The Match is Everything

There is a particular kind of failure that looks like success.

You identified the problem. You built a response. You implemented it with care and consistency. And nothing changed.

The response wasn't wrong exactly. It just didn't fit. It addressed the visible problem, not the real one. And in organizations, in classrooms, in teams, in families, that gap between the visible and the real is where most well-intentioned effort disappears.

Adam Grant, in Think Again, writes about what he calls the preacher-prosecutor-politician trap. When we encounter a problem, we tend to slip into one of these modes: defending our existing interpretation, attacking alternatives, or selecting whichever explanation makes us look best. What we rarely do is what scientists do: hold the interpretation loosely, stay curious about what else might be true, and remain open to changing our minds when the evidence points elsewhere. Matching a response to an actual need requires that scientific posture.

Questions to ask before you commit to a response:

●  Am I responding to what I've observed, or to what I've assumed?

●  Have I asked the person most affected what they think is going on?

●  Have I considered at least two other explanations before settling on one?

●  Am I choosing this response because it's right, or because it's familiar?

Reflective Questions

●  Think of a time you worked hard on a response that didn't produce results. In hindsight, was the match right?

●  Where in your current work or life might you be responding to the visible problem rather than the real one?

●  What would it look like to stay curious about a situation you think you already understand?

Listen to Episode 5 of Move Toward: Unlocked for the story of Sandra, a veteran teacher whose greatest strength had quietly become her biggest blind spot.