Point Lookout: a free weekly publication of Chaco Canyon Consulting
Volume 22, Issue 16;   April 27, 2022: Depth First or Breadth First?

Depth First or Breadth First?

by

When investigating candidate solutions to a problem, we tend to focus first on what we believe is the "best bet." But a more systematic approach can sometimes yield dramatic advantages by reducing the cost of the investigation and the time it requires.
Aedes aegypti mosquito in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Aedes aegypti mosquito in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. This mosquito species is one of the species that carries the yellow fever virus. The Panama Canal, as we know it today, is not the result of the first attempt to cross the isthmus. The first attempt, by French engineer Ferdinand de Lesseps, began construction in 1881. It would have produced a sea-level canal. It encountered a number of obstacles, which led to a halt in construction in 1889. Major obstacles were the scale of earth moving required, geological instability, heavy seasonal rainfall, and yellow fever. These obstacles were well known in advance of the French effort, but they weren't resolved before the resources were depleted.

Image (cc) by 1.2 only by Muhammad Mahdi Karim courtesy Wikipedia.

Some problems are at least partially susceptible to analytic solution. To solve these problems, approaches that entail a degree of mathematical modeling or analysis can be fruitful. But other problems stubbornly resist such approaches. For these problems we can usually devise candidate solutions by other means, but choosing among the candidates requires experimentation. Because modeling the effects of a solution mathematically is just too difficult, we must actually try a candidate to see how well it works — a practice we sometimes call "piloting." And when we try candidate solutions, we encounter a dilemma: do we proceed depth first, or breadth first? The choice we make can account for much of the difference between success and failure.

What do these two terms — depth first and breadth first — mean in the context of problem solving?

Depth-first search for problem solutions
When we search for solutions to a problem by piloting, we begin by implementing one solution in whole or in part. Soon we come to a place where we recognize an obstacle — a sub-problem. If we dive into solving that sub-problem, we're doing a depth-first exploration.
Breadth-first search for problem solutions
An alternative to depth-first exploration is breadth-first. In breadth-first exploration, when we encounter a sub-problem, we decide to set aside the sub-problem "for now," and investigate what else might lie in wait up ahead on our original path.

Which approach is better? Easy (but not very helpful) answer: "It depends." We must use our judgment about whether to solve sub-problems as we find them, or whether to set them aside for now to continue work on the larger problem.

Here are Which approach is better?
Easy (but not very helpful)
answer: "It depends."
five guidelines for making choices between depth-first and breadth-first approaches to searching for solutions to problems. In what follows I assume that we have two or more candidate solutions and that mathematical modeling doesn't provide much guidance for choosing among them.

Consider irrevocability
Fair comparison of different solutions requires assurance that we compare solutions using similar conditions. Some problem solutions alter the environments in which we evaluate those solutions. Solutions that alter the environment irrevocably are obviously troublesome to evaluate, because they make fair evaluation of other solutions difficult. But even more troublesome are solutions that alter the environment without revealing that they have done so.
Be certain that you understand how each solution alters the evaluation environment.
Consider the burden of comparing candidate solutions
A strategy for comparing candidates might seem simple until we consider resource and schedule constraints. Complexity enters because studying the suitability of a candidate solution might have effects on budget or schedule or both. Or making the comparison might consume the time of people with special knowledge who are needed elsewhere.
Reducing the field of candidate solutions is advantageous because it reduces the risk of irrevocable or hidden alteration of the evaluation environment. More important though, eliminating candidates limits the need to compare them one to another.
Keep the immediate goal in mind
While the ultimate goal is finding a solution that meets our needs, when evaluating a particular solution, the immediate goal can differ. For example, if we can eliminate a candidate solution rapidly or with minimal resource expenditure, we can reduce the total cost of evaluating candidates.
The overall goal of identifying an acceptable solution can sometimes "hijack" the effort to evaluate suitability of a given candidate solution, biasing the evaluator in favor of approving a candidate. Solution evaluation must remain objective. Eliminating a candidate solution can be almost as valuable as finding an acceptable solution.
Understand the advantages of depth-first searches
Searching for solutions depth-first elevates the probability of uncovering information that can make the overall search more effective in some circumstances. For example, when investigating an obstacle that one candidate exposes, investigators might discover attributes of candidates that are more likely to render them vulnerable to the same or similar obstacles. And that can make the rest of the search for solutions more effective.
Likewise, investigating an obstacle for one candidate can uncover information that enables elimination of other candidates. If that seems possible, you might have found a screening test. To determine whether a given candidate fails, apply that test. As you find more kinds of failures, you can add to your catalog of tests. This makes exploring future candidates cheaper.
Understand the advantages of breadth-first searches
Searching for solutions breadth-first elevates the probability of uncovering information that can make the overall search more effective, albeit in different circumstances. For example, when investigating an obstacle that one candidate exposes, investigators might be able to predict conditions that expose additional obstacles not yet discovered. Subjecting the candidate solution, or other candidate solutions, to those conditions can expose obstacles earlier in the investigation, speeding discovery of an acceptable solution.
If it's possible to explore more than one solution at a time, then breadth-first search has clear advantages. In breadth-first search, what we learn from investigating one candidate can probably be applied immediately to the investigation of another. By contrast, in depth-first search, obstacles encountered by one solution are not as likely to apply to other solutions because the path of exploring the solution space can differ dramatically from one candidate to the next.

