Mike Lehr's Blog

Periodically, I help sensitive people so I have special life management techniques set aside for them. A recent success has encouraged me to document some. I begin with raising their awareness for their gift.

The first point I make to sensitive people is that they are more in tune with their own emotions and the emotions of others than other people are. While almost all of them believe this is a curse, I share advantages. Primarily, they will tend to do much better at assessing the emotional state of groups and individuals. I even identified for one CEO the one employee she should talk to if she wanted to get a quick pulse on her employees.

When sensitive people try to explain their feelings, problems usually occur. Since most people will likely be less sensitive, they won’t feel the same. They’ll just say the sensitive person is wrong or way off base. This hurts them and creates self-doubt. As a result, they adopt the majority view even if they feel it’s not best.

The second point I make is that even though others don’t feel what they feel it doesn’t mean they aren’t being affected. It’s just whereas it’s happening on a conscious level for them it’s happening on a subconscious level for the others. Everyone has different levels of consciousness.  Eventually, these feelings will “bubble up” from their subconscious to manifest themselves in actions, thoughts and feelings.

When I talk to sensitive people, it’s not unusual for them to feel that they get the emotional temperature of the individual or group rather quickly. However, it’s very normal to find them talked out of doing what they believe will work or going about their work beneath the radar. Thus, raising their awareness is usually a huge relief.

Other posts in this series:

• Emotional Self Defense for Sensitive People (Pt II): The Unconscious
• Emotional Self Defense for Sensitive People (Pt III): Self-Awareness
• Emotional Self-defense for Sensitive People (Pt IV): Talent
• Emotional Self-defense for Sensitive People (Pt. V): Intimidation
• Emotional Self-defense for Sensitive People (Pt. VI): Defeatism & Courage

Long ago I sat in on the reprimand of an employee by a manager. The manager concluded his discussion by asking the employee, “Do you understand what I’m saying?” The employee responded, “Yes.” It suddenly occurred to me how biased we are in thinking that education alone will correct behavior. In other words, we assume that if someone understands our argument and reasons they will adopt our point of view.

In this above situation, there was no follow up by the manager to explore whether the employee agreed with the manager’s alternative action or whether the employee was moved to act accordingly in future situations. Yes, he was aware of the consequences, but we tend to forget that sometimes people are willing to pay those consequences.

I refer to making this false assumption about “Do you understand?” as a cognitive bias; we tend to believe that reasons, logic and rationales are enough to win the day. This bias will tend to make us wrongly believe that we’ve done “our best.”

I also experience this in non-disciplinary situations in which anyone is trying to influence another person. This cognitive bias happens frequently with instructors trying to move participants to take action in such settings as business training. They will ask participants, “Do you understand what I’ve shown (said, did, etc.)?”

Therefore, in summary, I find four basic hurdles, represented by the following questions, that we need to negotiate and verify before we can have significant confidence that we’ve persuaded someone:

1. Do you hear me?
2. Do you understand me?
3. Do you agree with me?
4. Are you moved to take the recommended action (to act on this idea)?

How many times do we hear, “I’m really a people person”? Yet, when people are the problem, we can’t find those folks in the country?

It’s not unusual for employers to say, “My people make my business,” and then in the same breath say “The worst part about running a business is dealing with the employees.”

How many times do we hear salespeople say, “I’m a relationship specialist,” but when it comes to working with their assistants, they stumble over themselves and run to human resources?

How many times do people say they want to get into management, but then pass on their less desirable employees to other departments by giving them satisfactory reviews?

When conversation is light and pleasant, many extroverts mingle with the best, smiling, shaking hands and joking. Yet, how many of them enjoy working with people when they have protracted developmental problems? When we use the term “socialize,” does it even connote people problems?

What does it mean to “work a crowd”? It means meeting people as fast as you can before they dump any problems on you. When was the last time anyone worked a crowd to find out what the problems were?

Yes, computers can be problems, but they are usually quiet about them. Wouldn’t it be neat if people were the same way? Maybe that’s why some people prefer sitting at their desks reviewing the latest figures to see what problems there might be rather than wandering around to see what problems people might have.

Perhaps the next time someone says, “I’m a people person,” we should ask two questions:

1. What was the last people problem you tackled?
2. Why did you enjoy it?

When does more freedom become chaos and uncertainty?

This past month, I conversed with a resident of a Muslim country. He commented on how many of his fellow citizens couldn’t understand why Americans thought they were free. “They have all these laws directing them. They can’t drive as fast as they want and they even need the government’s permission to drive (licenses).”

Coincidentally, the December 16^th 2010 edition of The Economist reported on driving in Iraq. It’s true, at least there, that Iraq has far fewer driving restrictions than the United States has. It doesn’t even require driving licenses. However, driving there is dangerous. In fact, “the health ministry estimates that six times as many people now die in car accidents as fall victim to political violence.”

