It’s funny how things come full circle. After my transformative talk with Horst Hörtner about strategically tackling my Master’s thesis, I immediately went looking for resources to solidify that new way of thinking. Lo and behold, a book I’d previously added to my maybe later-list suddenly shot to the top: Strategic Thinking in Complex Problem Solving by Arnaud Chevallier. Diving into it now, it feels less like a new read and more like a detailed instruction manual for the approach Horst outlined.
From Vague Notion to Strategic Framework
My biggest takeaway from Horst was the concept of moving beyond just liking a topic or disliking a problem, and instead using those intuitions as strategic starting points. Chevallier’s book is essentially the blueprint for that process. It doesn’t just tell you to think strategically, it shows you how.
The core connection lies in how Chevallier tackles problem framing. Before I spoke with Horst, my approach was probably typical: identify a broad area, then try to force a research question into it. Now, with Horst’s guidance and Chevallier’s detailed steps, I’m learning to:
- Deconstruct: Break down the big, messy problem (like ocean plastic) into its fundamental components.
- Analyze: Identify the specific lever points where my current knowledge can actually make an impact.
- Synthesize: Reassemble these components into a clear, actionable research question.
It’s a methodical process that directly addresses the collect and form strategy Horst talked about, helping me organize those scattered thoughts into a logical attack plan.
The Power of Issue Mapping
One of the most impactful tools in Chevallier’s book for me has been Issue Mapping. This technique directly mirrors Horst’s advice to look at both what fascinates me and what I want to change. Instead of just holding these ideas in my head, Issue Mapping forces me to visually lay out:
- The main question/problem: What exactly am I trying to solve?
- The sub-questions: What smaller questions need to be answered to address the main one?
- The hypotheses: What are my initial educated guesses or potential solutions?
This is exactly what I needed after those stressful weeks. It transforms the overwhelming feeling of a complex problem into a structured, navigable diagram. It’s like building a custom roadmap, where each turn represents a sub-problem, and each destination is a potential research outcome.
Aligning Knowledge with Leverage
The most practical part of Chevallier’s book is the focus on leverage. Horst challenged me to use my current knowledge. The framework helps me map my skills (like web development, prototyping, or systems design) against the sub-questions in my logic tree.
If I find a sub-question that is both a high-impact friction point and perfectly aligns with my technical portfolio, that’s the sweet spot for my thesis. It takes the guesswork out of the pivot. I’m no longer choosing a topic because it sounds cool. I’m choosing it because the logic tree proves it’s the most effective use of my skills to solve a problem I actually care about.

