As in companies, the electoral debate must focus on causes, not just symptoms

Every election is always the same. The candidates are chosen, the debates begin, the mandatory free electoral broadcasts start, and those running for the nation's highest office miss no opportunity to tell the public how they intend to solve the problems that afflict everyone the most: violence and lack of security, precarious public health care, deficient education, ever-growing unemployment...

In this context, another phenomenon also repeats itself: the candidates, regardless of party or ideology, focus their speeches much more on the “symptoms” of the problems, but discuss little or nothing about the “root causes” that generate these ills. Proposals to effectively address these root causes are, then, nowhere to be seen.

This is a basic error in our political discussion: seeing problems only from the perceptible side, the one we feel firsthand, without analyzing hidden reasons, which remain immune to apparently easy solutions.

Such is the case, for example, of the speeches on security and public health.

On the first, there is no shortage of platforms promising more police on the streets, more prisons, more repression apparatus and the like. Of course, containment actions that protect the population from the calamitous situation we have reached are necessary. But almost no candidate emphasizes other actions they will carry out to prevent this situation. Are we just going to increase repression indefinitely? Is this the right way to make crime decrease?

For that, it would be necessary to discuss much more the root causes - poverty, young people without prospects, organized crime, the flow of weapons, etc. - and the ways to solve them. In society, this debate involves controlling arms trafficking at the borders, dismantling criminal organizations and their sources of financing, the necessary actions in communities that give young people educational, cultural and work prospects, etc. Few candidates present detailed plans in this direction.

A similar phenomenon occurs in many companies. In them, leaders and specialists perceive the problems, but often devote themselves only to the symptoms, adopting superficial solutions focused on what is apparent.

In the lean system, one never focuses on the symptom of a problem, but rather seeks to understand the root cause that is generating the situation. From there, one tries to develop a definitive countermeasure to eliminate the source and resolve the issue once and for all.

Returning to the electoral debate, if we analyze the discussion on public health (another recurring topic), we see something similar: the predominant focus on symptoms. Most speeches point to more hospitals, more health posts, more equipment, etc., which is undoubtedly an important part of the equation. But few address the issue of the poor use of what already exists: hospitals without supplies, a shortage of doctors, regional disparities, etc.

Having more structure will be of no use if it continues with its enormous inefficiencies. Once again, the discussion of root causes and of ways to tackle them is pushed into the background, such as the training of doctors and paramedics and incentives for them to serve all regions, the optimization of management and supply processes in the care chain, the modernization of the flows connecting patients with providers, a greater focus on preventive health care, etc.

Focusing on symptoms is a very common tendency in our country. Candidates do it possibly because it makes the speech easier and more moving, without committing to deeper analyses and proposals. Companies, because they were born and grew up under traditional management views, seek immediate actions without first analyzing the why well. Both phenomena need to change.

So, when you are watching the electoral broadcasts on TV and the debates, try analyzing whether what is being said is merely a stopgap focused on symptoms, or whether proposals are being presented based on a good analysis of the causes, so that the problems are solved at their root. And take this mindset to where you work.

If everyone acted this way, we would stop “mopping up with the tap running”, which is the feeling we have when we endlessly discuss the symptoms of the same problems without ever overcoming them.