“You can’t fix what you can’t define.”
Sue Desmond-Hellmann used this sentence in her February 19, 2016 TED address about a more precise approach to public health. The Gates Foundation’s published speech records her discussion of understanding why newborn children die, while TED’s report of the session repeats the same observation. Her example distinguished an age category from an explanation of what had happened. Naming a group of deaths was not enough to identify the causes or choose a useful response. That distinction gives the short quote its substance. A definition should help people understand the problem they intend to address, rather than merely attach a familiar label to it. Desmond-Hellmann’s argument linked better information to more purposeful action. Read in its original setting, the sentence asks institutions to examine what they actually know before assuming that a broad description already provides an adequate basis for a solution.
A useful definition makes a question answerable. It can clarify which people are affected, what experience is being considered and which uncertainty matters most. Those choices influence what information a team seeks and how it interprets the result. Imagine an organization describing an access problem simply as low attendance. That label leaves several possibilities open: an unclear invitation, an inconvenient location or a process that people find difficult to use. These are illustrative possibilities, not findings about a particular service. The point is that a broad term may conceal different problems that require different responses. Defining the question more carefully allows people to test their assumptions and seek the missing context. It also gives those affected a chance to explain whether the institution’s description matches their experience. Precision should make a problem clearer to the people working on it and more recognizable to the people living with it.
Definition is therefore an ongoing responsibility, rather than an administrative task completed once. New information may expose a mistaken assumption or reveal that an apparently uniform group includes very different circumstances. A responsible team can revise its description without treating that revision as a failure. It can also explain why it collects particular information and how that information contributes to a decision. Respect for privacy and for the people represented remains part of this work; a desire for detail does not justify gathering everything. For an individual reader, the quote offers a modest habit of thought. Before rushing to solve a difficulty, describe what is happening, identify what remains uncertain and ask whose perspective could improve that description. A clear definition cannot guarantee success, but it can make the next action more deliberate. The sentence’s value lies in connecting careful understanding with the practical responsibility to act on what has been learned.
A category can organize information while still leaving the important question unanswered. Desmond-Hellmann’s original example makes that distinction visible.
Ask what the description explains and what it merely names. The difference can change which question deserves attention next.
An institution’s definition may omit an obstacle that people experience directly. Their perspective can help test whether a description is adequate.
Clearer questions should support understanding across those perspectives. Technical detail is useful when it improves a decision or makes an assumption visible.
A definition can improve as new information appears. Revising it may be a sign that the work is becoming more accurate.
Explain what is needed and why. Careful inquiry combines purposeful information gathering with respect for the people whose experiences it describes.
Explore more "Quotes of The Day"
Discover more notable quotes from influential voices across politics, science, business, technology, sports, and culture. Each quote offers insight into how ideas, beliefs, and decisions shape the world around us.