Relearning the Same Mistake

One of the things that most people believe is that they learn from their mistakes. I don’t think that is true. 

We like to think that we do but the reality is that analysing mistakes is often too is painful – so we avoid it.

I also believe that the majority of our decisions and therefore our behaviour is automatic. I think most people would argue that they are conscious of the decisions that they make but I disagree.

This article is the product of some self-reflection on two significant mistakes that I have made. By sharing this, I hope to be able to help you make fewer mistakes in future.

Failure

I was recently speaking to someone whose business had folded. They told me that they ‘learnt loads’ from the experience so I asked them what the most significant lesson was, and it was clear from the answer that they didn’t really know.

This started a pattern of thought that has remained with me since. 

X rarely leads to Y

The world is a complex place, often described as volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. Rarely does X cause Y. Yet we fool ourselves into thinking we understand the world and that we’ve got it all figured out. 
We like simple explanations because they’re satisfying and give us comfort. Take any item in the news and people will offer a simple explanation as to why that happened. The reality is that explanations are rarely simple. The world has too many variables and too much complexity to neatly explain why something happened.

Double-Loop Learning

I spoke about the way in which we automatically approach problems in my TEDx talk explaining the process of double-loop learning. 

Double-Loop Learning is about challenging the underlying mental models that drive the way in which we approach a problem or a challenge.
Over the past four years, I have made the same mistake twice because I have failed to ‘double-loop learn’. 

When I first started Leadership Forces, I read 7 Habits of Highly Successful People. I still think that this is a brilliant book and I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in ‘living deliberately’ – creating a life that works for them.

One of the habits talks about creating ‘win:win’ partnerships. Win:Win partnerships are where both parties get a good outcome from the deal. All healthy long-term partnerships work like this. If someone has to lose to create a winner, there is no desire to work together going forward – why would there be?!

I understand the value of these and have sought to develop them in my own partnerships.

What I have failed to spot is the ‘win:lose’ set up to look like a ‘win:win’.

I was introduced to a group of business coaches who had something similar to a franchise model. The way it worked was that you bought into the business to get access to their IP and demonstrate your commitment. Then they’d give you an area to run free events, deliver a presentation and generate some sales off the back of it. If you generated any sales at the event, you’d kick up  XX% to the main body of the organisation and take the rest. 

This percentage declined the more that you revenue you generated. They sold it as a ‘win:win’ because you maintained the independence of a freelancer but had the support of a larger organisation. 

The reality is very different. Selling your time is the hardest part of growing a professional services business, not creating IP. They were asking me to do the most difficult part, sell, win business, generate clients and kick up a percentage of that to them. This wasn’t a win:win, it was a win:lose dressed as a win:win.

I made this mistake a second time when I entered into a similar arrangement as an associate of an organisation. Again, there was an expectation that I sell on their behalf and bring in business. Some people might think that this is fair enough but I would argue that the hardest thing to do in a professional services business is build and manage a client relationship. If you’re able to do this, it is your relationship. If you are a salaried employee of an organisation or they’ve have made the introduction, it is their relationship. 

The warning signs for both of these mistakes were there but I ignored them. They didn’t apply to both organisations so perhaps I convinced myself that the situation was different when it wasn’t.
The warning signs were these;

• Low barrier to entry for people joining the organisation. Anyone could join, meaning anyone did join irrespective of whether they had any credibility.
• A family member in charge of marketing. Rarely do they have the proper skills and experience to do this effectively and rarely are they performance managed appropriately. 
• A lack of clarity leading to assurances which were not delivered and expectations which were not met. I was equally responsible as they were for letting this happen. I allowed optimism bias to cloud my decision-making here.
• People I trust telling me to ‘be careful’ because of a past reputation.
• Talking the talk but not walking the walk. A lack of leadership by example.
• A desire to generate as much money for themselves (it was always a 60:40 split in their favour, even when I’d won the client)
•  

Reading back through these, I cannot believe that I missed them but the view in the rear mirror is often clearer than the one in front of you.

When I decided to leave these organisations, I never heard from either of the owners again. There was no attempt to understand why I’d made the decision or thank me for the work I’d done. It sounds like I am bitter, the reality is I am grateful as it has reinforced the fact that I made the right decision.

When I was sharing this with a friend, Elliot Newsonen, he just said, ‘it’s your training budget, write it off as money you would have spent training yourself because you won’t make that mistake again.’ 

Helpful advice and a productive way to frame the problem.

Apart from ignoring the warning signs, what else did I miss? Were there any other blindspots that I need to be aware of going forward?

I have had a difficult relationship with my father. 

I don’t want to get too Sigmund Freud about this but I suspect that creates a blindspot for me. Both of these instances involved charismatic older men with a similar background to mine. We both shared similar interests, aspirations and frustrations. They were easy to talk to and seem to understand me. Perhaps a desire for a mentor/role model played a part in my decision-making. Maybe that clouded my judgement?

When I met with Jo Owen to talk about his book on Resilience. He shared with me that from time to time, he’d been let down by people. I think we all have. But he said that ‘if you chose to trust first’ then you have to accept that from time to time, you will be let down by people that you shouldn’t have trusted.

You can take the experience of being let down and develop a cynical view of the world believing that people are not to be trusted or you can continue to ‘trust first’.

Either way, you need to make a conscious decision. Do you want to learn to be a cynical person or are you willing to accept that people will let you down from time to time? If you chose to trust first, this is likely to continue to happen.

I really like this approach because it demonstrates that we can chose the lessons we learn.

Jo does not want to become a cynical person. It does not fit with his philosophy so he has to accept that from time to time, he will be let down. When I spoke to him about this article, his advice was ‘trust first.. but check’, a refined version of what he’d shared with me before.
I completely align with this view. I think that the ‘trust first’ model works well in nearly all situations but the ‘check’ ensures you listen to your intuition which I had failed to do. 

I believe that most people are intrinsically good. I chose to trust first but will pay closer attention to the warning signs in order to avoid making the same mistake over and over again.