I also ran across an article about choice in the same issue. “Too much choice, concluded Sheena Iyengar of Columbia University and Mark Lepper of Stanford, is demotivating.” The article went on to suggest that this is from the anxiety people often feel when making decisions; too much freedom of choice increases anxiety.

There are people who seem to prefer less, and almost no, freedom in their work. They prefer clearly defined directions, rules, policies and procedures dictating their thinking and actions. Why? I have come to learn that this produces a different kind of freedom for some: freedom from responsibility. How can we be responsible for decisions we did not make or regulations we did not write? For some it also produces certainty; they know what the “right” decision is.

As the diagram to the right asks, “When does more freedom become chaos and uncertainty to us?” For each of us, that varies. For some of us, it restricts freedom so much that it might not even seem like freedom anymore. So, is freedom for everybody?

Looking at beauty as power is important in understanding and appreciating intuitive approaches because it dramatically expands the influences and solutions we see. However, as I mentioned in the A Blue Heron Instructs on Patience, we tend to be prejudiced toward action; therefore, we will often overlook beauty as power because it’s not an active force. Thus, it helps if we initially think of beauty as attractive because the verb “attract” implies some kind of active force.

For example, suppose we saw a metal ball rolling on a level table toward a wall. We might initially think that there was something about the ball that caused movement. However, suppose later we find out that a powerful magnet was implanted in the wall. Now, we begin to see the wall as the active force.

Another problem we tend to have is that we look at beauty very superficially, as something physically feminine. However, beauty can exist in anything, including intangible things. For instance, consider the movie A Beautiful Mind; also consider the attraction of beautiful ideas, prices, cars, paintings, formulae, advertisements, parks, scenery, etc. Anything that attracts us has some level of beauty in it; even power is beautiful to many.

So, if a car dealer stocks his showroom with a car that he knows is likely to attract us enough to buy it, who is really applying the active force: the buyer or the dealer? Similarly, when the Indians attracted General George Custer into the trap on Battle of Little Big Horn because he thought he had a beautiful opportunity to defeat them, who was playing the active force: Custer who rushed in or the Indians who created the attractive situation?

A question posted by Expat 21 asked for examples of patience in the workplace, especially those demonstrating a contrast between American and other cultures.

While I find non-American cultures more patient, the examples I have aren’t that distinguishable by cultures except in their acceptance of patience-oriented approaches and the rules under which they might apply them. However, these rules don’t alter the basic strategies and tactics behind the employment of patience; they will only make application of patience more or less accepted.

With that said, Rahm Emanuel’s well documented quote,  “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before,” summarizes the business implications of patience. However, this means partnering patience with our knowledge, experience or insight about the future that others lack; we are waiting for the “crisis” that we know is over the horizon.

For example, I worked on an IT project involving the rollout of client management software (CMS). From my experience, I pushed for certain functionality that I knew sales executives would want. However, the CMS team discounted the functionality, had other priorities and didn’t incorporate it. I could have pushed harder, irritated the team and achieved only a partial list of what was needed. Instead, I waited for the rollout because I knew sales managers would request the functionality. When they did, I had their entire support to get the team to do what I originally proposed and much more.

Another example for me was the reorganization of an 80 person call center. They had already gone through three reorganizations in four years. I had advised patience to the new executive because her people were “shell shocked” and hadn’t been able to establish sound interpersonal working relationships; they needed a period of stability. She went along with her reorganization anyway; she felt pressure to do something. However, the reorganization reinforced anxieties, undermined executive credibility and made achieving goals difficult. She left after only eighteen months.

“Management by walking around” and “teachable moments” are key general examples of techniques employing patience. People are more receptive to instruction when they approach us than when we approach them. We can encourage it by making ourselves accessible but we need patience to make this work.

Some macro-business applications of patience deal with such things as branding, investment, public relations, training and marketing. In each of these cases, patience is required to see a return. Often the urgency of the moment disrupts these initiatives before the return on our patience is realized. It’s personal discipline combined with the corporate and social culture that will determine how much patience is accepted; however, the basic strategies and tactics remain fundamentally the same across cultures. It’s similar to warfare; weapons, training and supplies might be different, but the basic principles remain the same no matter who is fighting.

Related Post: Blue Heron Instructs on Patience

We live in an activist business culture, meaning we are biased toward action to solve problems. For instance, reorganizations often occur simply to show something is being done when most of the time they achieve very little. In reality, neither action nor inaction is better; it all depends upon the situation. Intuitive approaches often involve positioning which requires patience.

