For those who love to solve problems

This is a heartfelt letter to the many people in the world who often say that they love solving problems. 

I was in a design thinking workshop which taught me quite a few valuable things. One of them that really stood out to me was the contrarian idea of solving problems for edge cases. Typically, funders who back entrepreneurs gravitate towards projects that are focused on a large market. This is primarily because funders are investors who are looking to make money from their investment and solving the actual problem is essentially the gravy on top rather than their core purpose for investing. 

For all other problems, they say, go set up a non-profit organization. When non-profits are established to solve problems, oftentimes, the donor and sponsorship funds they receive are from individuals and organizations that want to make a big, positive impact so that they can make splashy corporate social good announcements and also feel better about themselves. So, if the beneficiaries of the donations only help a small group of people, they withhold their donations in favor of other organizations that solve problems for a larger population.

For a while, I thought, maybe over centuries, humanity will eventually solve edge-case problems or problems for smaller populations since all of the problems for the masses would be solved. However, I realized the folly in believing this eventuality. Because new problems for the masses will arise. That's why we have many solutions to "first world problems" today rather than solutions to other problems that have been waiting their turn to be solved. Why? There's money to be made by investing in these ventures or more people care about it because they can personally identify with the problem. 

In a crowdfunding course I was taking, a training video informed me that even if you do all the right things in preparing for your crowdfunding campaign, ultimately, you will only be successful in fundraising if there is an audience that cares about the problem you're solving. In other words, until people can identify with the problem, they don't care about it.

Lots of people say that they love solving problems but for most of them, their focus is only on the problems they care about. Nothing wrong with that...it seems like that's how most people operate and is expected human behavior. It's the normal distribution at work and they represent the masses who care to solve problems for the masses. The population of people who are interested in solving problems, regardless of scale or size of impact, profit, morality, or equality may be a small population. But how small is it? I'd really love to know. 

In entrepreneurship, it is often said that it's better to solve a problem by coming up with a solution that's a pain killer rather than a vitamin that simply makes someone's life better. However, there are lots of successful products out there that started out as a vitamin and was never addressing an expressed pain point but over time became a need. A classic example of this is the smartphone. When the iPhone came out, nobody expressed a pain point of having a need for a tiny computer in their hands to do everything they could while on the go. Today, this piece of technology is so ingrained in our daily lives, especially with multi-factor authentication, that you can't even be without your phone when you're trying to access a website on your laptop. 

Clearly, this concept of having to solve a problem per se is simply guidance of an easier path to success than otherwise. It is not to say that a "vitamin" solution cannot be successful. In other words, choosing to pursue solving problems that are not necessarily for the masses may not be the easiest path ahead, but doesn't mean you can't be successful pursuing it. In fact, it could be a blue ocean strategy of picking an area where you have fewer competitors who want a piece of that pie.

In that design thinking workshop, the instructor mentioned that when we solve for the edge case population, oftentimes the masses will still appreciate its function and will also purchase the solution. The example provided was Alexander Graham Bell's invention of the telephone was originally intended to help his wife and mother who were both hard of hearing. Hence, even though the solution was not created with the masses in mind, the masses can still embrace it. 

The question I have is: what if it's such a niche solution that only the edge case user can and will use it? Is the problem not worth solving because they are a small population? In the view of Darwin, I suppose that those people will suffer through their problems and that's how life weeds out nature's defects. This is often the case for the lack of interest in pharmaceutical formulations for diseases that few people suffer from as the market size is too small.

But what if the problem is a niche business problem that doesn't benefit from natural selection? There are a plethora of problems that are tolerated in just about any industry and job function because no one cares to solve the problem. Wouldn't it be nice if the people who love to solve problems are able to gain the support of funders who may not totally care about the problem personally but simply care to get problems solved? 

What this could look like is similar to a VC portfolio of companies, where some problems that are solved can end up making lots of money and cover the cost of all the other solutions that didn't end up making any money at all.

I am an entrepreneur and I was told to tell a vulnerable and personal story that hooks an investor in so that they will care about your problem to fund it to get solved. Many websites of investors appear to show commitment to solving certain problems. They usually publish a thesis or area of investment interest such as climate change or future of work. 

I'd love to meet investors who are simply curious about solving problems, especially problems that no one seems to care to solve but they are worth solving. It's embracing solving problems by removing significant market size constraints as a barrier. It would be great to work with a team of people who share such an interest and work to solve some of these problems in the world. There are many unsexy problems in the world that are worth solving. No hero stories. No personal, vulnerable stories. No sob stories. Just roll up your sleeves to examine the problem with empathy for those facing the problem, and solve the problem that needs to be solved. That's the only story. Is that too much to ask?

For practical reasons, we can certainly prioritize and ensure that of the portfolio of problems to be solved, that more than several of them have significant commercialization value in order to finance the rest of the endeavors that will not be loss leaders, but may not hit it out of the ball park in terms of profitability.

If this resonates with you, please comment below and let's connect! Whether or not we work together, I think there is a kinship here that could be mutually inspiring and supportive. It would be so amazing to meet someone with such a shared mindset. Maybe we're just naive wishful thinkers, but at least we'll know we're not alone.