If only a few candidate solutions are available, the advantages of breadth-first and depth-first investigations probably don't differ by much. But as the number of candidates increases, the value of choosing wisely can be significant. Go to top Top  Next issue: Rational Scope Management  Next Issue

How to Spot a Troubled Project Before the Trouble StartsProjects never go quite as planned. We expect that, but we don't expect disaster. How can we get better at spotting disaster when there's still time to prevent it? How to Spot a Troubled Project Before the Trouble Starts is filled with tips for executives, senior managers, managers of project managers, and sponsors of projects in project-oriented organizations. It helps readers learn the subtle cues that indicate that a project is at risk for wreckage in time to do something about it. It's an ebook, but it's about 15% larger than "Who Moved My Cheese?" Just . Order Now! .

Your comments are welcome

Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Problem Solving and Creativity:

An FBI SWAT team assists local law enforcement in New Orleans in August 2005The Paradox of Structure and Workplace Bullying
Structures of all kinds — organizations, domains of knowledge, cities, whatever — are both enabling and limiting. To gain more of the benefits of structure, while avoiding their limits, it helps to understand this paradox and learn to recognize its effects.
A dead Manchurian AshWorkplace Politics and Type III Errors
Most job descriptions contain few references to political effectiveness, beyond the fairly standard collaborate-to-achieve-results kinds of requirements. But because true achievement often requires political sophistication, understanding the political content of our jobs is important.
Cherry blossoms, some open, some closedContributions, Open and Closed
We can classify contributions to discussions according to the likelihood that they stimulate new thought. The more open they are, the more they stimulate new thought. How can we encourage open contributions?
Egyptian forces cross a bridge over the Suez Canal on October 7, 1973, during the Arab-Israeli WarGuidelines for Curmudgeon Teams
The curmudgeon team is a subgroup of a larger team. Their job is to strengthen the team's conclusions and results by raising thorny issues that cause the team to reconsider the path it's about to take. In this way they help the team avoid dead ends and disasters.
"My Wife and My Mother-in-Law", a famous optical illusionResolving Ambiguity
Ambiguity is anathema to success in collaborations. It causes errors and rework, extending time-to-market. When we interpret information, we often choose the first interpretation we find, never recognizing that others are possible. That leads to failure.

See also Problem Solving and Creativity and Project Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

A form of off road driving also known as mud boggingComing November 30: Avoiding Speed Bumps: II
Many of the difficulties we encounter when working together don't create long-term harm, but they do cause delays, confusion, and frustration. Here's Part II of a little catalog of tactics for avoiding speed bumps. Available here and by RSS on November 30.
Tuckman's stages of group developmentAnd on December 7: Reaching Agreements in Technological Contexts
Reaching consensus in technological contexts presents special challenges. Problems can arise from interactions between the technological elements of the issue at hand, and the social dynamics of the group addressing that issue. Here are three examples. Available here and by RSS on December 7.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenZLkFdSHmlHvCaSsuner@ChacbnsTPttsdDaRAswloCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

Reprinting this article

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Follow Rick

Send email or subscribe to one of my newsletters Follow me at LinkedIn Follow me at Twitter, or share a tweet Subscribe to RSS feeds Subscribe to RSS feeds
The message of Point Lookout is unique. Help get the message out. Please donate to help keep Point Lookout available for free to everyone.
Technical Debt for Policymakers BlogMy blog, Technical Debt for Policymakers, offers resources, insights, and conversations of interest to policymakers who are concerned with managing technical debt within their organizations. Get the millstone of technical debt off the neck of your organization!
Go For It: Sometimes It's Easier If You RunBad boss, long commute, troubling ethical questions, hateful colleague? Learn what we can do when we love the work but not the job.
303 Tips for Virtual and Global TeamsLearn how to make your virtual global team sing.
101 Tips for Managing ChangeAre you managing a change effort that faces rampant cynicism, passive non-cooperation, or maybe even outright revolt?
101 Tips for Effective MeetingsLearn how to make meetings more productive — and more rare.
Exchange your "personal trade secrets" — the tips, tricks and techniques that make you an ace — with other aces, anonymously. Visit the Library of Personal Trade Secrets.
If your teams don't yet consistently achieve state-of-the-art teamwork, check out this catalog. Help is just a few clicks/taps away!
Ebooks, booklets and tip books on project management, conflict, writing email, effective meetings and more.