what is that something? We should find out. And often the problem we see is a symptom of something else.

* To determine the barriers and resources associated with addressing the problem.

It's good practice and planning to anticipate barriers and obstacles before they might rise up. By doing so, you can get around (or over) them. Analyzing community problems can also help you understand (and find) the resources you need. And the better equipped you are with the right resources, the greater your chances of success in tackling whatever problem you are facing.

And finally:

* To develop the best action steps for addressing the problem.

Having a plan of action is always better than taking a few random shots at the problem. If you know where you are going, you are more likely to get there.

In general, when you tackle a problem, it's almost always smarter to analyze it before you begin. That way, you've got a deeper understanding of the problem; and you've covered your bases. There's nothing worse for member involvement and morale than starting to work on a problem, and running up against lots of obstacles -- especially when they are avoidable.

When you take a little time to examine a problem first, you can anticipate some of these obstacles before they come up, and give yourself and your members better odds of coming up with a successful solution.


So When Should I Analyze a Community Problem?


Always. At least, almost always.

Every community problem should benefit from analysis. The only possible exception is when the problem is an immediate crisis that requires action this very moment. And even then, analysis should help later.

However, there are conditions when analysis is especially important. And these are:

1. When the community problem is not defined very clearly

2. When little is known about the community problem, or its possible consequences

3. When you want to find causes that may improve the chance of successfully addressing the problem

4. When people are jumping to solutions much too soon

5. When you need to identify actions to address the problem, and learn what persons or groups could best collaborate in taking action.


How should I analyze a community problem?


And of course, that is the heart of this section.

The answer is there's no one way to do it. There are many. And we'll suggest further that you keep your eye on the big picture: to understand the problem better and to deal with it more effectively. These are the goals of any problem analysis. So the method you choose should accomplish those goals for you.

We'll offer one very simple analytic method here, and walk through a few examples. We think this method is helpful, but we encourage you to check it out for yourself. It is certainly not the only one available; some excellent alternative (and more detailed) problem-analysis methods are found at the end of this section.

Here it is. There are eight easy steps:

  1. State the problem, in general terms.
  2. Give specific examples of the problem.
  3. Think of reasons for the problem.
  4. Find the most probable solution.
  5. Identify solutions.
  6. Choose the best one.
  7. Implement the solution.
  8. Evaluate the solution.

A challenge question: Find an acronym to sum up these steps!

Does this seem too formal or too mechanical? If it seems that way to you, consider that this is similar to the way we solve many problems of everyday life. In every hour of our life, we face problems -- usually smaller problems -- and devise solutions to them. In fact, we are so experienced at this that we hardly recognize our problem-solving activities. But here's a simple, common example:

1. State the problem.

The room is dark.

2. Give some examples.

When I turn on the light switch, nothing happens.

3. Think of reasons.

(a) I might have blown a fuse.

(b) The switch could be defective.

(c) The light bulb might have blown.

4. Find the most probable reason.

The fuse isn't blown.

The switch is new.

The bulb is old.

So it's probably the bulb.

5. Identify solutions.

(a) Replace the fuse.

(b) Replace the switch.

(c) Replace the bulb.

6. Choose the best one.

I'll try changing the bulb; it's simplest and cheapest. (If the bulb has really blown, that's probably the only solution there is.)

7. Implement it.

I can change a bulb with the best of them...

8. Evaluate it.

Good. I've got some light now.

This is an example of analyzing an everyday problem, even though we might not call it analysis. It's largely unconscious. And, two key points:

  • We are already skilled at doing analysis.
  • The analysis helped lead to a successful solution.

Community problems, it is true, are generally more complicated than changing light bulbs. But the same type of analysis can apply to them as well, frequently with similarly -successful results.

Here's what we mean, using a different example. We'll add some commentary (in light shading) as we go along:

1. State the problem.

It's dangerous for kids to cross the street around here.

This is a pretty good opening statement, but it's not sufficient by itself. We need some examples, so that we can all be clear what we're talking about.

2. Give some examples.

At the intersection of Broadway and Maple, a kid was hit by a car last week. Two other kids got brushed just a few weeks before.

These are good examples. They are specific, observable, and measurable indicators, and they are certainly enough to spur the search for solutions and action. But why did these accidents and near-accidents occur? What are the reasons?

3. Think of reasons.

Let's see. There are a couple of possibilities:

(a) The traffic blinker at the intersection might not be working properly.

(b) How about the crosswalk? The lines marking it are faded. Drivers probably can't see easily.

(c) There's no crossing guard on the street. Didn't there used to be one a little while ago?

Here's an important point. Even for relatively simple problems (and on the scale of community problems, this is a relatively simple one, even though it is important), there are often several possible reasons. That's the case here. The reasons above are just some possible reasons. Are they the only ones? Probably not.

Let's at least find the main possibilities. But community life is complex. The underlying reasons aren't always apparent right away.

That's why analysis makes sense!

4. Find the most probable reason.

Okay -- we'll have to do some checking around.

(a) The blinker -- I asked the neighbors, and there's never been any problem with it.

(b) The crosswalk lines -- actually, they haven't been painted in two years. They should be. But that wouldn't explain all the accidents right now.

(c) The crossing guard. Yes, the previous guard retired just about a month ago. And there hasn't been a replacement since.

So, according to this analysis, the absence of a crossing guard is the most probable reason for the accidents. Would you agree? And do you see the value of analysis here? Here it is:

The value of analysis is that

it helps point you to an effective solution.