One day my wife and I were having a picnic lunch along the Cuyahoga River during a hike. At the inside corner of a bend in the river stood a Blue Heron. My wife asked what I thought he was doing there just standing. I told her he was waiting for a fish.

About twenty minutes went by when my wife said, “I don’t think he’s waiting for a fish; it has been a long time. I would just go after the fish.” Within a minute of telling her she would never catch one with that approach because the fish were much quicker, the Heron stabbed his head downward and retrieved a fish.

In business, people will encourage us to take action even when it’s not the best option. In nature, many animals, like the Heron, lie and wait for their opportunities. Sometimes we need to position ourselves for opportunities to maximize our returns and minimize our costs, but it’s often discounted by the urge to act. Real estate is an excellent example. It’s about “location, location, location.” That real estate is lying and waiting until the benefits from its location are reaped.

In our everyday business lives, we are often prejudiced to force a bad position just so we can feel action oriented, sooth our egos or look good politically. Resisting such temptation is challenging; patience requires more discipline than action.

I came across a book review in the October 11, 2010 issue of The New Yorker about The Thief of Time, edited by Chrisoula Andreou and Mark D. White. It’s a collection of essays on procrastination. Under an illustration there was this caption: Procrastination interests philosophers because of its underlying irrationality.

I never knew that procrastination received such puzzling attention. No one can really explain why we do it. Yet, it’s very common across all personalities. What makes it even more puzzling is that “indulging in it generally doesn’t make people happy.” In fact, according to Professor Piers Steel of the University of Calgary, “people who admitted to difficulties with procrastination quadrupled between 1978 and 2002.” He defines it as “willingly deferring something even though you expect the delay to make you worse off.”

Why is this important to intuition? Well, in order to appreciate intuition’s impact, we need to appreciate the degree to which our emotions influence our decisions and actions. Since procrastination is a frequent, everyday occurrence, it can serve as a tangible reminder to go beyond simple, rational analysis.

While many of us would acknowledge this, we often don’t practice it. Rather, we attempt to analyze problems in rational, logical and objective terms employing the best scientific analysis we can muster. We try to quantify then weigh benefits and costs without even considering the emotional weights of each. Then, we try to communicate our findings in the same way.

This can lead us astray because in reality emotions play a dominant role in people’s decisions and actions. Thus, when we try to be objective, we often aren’t realistic. Imagine not accounting for procrastination in planning because it’s irrational.

In his landmark book, Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence (aka Lawrence of Arabia) ponders why two Arabs can hold off a dozen Turks but a thousand Arabs cannot defeat a thousand Turks. He arrives at the realization that large scale armies need to be organized around the weakest link to tap the advantages that size and technology can offer. In other words, you can’t organize your army around a set of requirements that are impossible for a soldier to perform.

With this in mind, what might happen to a Special Forces combatant who is compelled to fight in the regular army? As the article, Imperial Grunts, conveys in the October 2005 issue of the The Atlantic, many of these combatants might not “fit” well in the regular army. This is what caused the Arabs to not fight well in large groups; they could not bridle their talents. This is very much like a talented athlete who is forced to sit on the bench or compelled to perform within a structure that does not allow him to express his talents.

In the workplace, the same can occur with an employee who feels the employer is not using his talent wisely. Since a large corporation is like a large army, it will tend to organize around the weakest link. Thus, he might not have the freedom to show what he really could do because he is being forced to work like everyone else does. When we combine this with managers and co-workers who feel threatened by his talent, you could easily see his talents suppressed, his influence marginalized or his actions disruptive. All could mean his departure.

In Robert Heinlein’s science fiction book, Starship Troopers, the instructor, Mr. Dubois says, “One can lead a child to knowledge but one cannot make him think.” Automatically, a picture forms in my mind of a person who collects a garage full of tools and doesn’t fix anything or who collects a kitchen full of utensils and always orders out. There are many people who treat knowledge the same way; they collect it but never think about it or employ it.

Often I will begin certain seminars by declaring, “You won’t learn anything new, but if you’re like others, you’ll still find it helpful.” We are so preconditioned to view the stuffing of our minds as a benefit, that we have difficulty seeing how this could be true. So, I go on to say, “Most of what I will cover you already know; however, I will present it in a way that will encourage you to think about it differently and take action.”

I contend that rather than go out and collect more knowledge, if we just use even 20% of what we already know but don’t use, we would see substantial changes in our careers and lives. How many people collect business improvement books as though they were collecting stamps?

Intuitively, we know that we must consider the emotional aspect of knowledge. This appears in the form of motivation to think and employ that knowledge. Simply, learning something new shouldn’t be the benchmark of a worthwhile learning effort. Did it encourage us to look at things differently? Did it move us from inertia to action?

Now, that is real power.