# Problem statements aren't enough Shine Garg (former Staff Engineer, now a career coach for senior+ engineers) makes an argument that generalizes well beyond software: a problem statement alone doesn't contain enough context to make a wise decision about it. Their "Staff+ Operating Range" model says strong engineers operate across three contexts at the same time: 1. **Technical context** — what can work in the system you actually have 2. **Organizational context** — what can become REAL through the teams and processes you actually have 3. **Business context** — what is worth pursuing at all Two takeaways I want to remember: - **Context expansion IS the career growth skill** past senior level. Junior engineers solve the stated problem; staff engineers first ask which contexts are missing from the statement. - **Identify missing context BEFORE starting work, not after.** Strong technical work without organizational and business alignment stays narrow in impact, no matter how well executed. This is [[Systems thinking]] applied to engineering careers: the problem statement describes one node, and the decision quality comes from seeing the surrounding system. ## References - Why problem statements aren't enough (Shine Garg): https://letters.unchartedpathbreakthroughs.com/posts/why-problem-statements-arent-enough - Hacker News discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48681499 ## Related - [[Systems thinking]]