And think: How did you find the most probable reason? A likely answer is that you did some checking around. You collected some facts about events in the past, and related those facts to the accident patterns now.

In other words, you collected some evidence. And then you used logic. In other words:

Analysis of community problems involves

collecting evidence, and using logic to interpret that evidence.

5. Identify solutions. (based on the most probable reason)

The solution is to get a new crossing guard. It didn't take much to figure that out.

Well, it didn't, but you still had to do some figuring, didn't you?

Analysis may have helped here. Caution, though: This doesn't necessarily mean the crossing guard is the best solution -- we have to check that out in the real world.

6. Choose the best one.

Find the crossing guard.

Again, this is easy. The only question now is where will we find one. (Advertise -- Announce at the PTA -- Send a notice home with the kids) This could be another small problem (though maybe not). But if it were, you could probably solve it. Are we right?

7. Implement it

We found a new crossing guard. She starts next Monday.

Congratulations! Now let's see how this works.

8. Evaluate it.

It's been a year now since she started. No more accidents, or close calls. Everyone thinks she's doing a good job. She's happy, too. I guess we can close the books on this problem.

Analysis has helped solve this community problem.


Going beyond the basics does analysis really work?


What do you think of this approach for analyzing problems? As we mentioned, we think it is useful; but of course you must make that judgment yourself. The best way to do so is to try it out. You'll get a better feel for its pros and cons. You'll understand it better.

So we encourage you to test it. Try this analysis out with a different problem, such as the declining downtown example at the start of this section. Better yet, try it with a current problem in your own community setting.

What do you conclude? We hope you'll find some value in analysis. We do know that when we have tried this method with real problems in our own communities, we have drawn some additional conclusions of our own, going beyond the basics:

1. Analyzing community problems can be hard work. It takes real mental effort. We're not used to sitting down and thinking deeply about a problem. (We're too busy!)

2. Real community problems are likely to be more complex, and harder to solve, than the street-crossing example given above. The problems themselves may be larger (on all dimensions), the costs greater, the stakes higher, and the opposition stronger. There may be more elements to take into account. Solution may also depend more on factors outside your immediate control. A revitalized downtown, for example, depends upon the overall strength of the economy. You can't control the economy by yourself.

3. When you go looking for reasons and underlying causes for significant problems, you are likely to find more than one. Life is not "one problem = one reason." It's more complicated than that. Several different reasons may be operating. They may be influencing the problem, in different amounts, all at the same time. (And these may be not just possible reasons, but actual ones.) It may not be an easy task to untangle all the reasons and their relative strengths. Yet you want to untangle them as best you can.

4. The problem may not only have more than one reason; it may have more than one solution too. Problems often call for multiple solutions. That is, for difficult problems, there may be more than one thing you need to do. So in revitalizing the downtown, you might want to (a) beautify the streets; (b) expand the staff of the chamber of commerce; (c) run sidewalk sales; (d) look for outside loans; and (e) recruit new businesses. These are all parts of the solution -- or important-but-partial solutions -- solutions that come together into one whole. Many different types of actions might be necessary for revitalization.

So in solving real community problems, the analysis is not always so cut and dried. There may be multiple reasons behind the problem, and multiple reasons to consider, with many unknowns. The analysis may not always be easy. The solution may be more difficult still.

But that's why problems are problems. If analysis and solution were as easy as pie, we'd be gaining a lot of weight. Community problems exist precisely because they often resist clear analysis and solution. They persist despite our efforts. They can be real challenges.

Yet this doesn't mean we are helpless. Not at all. Analysis, including the analytic methods we have described, can take you a long way. In the downtown example, if you were serious about reversing decline, you might get a group together (a group is usually better than going it alone) and follow the same steps outlined before. State the problem. Look at the examples, the facts and figures. Lay out all the possible reasons. Find the evidence that supports each reason, and possibly prioritize their importance. Identify possible solutions for each reason. Pick the best. You'll then have what may approximate a comprehensive package of solutions. Go to work on implementing them.

This analysis can work, and it can help. If the downtown keeps declining, it may not be because your analysis is poor. It may be that you simply don't have the resources, or the control, or the community will to create the needed changes. Even then, you needn't quit. You can go back to the drawing board and (at the minimum) rethink your resources and regenerate your will.

With good analysis, some resources, and enough determination, we believe even the most troublesome problems can be at least partially solved.



We encourage the reproduction of this material, but ask that you credit

the Community Tool Box.



Resources

Avery, M., Auvine, B., Streibel, B., and Weiss, L. (1981). Building united judgement: A handbook for consensus decision making. Madison, WI: Center for Conflict Resolution. (Available from the Center at P.O. Box 2156, Madison, WI 53701 -2156).

Cox, F. M. (1995). "Community problem solving: A guide to practice with comments." In Rothman, J., Erlich, J. L., and Tropman, J. E. (eds.), Strategies of community intervention (5th ed., pp. 146-162). Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock.

Dale, D., and Mitiguy, N. (1978). Planning for a change: A citizen's guide to creative planning and program development. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, Citizen Involvement Training Project.

Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, F. P. (1997). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (6th ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Lawson, L. G., Donant, F. D., and Lawson, J. D. (1982). Lead on! The complete handbook for group leaders. San Luis Obispo, CA: Impact Publishers.

Mondross, J. B., and Wilson, S. M. (1994). Organizing for power and empowerment. New York: Columbia University Press.