I’ve seen other leaders state or imply, ”Don’t bring me problems; bring me solutions.” It’s a management approach that sounds empowering and proactive, invoking an image of a motivated team tackling challenges independently. However, in my opinion, it has more drawbacks than benefits. Below, I discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this approach and how I strive to act instead.

Origin

While writing this blog post, I attempted to research the origins of this management approach. I suspected it arose in specific valuable contexts and was later misapplied more broadly - but I found no clear origin.

I found famous leaders like Margaret Thatcher and Teddy Roosevelt being attributed quotes related to solutions-not-problems. However, these are merely instances of famous people being attributed various quotes without any substantiation.

Complaining about a problem without posing a solution is called whining.
(likely not) Teddy Roosevelt

I also found some speculation that the mantra “bring me solutions” might be related to Henry Ford. While I can imagine how the solutions-not-problems could be connected to the high labour environment of that time, I found no substantial proof that it originated there.

Implicit

A manager doesn’t need to explicitly say, “Bring me solutions”, for the mindset to take hold. A manager’s indirect actions can unintentionally send the same message.

The implicit signals can take many forms. A manager who consistently praises individuals who solve problems on their own but shows little patience when others bring up issues they’re struggling with. A manager who, during every meeting, asks, “Have you thought through a solution yet?” whenever a team member raises an issue. A manager who rewards quick fixes and loses their cool when a problem is being discussed.

All of these examples can signal that coming forward with an unresolved problem is discouraged. Team members quickly learn what their managers value based on who gets recognized, rewarded, or given opportunities. If bringing solutions is perceived as the path to success, people will naturally follow suit.

Upside

I’ll address the downsides of solutions-not-problems below, but there are situations in which the approach of solutions-not-problems can be effective.

When the team consists of experienced professionals skilled in the relevant challenges, pushing people to think through solutions on their own can be effective. It encourages proactivity. It forces people to prioritize, focus, and take ownership. It reduces upward delegation, preventing a manager from becoming the bottleneck.

In the past, especially when I was starting out as a manager, I’ve had situations when I inadvertently encouraged upward delegation, an act of pushing responsibility to one’s manager. As an engineer, I was accustomed to solving problems, so even when I became a manager, I would sometimes do something akin to “bring me problems, and I’ll solve them.”

From what I’ve seen, this is not a unique issue among new managers. That didn’t work, as I couldn’t realistically solve everything myself, and I needed to empower my team more. If “bring me problems, and I’ll solve them” is on one end of the spectrum and “bring me solutions” is on the other, over time, I definitely moved closer to solutions-not-problems. But not fully.

A solutions-not-problems approach can genuinely feel empowering to the team. A manager is signalling that they trust the member’s judgment, creativity, and problem-solving skills. Who wouldn’t want to work in an environment like that?

(I definitely appreciated it when my managers showed trust in me)

Yet, while this approach works in some cases, it also carries serious downsides.

Downside

Over time, managers who, either explicitly or implicitly, discourage problems from bubbling upwards become disconnected from the very things they should understand deeply.

(you know, the actual problems facing their teams)

The key reason why this approach breaks down is reduced transparency. People conceal problems instead of addressing them. When solutions aren’t immediately apparent, team members might decide it’s safer to not mention the issue at all. Nobody wants to be the bearer of bad news.

This reduced transparency can then lead to less collaboration, poorer decisions, and issues festering.

Less collaboration. Not every problem can be solved by one person alone. Some issues are complex and require multiple perspectives and skill sets. Reduced transparency and encouraging teams to always solve issues can isolate and create silos.

Poorer decisions. Managers exist not only to delegate; managers also need to support, coach, and clear obstacles. When a manager is not aware, they can’t help - meaning that the team’s decisions can be of worse quality. The manager’s decision quality also suffers when they are unaware of the actual struggles and concerns within the team.

Issues festering. When the team is reluctant to bring problems forward, minor issues may fester into much bigger ones. The earlier a problem is shared, the easier it is to solve.

Balance

So what’s a better approach?

Personally, I prefer something closer to: “Bring me problems - solutions are great if you have them, but let’s solve together if you don’t.” This shifts the tone from “don’t bother me until you’ve fixed it” to “I trust you, and I’ve got your back.”

I want to signal psychological safety and encourage open, honest conversations about what’s actually going on. I want to promote ownership, but that doesn’t mean isolating myself from the challenges in my team. It’s possible to be both demanding and supportive.

I don’t see problems as annoyances - they’re opportunities to understand and support. There may be situations when I can help because I know something that my team member doesn’t. There will also be situations where we need to figure it out together. Both are great. I trust you, and I’ve got your back.