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

Having followed Jonah Lehrer’s  Seed postings, I looked to the release of his new book.  How We Decide  is a fun and comprehensive survey of Decision Making’s neurologic and cognitive aspects.  http://www.powells.com/blog/?p=4507#more-4507

Book Covers the Landscape: Lehrer’s  How We Decide can seem to be a jumble of entertaining and bewildering fragments, perhaps because the book’s encyclopedic scope overwhelms.  The decision making process might not seem so chaotic, nor undefined, if we understand the sequential process of the sensory message traveling through the brain .

We know that the sensory signals coming in through the brain stem must first run the limbic gauntlet, the

brain’s front-line guards.  The emotions are associated with the amygdala which sits close to the brainstem.  It is not surprising that our emotions can be tied closely to our sense of smell, given their roles as front-line guards.

The incoming signal pattern is compared against a library of friend-or-foe profiles, “caricatures” of the usual suspects, designed for quick recognition for fast response -  as much as some would consider profiling impolitic.

If (a) the sensory signal patterns have not roused the front-line emotional guards, and (b) the brain decides there’s time for a more deliberate analysis, then the patterns are sent up to the rational PFC (prefrontal cortex) tecchie upstairs, which keeps a library of models of cool logic, abstracted from knowledge and experience.

Hopefully, there is a matching model – and a quick “intuitive” response is triggered

The process is sequential , and it’s not as if the brain consciously mulls, “Hmm, I wonder if I should get the PFC (prefrontal cortex) guys  work on this, if not I’ll just push it on my subconscious …”

The brain performs a triage on the incoming signal:  (Case 1) Do the incoming patterns match any known threat models?  If so, then the amygdala shuts the gates and sounds the alarms.   Case (2):  If the patterns are non-threathening, and there’s time,  then the sensory signals are sent up the to the PFC which then checks for a match against its abstracted models.

The brain’s two collections of models: To make decisions the brain has two “libraries” of models learned from its experiences and knowledge: (1) the rational (logical) and, (2) the emotional and instinctual models.     As a defensive mechanism for survival, Fear understandably predominates among the emotions.

We can train ourselves to recognize – i.e., “intuit” – without conscious analysis when a situation matches a model.  The incoming signal must first pass the instinctive and the emotional screens, before the signal is passed on to the rational PFC “techie” on the fifth floor, who might have  ready modules and won’t have to kludge a long analysis .

Two lines of defense : Some studies argue further that we cannot even make decisions without emotions.   You’d see this when the more savvy salespeople instinctually flank their prey:  When the purchase is a major shift for the buyer,  sell first to the fear: create a gap, a pain point. When  the buyer has made that shift, then sell on the product’s features, rationalizing the decision.

And impulse buyer that I am,  my survival instincts know to latch on to the practical features-  to justify later to the wife my latest and greatest gottahavit gizmo.    –