In organisational planning, hope often overshadows critical thinking and good ideas, with the allure of the next project always seeming like the 'fix' we should have implemented in the first place. This phenomenon is evident in publishing, where 'bestsellers' frequently flop, yet optimism persists unabated, and is a result of what is referred to in advertising as the 'green awning effect'. In strategy meetings, this effect shifts the focus to new opportunities while downplaying historical lessons. Yet embracing these lessons can guide better decisions and prevent costly mistakes.In business it often feels like we work toward hope rather than great ideas. Put another way, the grass is always greener in the next project. I frequently observed this age old phenomenon when I worked in the book trade where at the regular acquisition meetings publishers would stand up and espouse their love for the next 'bestseller', only for it to sink without much trace beyond a small blip on the BookScan report. Yet, at the very next meeting there would be the same publisher with another 'bestseller'.
To be fair, no one can predict the future, and this means any statement about what tomorrow will bring is fraught with difficulty. But as I argued in Why Positioning Eats Predicting For Breakfast:
Although we cannot know what tomorrow brings, we can use a pattern recognition approach to lower risk and devise stronger strategies. This is because while it is nearly impossible for us to predict one specific future, we can confidently position for multiple probable futures.
In this column I continue from some of my thinking in that piece to specifically address a Weasel phrase that abounds in strategy meetings — "this time it will be different". One of the more costly phrases you will hear in business.
The Allure of Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow
Imagine with me for a moment that we are sitting in a strategy meeting and Joe, who has a history of failed deliverables, is once again presenting on his next initiative. Some insightful individual pipes up, "how will this address the historic challenges we have faced?" To which Joe responds, "it is true we dropped the ball in the past and got our numbers wrong, but this time it will be different! We have revised numbers, we have learnt from our mistakes, the data is clear, and we are better prepared."
Unless Joe has angered the Executive gods, and a HiPPO wades into the pool, you will usually feel the timbre of the meeting shift. Focus moves away from the veritable feast of doubts and onto this latest opportunity. In advertising this is sometimes referred to as the 'green awning effect'.
The "green awning effect" in advertising refers to the phenomenon where people are more likely to notice and remember things that stand out or are different from their surroundings. This term originates from the idea that if you are walking down a street with many buildings that have the same colour awnings, for example all brown, a building with a green awning will stand out and attract your attention.In this moment, the history of failure vanishes like the darkness at dawn. If Joe is perceived as a 'can do' person who is aligned with the organisation's goals, his efforts to explain away past failure are even more likely to be accepted. What is even more problematic is that any courageous individual who holds to a doubtful line of questioning will be demonised as "being difficult", "argumentative", or that most damning of corporate criticisms — "not on the team". This is because proxies are too often the primary currency in a meeting of key decision makers who have a limited grasp of subject matter.
As ‘An’ Historian, it will come as no surprise that history always looms large in my thinking. Because of this, I am both awake and aware to the problems of ignoring historical context. Something which I outlined in Look!, there is a Tiger in that Grass, but of which I must be extremely careful because we live in partisan times where nuanced objections are often taken to be negativity at best and outright opposition to an initiative at worst. Therefore, to anyone who is keen to challenge a Pseudo-Profound Bullshit initiative be very wary. Ensure you can read the room well, have detailed background on the stakeholders involved, and don't press your case when it is clear the authoritarian shutters are coming down and a senior manager is primed to crush any opposition to their latest initiative. In which case, simply jot your thinking down somewhere private and bring it out in the years to come when you are on the speaking circuit. Anecdotes are always appreciated by the audience, if not by the subject of the anecdote.It is little wonder this scenario is so common because we are inclined to believe in progress — the notion we are moving inexorably toward a 'better' future with tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow representing progress toward an ideal state. In an organisational context this 'ideal state' is represented by a predefined set of strategic goals.
This belief in Progress, with a capital p, is sometimes referred to as whig history — with a lower case w unless you are referring to a specific movement in British political history. It is an approach which causes people to focus on 'goodies vs baddies', what is changing rather than what is remaining the same, what is different rather than what is constant. When this happens, we lose sight of the sine qua non/starting point/base rate and with it both the historical frequency of success or failure in similar situations. Most critically, if the initiative was not a success, what caused failure in the first place. This is very costly as instead of ushering in a future of progress, we end up with more of the same.
Finding Context
History provides vital context to events which can ground our decisions and help us to position for multiple possible futures. By history I do not mean the Peloponnesian War or First Council of Nicaea — events which in the organisations for which I have worked are usually only understood by three people: of these the first is dead, the second is in a lunatic asylum, and I am the third but have forgotten it all. Rather, by history I mean the market forces, organisational strategies, and operational constraints which saw the making of the original decisions.
The reason this latter type of historical evaluation is critical is because no matter how unique a set of circumstances may appear, parallels abound and can offer valuable lessons. If your organisation has developed a website which was a flop with customers, and the issue was incorrect data, missing customer orders, lack of integration with downstream services, relaunching the site on a new tech stack with updated branding will look great and inspire confidence that "this time it will be different" — only it will be the same just with different branding.
The belief that "this time it will be different" is a seductive but often misleading notion. By focusing on perceived differences, we risk ignoring valuable historical lessons and making costly decisions. Embracing historical wisdom and recognising the similarities in seemingly unique situations can help us navigate complex decisions with greater clarity and less risk. Ultimately, the past is not just a series of bygone events but a repository of lessons that can guide us in shaping a more informed and prudent future. Something which holds even more weight when the past event we expect not to repeat was only last fiscal.
To navigate this landscape, it is essential to balance the recognition of differences with an understanding of historical similarities. This approach requires humility and the willingness to learn from the past.
- Evaluate Base Rates: When making decisions, especially in investment or strategic planning, consider the historical base rates. How often have similar situations led to success or failure?
- Seek Contrary Evidence: Actively look for evidence that contradicts your belief in uniqueness. This can help counteract confirmation bias and provide a more balanced view.
- Learn from History: Study past events and patterns. For organisations, hitting up AI cannot help with this — you've got to talk to your people, particularly the ones who have been there the longest. Unless you are a start-up, organisational history is rich with examples that can provide valuable insights and help avoid repeated mistakes. If you are a start-up, or cannot find anyone with the necessary historical knowledge, read widely from case studies about other organisations. Invariably someone somewhere has tried and failed before — learn from their mistakes.
Good night, and good luck.
