Problem-Cause-Solution First-Principles Framework
You can't solve a problem directly — break it into ranked causes, then solve the biggest
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 4
- Confidence
- 90%
A structured alternative to the vague 'five whys' for first-principles thinking. You state the real problem (which is usually a symptom you can't attack directly), brainstorm all its causes, rank those causes by magnitude, then align a solution to each cause — solving the largest causes mitigates or solves the underlying problem. Campbell finds it works at big, medium, and small scale.
Origin
Patrick Campbell learned this in competitive debate in high school and college and adapted it as his go-to first-principles tool over the 'five whys.'
Core principles
- 01A problem is often a symptom you cannot solve head-on
- 02Causes are attackable where problems are not
- 03Ranking causes by magnitude tells you where leverage is
- 04Solutions should map one-to-one onto causes
How to run it
- 1
Name the actual problem
State the nebulous outcome you're trying to move, e.g. 'growth' or 'world hunger' — and accept you can't solve it directly.
Pro tip For big problems, spend real time debating the problem itself to force alignment before jumping to causes.
- 2
Brainstorm all the causes
List every contributing cause: for world hunger — irrigation crisis, aid not reaching destination, famine, drought. For growth — people won't pay for metrics, accuracy is hard, the market is dense.
- 3
Rank causes by magnitude
Order causes so you know which one, if solved, would move the problem most (e.g. if irrigation were the biggest cause of hunger, prioritize it).
- 4
Align a solution to each ranked cause
Attach solutions to the causes; solving a big-enough, proper-enough cause eventually mitigates the actual problem.
Pro tip The combined solution often becomes a coherent strategic approach, not a single tactic.
In the wild
Facing the growth problem for ProfitWell's metrics product, Campbell listed causes (people won't pay for metrics, accuracy is hard, dense market of ~100k logos), then chose an approach — free metrics plus paid pay-for-performance products — that could charge far more in a tiny market.
→ The freemium + pay-for-performance approach mitigated multiple causes at once and became the company's growth strategy.
For an upset customer, the support rep asks why: the cause was a slow reply plus a weak solution. That lets them open with 'I understand we didn't get you an answer quickly enough, apologies for that.'
→ The framework gives frontline staff a beat to think and a cause-anchored response instead of a reactive one.
Common mistakes
Trying to solve the symptom directly
Attacking 'growth' or 'world hunger' as a monolith fails because it's a symptom; you must decompose it into causes you can actually act on.
Skipping the magnitude ranking
Without ranking causes you spread effort evenly and may pour resources into a minor cause while the dominant one goes unaddressed.
Is it for you?
Best for
Product and strategy people who find 'five whys' too conversational and want an actionable decomposition for presentations, missions, and decisions
Not ideal for
Genuinely novel, paradigm-shifting problems where causes are unknown and rapid experimentation beats analysis
From the transcript
“you can't actually solve a problem so if we talk about world hunger you can't just solve world hunger because it's kind of the symptom”
“then what I can do is I can rank those causes in terms of like magnitude”
“this thing called Problem cause solution so I learned this in debate in college in high school”
From the episode
10 lessons on bootstrapping a $200m business
Patrick Campbell (ProfitWell)