To improve almost anything, one has to diagnose what needs improving and then make the improvement.  The other day, I became engaged in a discussion regarding the relative importance of the "diagnose" vs. "make the improvement" activities.  From one perspective, you could argue that diagnosing and implementing are like your right foot and left foot - which foot is more important in the walking process. Of course, both feet are equally important.

When it comes to diagnosis and implementing an improvement (or treatment of the problem), the answer is not so clear.  Some of my colleagues argued that implementing the improvement is more important. Others argued that if you don't diagnose the problem and get to root cause, all attempts to improve are futile because you will only improve by accident.  

Where do you weigh in on this matter?