The Shotgun Approach

The evolution of firearms is interesting. One of the important developments is the difference between a single projectile and multiple projectiles. It’s not clear which came first. They probably developed almost simultaneously. The difference between the two firearms technologies can teach us a lot.

There were some scary times in the evolution of firearms. I remember seeing “matchlocks.” A piece of rope in the hammer mechanism would be set afire and when the trigger was pulled, it dropped into a pan of powder on the side of the barrel that served as a primer. That was supposed to ignite the powder inside the barrel, which would explode and propel the projectile toward the target. I wonder what the efficiency was, percentage-wise. I’ll bet enemies and animals had a 50-50 or better chance of surviving and going on to harm the matchlock user. Especially with the rather long time it took to reload. Hard to imagine that the flintlock was a huge technological advantage, but it was.

I remember seeing pictures of a “blunderbuss.” I actually saw some in a museum. They had a flared muzzle and I can picture soldiers and hunters dumping handfuls of stuff down the barrel. They developed about when the flintlock did, so in addition to the more reliable firing mechanism, a barrel full of stuff would wreak havoc on that attacking enemy or animal. That’s basically how shotguns evolved.

Now, except for those traditional firearms that are still popular with some folks, the primer, the powder, and the projectile are all one piece. These cartridges are almost perfectly reliable. Still there are the two basic ideas, single and multiple projectiles.

We hear about the “rifle approach” and the “shotgun approach” in areas other than firearms. Basically a rifle involves one projectile aimed at a stationary or slow-moving target. Rifles can be pin-point accurate for hundreds of yards. Mile-long shots have been successful. The shotgun approach is great for moving targets. A single cartridge can hold dozens of pellets. “Buckshot” may include as few as 9 large pellets. There may be 50 BB sized pellets or maybe even several hundred very small pellets in a shotgun shell. Obviously, this model offers a huge advantage when hunting birds on the wing or squirrels on the run. The trade-off is limited range.

But here’s the catch. I always find a catch, if I can. Even with a shotgun, if the target, say a bird, is close enough, it can theoretically be brought down with a single pellet. Amazing, huh? What’s the point? Glad you asked.

I think we can solve problems with either the rifle or shotgun approach. If we identify the target and make a good shot with a rifle approach, we’ll have a pretty high success rate at problem-solving. But then again, if we use the shotgun approach to problem-solve, as in a brain-storming exercise, there could be a bunch of effective ideas brought up. And just like it’s possible for one shotgun pellet to bring down the quarry, that one perfect idea can be generated while brain-storming.

Here’s an odd thing, though. Even if that one pellet among dozens does the job, what about all the rest of pellets? They can be problematic. They can be interference. They can over-shadow the one good idea. They can be seen as evidence of failure or evidence of crazy-busy behavior without a positive result. Shot-gunner-types can simultaneously be the biggest help and the biggest hindrance to a project or program. They generate too much extraneous stuff. They can even blow the target to pieces.

I’ve been the shot-gunner on many occasions. “Wait! I’ve got another idea!” “Wait! How ’bout this!” “Wait, here’s a brand new angle!” I’ve tried these things after other people are several steps farther along the problem-solving angle. I’ve gotten in the way of progress when I do that.

What needs to happen, I think, is making a careful selection of the “weapon” we choose to use. We can maximize success if we choose properly. When there’s a moving target, like the solution at the beginning of problem-solving, take along your shotgun approach. When there is a clear, established goal, especially if it’s distant, hone in on it with as much accuracy as possible with the rifle approach.

Both approaches have value, but a lot of targets will be missed with the wrong weapon.