An associate of mine is a Teller of Truth to big business chiefs. “Performance accountability!” he cries to enthused clients. But their pain inevitably fades, and their motivation, too.

No one is keener than he to listen for just what the client really wants to do – but it’s rarely the same thing as what needs to be fixed. Sadly, my friend the shaman shoots too straight an arrow to pander, and most clients quietly fade away.   My friend shakes his head.  I notice the arrows stuck in his back. The thing is, I’ve walked in those designer moccasins, too.

Whether you are a consultant or a CEO, you’ll find this three-part blog invaluable, and all too painfully familiar.

Part 1: The Fine Art of Getting Fired from Consulting

Get the client to feel enough discomfort with the status quo, and you can wedge that door open. However, serious problems rarely are solved with incremental solutions. The dilemma is that unless you keep him comfortable with the solution ( cost, risk, politics, etc.), you’re out the door.

So here’s how I jumped from a profitable relationship and banzaied into political suicide.

The following dialogue happened over 18 months somewhere along the Detroit-Cincinnati corridor, once known as the country’s tool-and-die center where you’d be more apt to hear about LEAN than AGILE. “Schools of excellence” here pin their sciences on concepts of manufacturing efficiencies for tangible products.

Me: “The coolest thing in decision making is going to be in the latest neurologic imaging clarifying the key role of emotions in decision making.”

Lead: “ Our clients are engineers; they only want practical content. And don’t bring up anything about brain research – that’s a sure kiss of death.”

Me: “It’s more than just practical: in fact, we can’t make real decisions – a real shift in positions– without emotion.”

Me: “More importantly, the more chaotic the situation, the less useful are traditional “rational” methods. Heck, that’s why the whole project-management BOK that people are certified into, is having to be overhauled. The best tools emphasize shorter test-and-feedback loops, instead of massive GANTTs that are impractical for day-to-day management.”

Lead: “Hmm, just like the jet pilots’ OODA loops?”

Me: ”Right! And further, if you think about it, the more you frontload with information content instead of principles, the less limber the model. In fact, the breakthrough in self-learning Artificial Intelligence only came when they shifted from a knowledge-based model, to a learning machine that focuses on experiences from mistakes.”

Me: Getting excited. “And you know why we can’t make major decisions without emotion? It’s about expectations, it’s about a personal desire to be there instead of here – a shift. Learning is expectations versus outcomes.

Me: Waving my arms. “And you know how good salespeople and shrinks create an opening? It’s about wedging in a discomfort – fear is the strongest emotion, especially fear of loss.”

Lead: Stepping back again. “ Uh, that’s interesting theory. But these are engineers. I have to give them something they can use and drill right then. How about probability-v-outcome tables?”

Me: “ Well, everytime we step back for a larger frame, sure – heck, any generalization has to be an abstraction. But it’s hardly just theory – the most exciting breakthroughs are in neurologic studies of decision making.”

Lead: “There you go again…”

Lead: “Hmm. Well, let me take the lead in this meeting with the client, ok…”

Lead: (Nervous steps recede into an empty corridor. )

Me:  Silence.

Next:
Part 2: The Truth About Making Decisions: Real Men Are Emotional
Part 3: The Paradox of Chaos: Simplicity

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

This entry was posted Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009 at 5:05 pm and is filed under Brain Aspects of Decision Making. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.