In science, everything starts with a problem statement, and very often what we are looking for in the first instance is a solution. But no solution to a problem is “simple” in absolute terms. Newton’s laws of motion may be a simple way to describe how an apple falls from the tree, but they are not a simple solution for describing the curvature of light beams by black holes.

To take an example from our modern world, the iPhone is generally praised for being a thing of beauty, an exemplar of simplicity. And, yes, it certainly is a simple solution for making calls, browsing the Web, listening to music, and so on. However, it is not a simple solution for the problem of just telling the time.

Before finding a solution we need to define the problem clearly, to ask questions, and then ask some more – something that scientists understand well. This certainly isn’t new but in a world of seemingly endless choice, opportunity and change, it becomes critical. Meanwhile, almost every problem can be solved, but choosing the right problem to tackle must be paramount.

With the benefit of hindsight – that most accurate of sciences – simple solutions often seem intuitive. So, yes, it really is OK to settle on the solution even if it feels inevitable. It doesn’t always have to be fireworks. On the other hand, you shouldn’t settle until you are at the point where there is nothing left but the last piece of the puzzle to be slotted into place.

Big problems do not necessarily require big answers. Take the lines of customers waiting impatiently to check in at a hotel front desk – the last thing they want after a many-hour drive or overnight flight. Hotel heavyweight Marriott invested in mobile check-in and freed up front-desk staff to meet and greet, greatly improving the all-important customer experience. Simple.

Another example. In a certain high-rise building in New York there were endless complaints about elevators operating too slowly. Here, the key was defining the problem. It turned out that it wasn’t the speed of the elevators that was problematic, but rather the fact that the elevator halls were claustrophobic, which made people feel that they were waiting too long. Installing mirrors in the spaces solved the problem. A solution that was as simple as it is intuitive.

Back in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan was faced with a problem: how to deal with the Communists. Speaking at the Moscow Summit in May 1988, Reagan delivered his now classic strategy statement: “Here is my strategy on the Cold War: We win, they lose.”

As an exercise in spin, it worked – these words have become among Reagan’s most quotable. And on the surface, the strategy seems staggeringly simple. No doubt, at the moment that Reagan made his statement, the US had a clear and neatly sketched out strategy for the Cold War. However, given the seriousness of problem, you could argue that it sounds trite, even a little childish. Is it really meaningful or does it just rephrase the problem statement?

All too often, company mission statements featuring words such as “digital” and “customer-centric” are similarly problematic. Like Reagan’s Cold War strategy statement, they are communication gimmicks. But unlike Reagan’s statement, they are intended to serve as practical guidance for decisions and actions. Crafting mission or strategy statements is clearly an art in itself, and everybody needs a powerful mission statement. But companies must avoid spin without substance and make sure their strategies are meaningful, looking at the problem from all angles and solving all aspects of it.

Solutions need to be practical – by which we mean achievable, detailed, concrete and actionable. Only then are they truly impactful. Find concrete ideas and they will stick.

A good example is approach taken by Danish consumer electronics company Bang & Olufsen (B&O). In true Scandinavian style they deliver a lesson in solving a business problem with simplicity. In a sea of competition from other makers of consumer electronics, you might think that their focus would be the quality of the sound. But you’d be wrong. In fact, B&O’s focus is on relaxing and enjoying – on “leaning back”. This is now a recognized business strategy, as discussed in John Maeda’s book The Laws of Simplicity. Being able to lean back and relax in our competitive society, he writes, seems out of reach, but B&O’s practical design approach enables you to do so.

Apple plays this brilliantly too. Its slick user experience is embedded into every product. Users know what they are getting; pick up a new Apple device and fans can navigate it immediately, the manual “is already there”. It’s perfectly simple – and consummately practical.

Another core scientific objective is to find light solutions that require minimum effort. In science we apply Ockham’s razor, the philosophical principle that says that when there are complex alternatives to solving a problem, the simpler version is always preferable. While theoretically string theory could be used to describe an apple falling to the ground, Newton’s laws are better because they require minimum effort.

We have seen that business solutions should be meaningful and practical. But those two attributes alone don’t always bring us closer to the essence of what we are trying to solve. With their weighty, concrete, practical detail, they may even do the opposite. So, once your business solution is sufficiently meaningful and practical, it’s time to step back, take your time and squint. Light business solutions are easy to comprehend and memorize; they are viral in nature and able to reach into all corners of an organization.

Effective solutions are elegant. However, the search for elegance should never be a standalone criterion, but rather a sort of litmus test. American physicist Murray Gell-Mann, who won the Nobel Physics Prize for his work on elementary particles, provides inspiration here. He writes: “…it is well known that a theory in elementary particle physics is more likely to be successful in describing and predicting observations if it is simple and elegant.”

To be elegant, says the Oxford Dictionary, is to be graceful and stylish, pleasingly clever but simple. Elegance also implies sophistication. Finding a simple solution to a problem statement requires deep expertise about the topic – which means bringing all unconscious experience, from all corners of the business, to the table.

Take travel, for example. In a jungle of confusing service propositions combined with overwhelming choice, fare aggregator and metasearch engine Booking.com base their success story on elegantly solving the challenge of finding the right hotel. They were the first to combine the broadest possible choice with easy-to-navigate filters – a winningly elegant solution to a vexing customer pain point.

Elegance works as a litmus test because sometimes there just isn’t time for the tricky balancing act of making your solution meaningful, practical and light. Very often, we find that if a solution comes across as elegant then more than half the battle is won.