Housewives.... Redux

Simran points out in comments that he was being facetious and begs the mercy of the Estrogen Goddess (Hey, I married a Warrior, it's a move I've been perfecting for years):

I think that business has lagged behind in realizing what appeals to women, and that there is tremendous potential for those that choose to do things right.

A successful business today is different from a successful business 40 years ago - the responsiblities have changed, and emotion is a part of that.

Fair enough. But, as they say, many a truth spoken in jest. It was a prototypical example of a real problem.

That 40 years-change example seems right give or take. We've mastered the scientific method and global overnight delivery, but those are all the "easy" problems if I may be so bold. They merely require an understanding of sequencing, logistics and statistical analysis. What the hell--they require analysis. These are primarily left cortex skills, and vital, but only half the equation.

Many messes I get to witness or help clean up are due to the fact that some (most?) business thinkers proudly wear their rationality on their sleeve, but when stressed or challenged, they revert to limbic and self-defeating behaviours they still insist are rational. In denying the validity and impact of feeling--their own and others--they guarantee negative outcomes because of the imbalance from this prejudice.

In a way, we become irrational in our rationality, unwilling to call a spade a spade and say, "I don't know", or "I made it up", or "we got lucky".

There's no shame in this. There is, however, plenty to dole out when we walk away from it's Elephant-in-the room influence. "Contempt before exploration leaves us in ignorance" is the essence of a quote from Herbert Spencer. It causes many of us to view innovation purely in terms of silicon chips or delivery systems, leaving a whole host of "business leaders" unaware and unarmed as they enter what's now being coined "the experience economy" or an "era of transformation."

Many can finesse a balance sheet within a nanometer and yet have little intuitive sense of the deeper meaning of the products and transactions and urges behind those numbers. If you can't understand you can't describe, and you can't teach. If you can't teach, you can't replicate on command. No command means no ability to reasonably manage, forecast and plan. And that means no pudding.

Leaders who fess up and admit this common understanding deficit and resulting urge to overcompensate, to deny imbalance, end up learning amazing things and profiting from them.

Andy Pearson--a subject in the original Oprah!/Business Leader debate--is but one of many examples of the benfits of evolving this understanding.

I think this is a very salient and productive topic. I'd love to hear more opinions from all corners.