Is the Explanation Really the Problem?—Working with People You Simply Cannot Get Through To

“The explanation was inadequate.”

People use this phrase quite casually.

They say someone failed to understand because the explanation was insufficient. If we improve the way we teach, they will understand. If we put ourselves in their position and explain it differently, they will eventually get it.

But if you live long enough, you encounter people whom no amount of explanation seems to reach.

I experienced this when I worked as a private tutor years ago.

I could rephrase something in simpler language, give examples, and draw diagrams, yet the ideas still would not connect. Something the student had finally learned to do one day would be completely reset by the next.

I had similar experiences after I began working professionally.

No matter how many times I explained something to a junior engineer, I could not convey why it worked that way. If I taught the procedure, the person could follow it at that moment. But as soon as the conditions changed slightly, we were back at the beginning.

The person was working seriously.

That was precisely what made the situation so difficult.

“Anyone Can Do It If They Try” Is Quite Cruel

When I talk about experiences like this, people say, “Maybe the problem was the way you taught.”

Of course, changing the teaching method sometimes solves the problem.

But there are substantial individual differences in people’s ability to understand.

In recent years, the term “borderline intellectual functioning” has become more widely known. It generally refers to cognitive ability that is below average but does not meet the threshold for an intellectual disability.

That does not mean we can diagnose someone in front of us on our own. Still, my personal experience makes it impossible for me to deny that people with such difficulties exist.

The more important point is much simpler.

People differ in athletic ability. They differ in musical pitch perception. They differ in their ability to draw.

Yet, for some reason, the ability to understand is treated as the one ability in which everyone can reach the same level through effort and education.

That cannot be true.

Engineering Makes Differences in Ability Painfully Obvious

I think IT engineering is a profession in which these differences become especially visible.

You cannot write software merely by memorizing procedures.

You have to break down problems, identify common elements, connect cause and effect, and apply knowledge learned yesterday to a slightly different problem today.

Someone can memorize:

“When this error appears, run this command.”

But the moment the error changes, they cannot proceed unless they understand what the command itself means.

When the person is serious and hardworking, the situation is painful for the teacher as well.

If someone is being lazy, you can warn them. If they lack motivation, you can reprimand them.

But sometimes they are trying their hardest and the explanation still does not get through.

So the teacher changes the explanation, draws diagrams, uses analogies, and makes everything even simpler.

It still does not work.

That is extremely exhausting.

Education Is Not Only About Making People Able to Do What They Cannot

When I was younger, I believed that once I accepted responsibility for teaching someone, I had to continue explaining until they understood.

I no longer think that way.

If abstract understanding remains extremely difficult, fix the procedure. Turn it into a checklist. Reduce the amount of work that requires judgment.

If that is still too difficult, change the work you assign to the person.

It is far crueler to take someone who cannot swim into deep water while continuing to say:

“Anyone can swim if they try. With a better teaching method, you will definitely learn.”

If the required ability and the person’s aptitude are badly mismatched, the problem does not belong to the trainer alone. It is an organizational problem involving placement and hiring.

Earlier, I used the broad label “borderline intellectual functioning,” but intelligence also includes different strengths and weaknesses in areas such as motor function, language, spatial judgment, and mathematics.

Helping someone find work that matches their particular profile is far more supportive than merely proclaiming equality.

Society’s System Requirements Have Become Too High

I also think this is a problem distinctive to modern society.

Many jobs have become highly intellectualized.

People use computers, read documents, write emails, and make judgments involving several conditions. Even jobs that once rewarded physical strength or manual dexterity now involve operating devices and following complex business rules.

Human beings did not suddenly change.

Society’s system requirements increased.

In engineering terms, the hardware has remained the same while the required specifications keep rising.

Of course something will eventually stop running.

Sometimes We Need to Give Up on Being Understood

I still believe we should explain things to people as carefully as possible.

But I no longer believe that:

“If we explain something correctly, everyone will always understand it.”

Explain as far as the person can understand. If that is difficult, compensate with systems. If that still does not work, change the job or role.

It is easy to say, “You should teach more carefully,” or “Maybe the teaching method was the problem.”

I would like to give those people this reply at least once:

“Understood. Starting tomorrow, you will be responsible for the training.”

At that moment, they will probably understand the meaning of “the right person in the right role.”