An important part of all analysis and problem solving is to be able to define terms. Typically folks start by identifying the various terms that need defining, then arguing about the definitions. In my experience this often leads to unproductive (and sometimes heated and hostile) “terminology wars”. The terms identified are typically common terms that people have been happily using for years, oblivious to the idea that other people legitimately use the same term to mean something a little different. Or perhaps a lot different. The quintessential example here is Strategy. I have heard no end of discussions that start with the assertion “Strategy is …” (See chapter Be wary of any sentence starting “Strategy is …” ). I have heard many hours of fruitless discussion of this form. The problem is that the discussion neither really challenges nor unearths the differences between positions or gets to any resolution.
An alternative approach (much less natural and intuitive for many but much more productive) is to try to ignore labels altogether and focus on distinctions. Once a set of meaningful distinctions is identified, then can begin a process of agreeing suitable labels for each. One former colleague used to provide temporary “neutral” labels to assist in the conversation – so things got called “starfish” as a generic temporary label for something that was being defined before being labelled. If you have an insightful distinction, it’s worth having a label for it. Having a label has no such implication for trying to develop a distinction.
The only time that starting with the label is demonstrably better is where an organisation with a reputation in its field (has some authority) wants to maintain its position by declaring its definition of a term. But this can be risky if its authority is successfully challenged.
Heritage: Across multiple decades of consulting I have been party to many strategy, planning and problem solving sessions where more effort was put into defining terms (that were not actually very useful) than identifying the core concepts and distinctions that were really valuable and for which names would be needed.