The ± Factors How much do you really like to think of the consequences?

How much do you really like to think of the consequences?

E-mail Print PDF

I had a mail conversation with one of the leading professors in marketing on a highly esteemed business school. Thought of sharing it with you (additional comments are in brackets).

Me: Lately I have discovered that people in common are more interested in blog post than online analysis (which can pose a risk to long-winded texts). What is your experience?

Professor: Can only agree. Do not know if it is entertaining or alarming though...

Me: We can only conclude that it is what it is and find it more or less interesting. As a consequence, we may ask if we can do something about it (which in its consequence will show whether it is entertaining or alarming).
Do you know the PIC / NIC model for impact assessment? It was developed by an American psychologist [Leslie Wilk Braksick] a few years ago.
In short is the model says that all actions have a number of basic consequences and we base our behavior on these consequences:

  • Positive / Negative
  • Immediate / Future
  • Certain / Uncertain

[In my mail conversation I forgot to tell that according to Leslie WB 80% of the outcome is based on the consequence of the action for the recipient and 20% is based on the original action, and still most leaders focus on the original action.]

This shows that the individual wants a positive, immediate and secure consequence of our actions. Maybe an explanatory model for us choosing the blog instead of the analysis? Could sound a bit dicotom [black and white], perhaps, but quite plausible.

Professor: A nice connection to the PIC / NIC! The immediate is really on the dot, the certainty is a little more tricky - it is not so that we want to be almost safe (but not quite entirely)? Rumors and blogs are quite united ...

As always, feel free to comment and develop, or check out other people's view with the sponsors on the right.